Transcript Highlights:

• this testing as well. this testing as well. So,<00:21:52.799> Mr.
• . testing. testing.
• evidence tested. evidence tested. >> Senator<00:25:02.880> Cole.
• this testing for us? this testing for us?
• Um, years.

Bills: HB0103, HB0070, HB0091

Keywords: First Amendment, free speech, lawsuits, immunity, public participation, strategic lawsuits, foreign censorship, digital innovation, constitutional rights, Wyoming GRANITE Act, extraterritorial laws, civil actions, speech protection, legal jurisdiction, joint liability, artificial intelligence, social scoring, biometric data, privacy rights, government regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• ESTABLISHES A THREE-YEAR TEACHER CONTRACT AND A 10 YEAR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION.
• THERE ARE THREE TIMES A STUDENT TAKES A TEST EACH YEAR ALTHOUGH ONLY ONE OF THOSE IS USED FOR HIGH-STAKES
• SO WE REALLY SUPPORT AS PARENTS WHO SEE THIS HAPPENING YEAR AFTER YEAR WE REALLY SUPPORT THE OPPORTUNITY
• A LOT OF OUR SCHOOLS, OUR DISTRICTS HAVE GONE TO JUST TEACHING TOWARDS THE TEST BECAUSE THE TEST BECOMES
• ONE AND PM TWO, WE SHOW THERE CAN BE SOME ADVANCEMENT IN THOSE TESTS BUT JUST NOT THIS TEST.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that data one-year-old, two-year-old, three-year-old, four-year-old, or five-year-old data?
• I believe this— Is that data one-year-old, two-year-old, three-year-old, four-year-old, or five-year-old
• But test well data is not the same thing as 20 years of continuous pumping and large-scale drawdown.
• Maybe 10-year, 15-year, 20-year plans. I know. Maybe 10-year, 15-year, 20-year plans.
• per year.

Summary: The committee held a hearing on high-capacity groundwater wells proposed in Anderson, Henderson, and Houston counties, with members framing the issue as one of local water supply, fairness, and the need to modernize groundwater law while protecting private property rights. Opening remarks focused on the scale of the proposed Redtown Ranch and Pine Bliss projects, the potential export of tens of thousands of acre-feet of groundwater annually, and concerns that the applications lacked sufficient technical detail and could harm nearby landowners, cities, agriculture, and manufacturing. Members also noted the broader context of the recent flooding tragedy in central Texas and the Legislature’s intent to address water-related loss of life in the upcoming special session. Witnesses from the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts and the Texas Water Development Board explained the current groundwater management framework. They described groundwater conservation districts as the state’s preferred management method, the role of groundwater management areas and desired future conditions, and how the Water Development Board uses those conditions to calculate modeled available groundwater. They emphasized that districts rely on local data, monitoring wells, and planning processes, but that information is often more limited in areas without a district, where the rule of capture applies. Members pressed witnesses on recharge rates, export permits, subsidence, the effect of pumping on nearby wells, the age and real-time availability of model data, and whether the proposed project would exceed modeled available groundwater in some counties. TCEQ explained its limited oversight role over groundwater conservation districts, including inquiries, compliance actions, and, in extreme cases, dissolution authority. Water Development Board staff also outlined funding programs, saying the New Water Supply for Texas Fund is limited to projects such as brackish desalination, reuse, ASR, and other new-supply projects, and does not fund fresh groundwater exports alone. They said the project at issue had not applied for board funding. A water lawyer then testified on the rule of capture, ownership in place, and district regulation, arguing that districts must use permitting and other tools to manage production within modeled available groundwater and that the Legislature could consider additional authority over groundwater exports under current law.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's kind of our big test that we all 50 states take every two years: fourth graders and eighth graders
• That's kind of our big test that we all 50 states take every two years: fourth graders and eighth graders
• That's kind of our big test that we all 50 states take every two years: fourth graders and eighth graders
• That's kind of our big test that we all 50 states take every two years: fourth graders and eighth graders
• That's kind of our big test that we all 50 states take every two years: fourth graders and eighth graders

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It establishes a three-year teacher contract and a 10-year professional certificate.
• So what we're doing with the high-stakes testing is, if we were talking three years ago, we're not having
• So what we're doing with the high stakes testing is if we were talking three years ago, we're not having
• We're not doing away with the tests for those that are concerned that we're just getting rid of all testing
• But what we're doing is if a kid is struggling to pass this one test, their 11th and 12th grade year

Summary: The Senate convened with an opening prayer, pledge, and several recognitions, including visiting student groups, chambers of commerce, and apprenticeship participants. Senators also observed a moment of silence for a fallen Walton County deputy and later for the late John Pasadoma. The chamber then moved through a long third-reading calendar and special order calendar, with most bills passing overwhelmingly and several amendments adopted along the way. Among the major measures, SB 234 on criminal offenses against law enforcement officers passed 37-0 after debate and an amendment clarifying “good faith” in an officer’s duties; SB 7020 on open government and cybersecurity information passed 37-0; SM 1488 urging Congress to create a U.S. sovereign wealth fund was adopted by voice vote; SB 944 reducing insurance overpayment claim deadlines for psychologists passed 37-0; SB 878 expanding misdemeanor probation treatment provisions to controlled substances passed 36-1; SB 538, the state court system package, passed 37-0; SB 480 on nonprofit agricultural organization medical benefit plans passed 32-4; SB 472 on correctional-facility education credit for licensure passed 37-0; and SB 56 on geoengineering and weather modification passed 28-9 after extensive debate about enforcement, federal preemption, and the bill’s purpose. Later, the Senate passed CS/HB 421 on peer support for first responders 37-0 after substituting the House companion, and SB 164 on vessel accountability advanced with a technical amendment. SB 166 on administrative efficiency in public schools drew the most extended debate and multiple amendments; it changes testing, promotion, teacher evaluation, certification, and facilities rules, and passed 37-0. The chamber also passed SB 282 on warranty association financial requirements 36-0, SB 316 creating series LLCs 35-1, and SB 384 on annexing state-owned lands 36-0. At the end of the day, the Senate waived rules to immediately certify all passed bills to the House, received budget schedule guidance from Appropriations Chair Hooper for SB 2500 and SB 2502, and adjourned until April 9.

Transcript Highlights:

• year. Mhm. year. Mhm.
• year round? year round?
• . test. test.
• year over time? year over time?
• the same year to year?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met to hear from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals as part of its review of a proposal involving statewide administrative consolidation and changes to school governance. Members first discussed how school board witnesses would be selected, with the chair saying the committee would seek a mix of district sizes and structures and would also accept emailed input. The principals’ association said it represents more than 550 principals and assistant principals and urged caution about any mandatory consolidation, arguing that successful consolidations are gradual and voluntary. Association leaders and principals testified that principals already handle a wide range of responsibilities, including instructional leadership, student discipline, safety, staff supervision and evaluation, family and community engagement, and day-to-day crisis response. They argued that shifting more legal, budgetary, and administrative duties onto principals would reduce time for coaching teachers and supporting students, increase burnout and turnover, and create legal and training risks, especially in areas such as special education, privacy, and labor issues. They also said the roles of superintendents, principals, and school board members are distinct and require different training and expertise. Members asked detailed questions about how responsibilities are divided between principals and SAUs, whether principals recruit and evaluate staff, and how much time principals work. One principal said she works about 60 to 70 hours a week and that additional duties would be difficult to absorb. Another principal described his school’s structure, the importance of community building, and the need to preserve district-wide alignment if consolidation moves forward. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I did try to check kind of where we were this year so far, since we are in the assessment testing window
• I do have one slide that starts at third grade, but because of the years we have testing, I also did.
• I do have one slide that starts at third grade, but because of the years we have testing, I also did
• Also, we have school psychologists, especially for testing every three years. They are included.
• And I know that they're, particularly this time of year, they're just busy testing.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is your second year as Vice Chair.
• Under HIPAA, protection extends 50 years after death.
• And you get that sample, what are you testing for?
• We can specifically test for that being inside blood.
• I passed a bill a few years ago so that you don't have to get the second confirmatory DNA test.

Summary: The committee met with Senators Garcia and Simon excused and heard a presentation from FDLE Deputy Commissioner Vaden Pollard on homicide and violent-crime investigations, focusing on access to blood evidence, toxicology, medical records, mental health records, and the legal limits imposed by Florida law, HIPAA, and 42 CFR Part 2. He explained that autopsy evidence collected by medical examiners is generally available to law enforcement, while hospital records and mental health/substance abuse records usually require subpoenas, court orders, or consent, which can delay investigations. He also discussed the difference between DNA testing and toxicology testing, the role of warrants and probable cause for living suspects, and the special rules that apply when a suspect is deceased. Members asked detailed questions about what toxicology panels include, whether medications can be tested for, how medical examiners review prior medical history, and whether FDLE tracks data linking violent crime to mental health issues or follow up with regulators after incidents. Pollard said the agency follows investigative leads where relevant, but regulatory follow-up depends on the circumstances. He also discussed behavioral threat assessment and management, and said risk protection orders have been used effectively to prevent violence and can lead to court-ordered evaluations and services. The committee then shifted to crime lab capacity and turnaround times. Pollard said the average DNA turnaround time was 208 days for some evidence, with anything over 30 days considered backlog, but that sexual assault kits are prioritized and generally handled much faster, with rush cases sometimes completed within 24 hours. Members expressed concern about delays in unsolved violent and sexual assault cases and asked what resources would help reduce backlog; Pollard said additional analysts would improve turnaround times. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenter and adjournment after Senator Bernard moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• we've had over the years.
• , a blood test, or your analysis test.
• exact thing for that many years. exact thing for that many years.
• Don't take the test.
• <01:54:23.920> we last year in the last calendar year we last year in the last calendar year

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's been in the process for years, um, I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 years, and it's
• That was raised in the FIR not just this year, but in prior fiscal years.
• But after years of not seeing that as a viable solution, I finally relented this, uh, last year and,
• For the last 53 years.
• They, um, the, the, the testing, they are not, um, it's predominantly we use Body lab for that testing

Transcript Highlights:

• It is issues with CDC COVID 19 testing.
• <00:24:57.200> for advice for wearing masks, testing for advice for wearing masks, testing
• . released the the test kits anyway released the the test kits anyway and<00:34:34.480> they<00
• deaths and deaths per year deaths and deaths per year and<00:48:55.280> you<00:48:55.599>
• We were meeting two times this year.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The New Hampshire House Special Committee on the COVID Response Efficacy met to continue its fact-finding review of the state’s pandemic response, with the chair restating the committee’s mission and focus on federal guidance, federal funding, emergency use authorization vaccination efforts, long COVID, patient rights, and vaccination policies. The chair said the committee had previously reviewed materials about the U.S. Supreme Court declining to hear a COVID vaccine case and CDC internal emails about vaccine risks, and introduced additional research on CDC testing and communications failures. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to summarizing articles and a recent U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report titled *Unmasked: How Biden Health Officials Purposely Turned a Blind Eye Toward COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals*. The chair argued that CDC testing and guidance were flawed, citing delayed data publication, confusing guidance, a faulty early COVID test, missed opportunities to study silent spread, and alleged suppression of safety information. The Senate report was described as alleging that FDA and CDC officials knew their surveillance systems could mask vaccine safety signals, that officials discouraged internal analysis from being shared externally, and that newer analytical methods identified multiple statistically significant adverse-event signals. The chair also discussed the V-safe system, VAERS, and claims that federal officials downplayed or concealed adverse-event data. Members and the chair connected these federal issues to New Hampshire, noting changes in the state’s health care landscape since the pandemic, including more urgent care facilities and satellite ERs. The chair suggested New Hampshire should develop independent scientific assessment resources to validate federal information in future emergencies. Representative Wheeler noted that the materials would be entered into the committee record and made available on the House website. No votes were taken; the committee discussed the materials, invited further questions, and indicated that a proposed committee communication would be revisited later after additional supporting information is gathered, with a goal of issuing a statement by the end of June.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what are we testing for specifically?
• Specifically, what are we testing for?
• Testing that before it goes in?
• Testing methods. Okay. I know it costs a lot to test water.
• But our growth now has exceeded that years.

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• of the year, and providing three tests in a year and help student knowledge what I hope for decades
• all sorts of euphemisms for it, we're going to start off the year and give a beginning of the year test
• And these adaptive level, We're going to start off the year and give a beginning-of-the-year test.
• saying the end-of-the-year test, where there's this high-pressure test that is a one-size-fits-all,
• that is not just a high-stakes end-of-the-year test?

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum call, invocation, and approval of the previous day’s journal, then observed a moment of silence after Senator Eckhardt referenced a mass shooting in Austin. The chamber also agreed to postpone reading and referral of bills until later in the day. Early procedural business included a motion not to print Senate Bill 3, which was adopted without objection. Later, Senator Mendez raised a parliamentary inquiry about moving flood relief bills to the top of the calendar, but the presiding officer said the order of business was up to the chair. The main floor action centered on Senate Bill 4, the congressional redistricting bill. Senator King laid out the bill, describing it as the companion to the House version, based on 2020 census data, and arguing it was legal, race-blind, more compact, and likely to elect more Republicans. Senators asked extensive questions about the process, public hearings, and the map’s effects on districts and communities. The Senate voted to suspend the regular order of business and the three-day rule, then passed SB 4 to engrossment and finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 19 yeas and 2 nays. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 6, relating to abortion and civil liability for the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs. Senator Hughes argued the bill was needed to stop illegal abortion pills being mailed into Texas and harming women and unborn children. The Senate suspended the regular order of business and the three-day rule, passed the bill to engrossment, and then finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 18 yeas, 10 nays, and one present not voting. A lengthy discussion followed on the committee substitute for Senate Bill 14, which would standardize law enforcement personnel and departmental files statewide. Senator King said the bill codifies a TCOLE model policy and limits public access to personnel files to substantiated misconduct, commendations, and evaluations, while keeping other records available through other legal processes. Senators Eckhardt, West, Hinojosa, and others questioned how the bill would affect transparency, meet-and-confer agreements, civilian review boards, and access to unsubstantiated complaints. An amendment by Senator Hinojosa of Dallas to narrow the bill to unfounded complaints failed, and SB 14 was then passed to engrossment on a vote of 18 yeas and 10 nays. The final major item was Senate Bill 1, the natural disaster omnibus bill responding to the July flooding. Senator Perry said the bill addresses camp and RV park safety, evacuation plans, emergency rooftop access, lines of succession for local emergency management, annual drills, volunteer management, drone restrictions over disaster areas, small-business recovery loans, and a statewide data hub for flood and weather monitoring. Senators Menendez, Eckhardt, and Kolkhorst asked about autopsies, volunteer background checks, liability, warning systems, floodplain mitigation, and coordination with FEMA and local governments. Perry said the bill focuses on preparation, response, and recovery, while broader prevention and mitigation issues may be addressed later. The transcript ends during this extended discussion, before final action on SB 1 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And for kind of two years from 2013 to 2015, there was this phase where operators were drilling and testing
• It might be two years, or two and a half years.
• You still have the tests. The testing led to the ongoing evolution.
• It was uneconomic for a lot of the tests that Continental and others did those first few years.
• But two years goes by, then it’s another two years, and 10 years is going to be here way too early.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Finance and Tax Committee met to consider Senate Bill 2397 and a proposed amendment creating a development incentive well program for North Dakota oil and gas production. Representative Dockter explained the amendment as a way to encourage exploratory and innovative drilling in light of the state’s financial outlook and the growing share of stripper wells. Department of Mineral Resources Director Nathan Anderson and DMR geologist Timothy Nashim presented background on the Bakken and Three Forks formations, with Nashim describing research showing that Middle Three Forks second-bench development can add reserves in some areas but not others, and that roughly 600 additional wells in the strongest area could yield about 250 million barrels of oil. Continental Resources representatives William Houser and John Argo supported the amendment. They said the bill would give a temporary oil extraction tax exemption for certified development incentive wells, limited to 36 months or 300,000 barrels, and would also update tax treatment for gas used in enhanced oil recovery and on-site electric generation. They argued the measure would encourage new technology and testing in existing spacing units, complementing House Bill 1483, which they said focused on geographic expansion into non-Bakken and non-Three Forks areas. Argo said Continental still invests heavily in North Dakota but is shifting rigs elsewhere because of economics, and he urged incentives to spur exploration and preserve the basin’s long-term future. North Dakota Petroleum Council executive director Ron Ness also supported the concept, calling it a targeted, low-risk way to encourage innovation and future barrels. Committee members asked about royalty treatment, the difference from House Bill 1483, pressure maintenance, and how the program would be administered. DMR said the amendment should clarify that the operator bears the burden of proving a well qualifies and that only one incentive well per stratigraphic interval should be certified. No vote was taken; the committee paused to work on revised language and indicated the bill would likely need further adjustment, possibly in conference committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Five years? Ten years? See what I mean? Yeah. Active enrollment status, active...
• testing um especially for subdivisions. testing um especially for subdivisions.
• outside services to witness test bits. outside services to witness test bits.
• That's a year from July. Do we need to move that up? It's like over a year. It's a year from July.
• It's a year from It's like over a year. It's a year from July. July. July.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee opened discussion on SP 170 and worked through the bill section by section, focusing first on housing discrimination language and then on land-use and development provisions. On the housing section, members discussed adding “school enrollment status” or a similar term as a protected class to prevent municipalities from steering students into specific zones, especially in Durham. Some members questioned whether “status” was too vague and suggested “enrollment status” or “school enrollment status” for clarity. Public testimony raised concerns that adding a new protected class could have broader implications beyond this bill and could affect municipal zoning authority, while supporters argued the language was needed to prevent discrimination against students in housing access. The committee then heard testimony on provisions limiting municipal authority over septic test pits and well-siting requirements. DEES officials and a builder testified that state standards are already protective of groundwater and surface water and that some local requirements are more stringent than the state’s, adding cost and delay to housing projects. Supporters said uniform state standards would make housing development faster and more predictable. Opponents warned that local rules can protect aquifers, wellhead areas, and drinking water in specific communities, and that removing municipal flexibility could weaken those protections. The subcommittee appeared comfortable keeping these sections, though members discussed whether to clarify the language and whether some local review authority should remain. The meeting also covered road-length limits, caps on the number of lots on dead-end roads, and subdivision design rules. Members generally supported prohibiting municipalities from using maximum road length or lot caps to block development, with one amendment suggested to allow such limits where adequate water and sewer capacity is lacking. The committee also discussed allowing utilities and infrastructure such as septic systems, wells, electric systems, drainage structures, and shared leach fields to be placed in subdivision open space or perimeter buffers when those areas are not protected wetlands or shoreland. Finally, the committee reviewed a provision requiring municipalities to stamp and accept plan changes within three days after initial review, with members explaining that the goal is to prevent repeated, incremental changes from dragging out the approval process. No final votes were taken in the portion of the meeting provided, but members indicated general comfort with several sections as amended or clarified.

Transcript Highlights:

• state agencies this year, and they follow two basic lines of work.
• That's a 236% year-to-year growth.
• Over the past two years, Washington State has leveraged more than...
• The SLCGP grant is a four-year grant. We are now in year three of that four-year program.
• The funds are released by the federal government once a year, and in the first two years, as I mentioned

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s Office cybersecurity performance audits for fiscal year 2025, covering both state agencies and local governments. SAO staff explained that the audits are conducted independently under Initiative 900 and are kept confidential at the entity level, with detailed findings shared directly with the audited organizations. They reported that state agency audits found nearly one-third of assessed safeguards fully implemented on all systems and 227 vulnerabilities across seven agencies, including three critical and 21 high-severity issues. For seven local government cybersecurity audits, nearly a quarter of safeguards were fully implemented on all systems, and auditors identified nearly 300 vulnerabilities, including nine critical and 47 high-severity issues. SAO also summarized its ransomware resiliency audits and critical infrastructure audits for local governments. In six ransomware audits, a little over 35% of assessed safeguards were not in place, while about 60% were at least partially in place. In 39 critical infrastructure audits, focused largely on water and sewer providers, auditors found over 260 vulnerabilities and said more than 10% were critical or high. Staff highlighted that these audits have led to improvements, including one vendor making security changes after SAO testing that were later echoed in a federal advisory. They also described related services such as cybersecurity checkups, policy guidance, and other cyber-related work by the office. Washington Technology Solutions’ state chief information security officer, Ralph Johnson, praised the audits and said they help protect essential public services. He cited a sharp national rise in ransomware incidents against governments and said Washington has used more than $11 million in federal and state cybersecurity grant funds for over 200 projects. In response to questions from Representative Scott, SAO and WOTEC discussed options for addressing urgent vulnerabilities, including compensating controls, grant funding, and low-cost mitigation steps. The committee also discussed how Washington’s program compares nationally, with Johnson saying Initiative 900 is unusually comprehensive and that local governments often seek audits voluntarily. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony was offered but none was given.

Transcript Highlights:

• year. Mhm. year. Mhm.
• year round? year round?
• depending to every year every other year depending to every year every other year depending on<00
• . test. test.
• Does the SAT organization try to keep the academic level of the test the same year to year?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting focused on school governance and a proposed shift in responsibilities related to SAU consolidation, with committee members first discussing how school board members and other local officials would be selected for future testimony. The main presentation came from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals, whose executive director Brady Belair and several principals argued that mandatory statewide administrative consolidation should be approached cautiously and that any consolidation should be voluntary and locally driven. They said anticipated savings may not materialize, citing possible higher personnel, transportation, and technology costs, and warned that forcing changes could create disruption without improving student outcomes. Principals testified that their jobs are already broad and demanding, centered on instructional leadership, student safety, staff supervision, family communication, and day-to-day crisis response. Kathleen Murphy of Amherst described working 60 to 70 hours a week and said principals spend substantial time coaching teachers, handling student issues, and supporting school climate; she said adding more administrative duties would compromise student learning and teacher growth. Adam Osborne of Bow Memorial School similarly described principals as daily problem-solvers who set school-level direction and create conditions for schools to thrive. The witnesses also emphasized that principals, superintendents, school boards, and business administrators have different training and responsibilities, and that specialized tasks such as special education compliance, FERPA/HIPAA issues, and labor matters require appropriate expertise. Committee members questioned the witnesses about overlap between superintendent and principal duties, the completeness of statutory responsibility lists, and whether some functions such as curriculum, discipline, hiring, and evaluation are shared. The principals acknowledged some overlap and collaboration, but said superintendents typically handle broader system-level, legal, and central-office responsibilities while principals focus on building-level leadership and teacher support. One member raised the earlier expectation that districts might move to a principal-plus-business-manager model, but the witnesses said that model did not develop as expected and that district structures vary widely. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• For road tests, the first two tests are at no charge if they fail and have to retake it a third time.
• For road tests, the first two tests are at no charge if they fail and have to retake it a third time.
• we actually the first uh for road tests we actually the first two<00:12:53.760> tests<00:12:54.160
• <00:16:10.600> ago address I believe it was two years ago address I believe it was two years
• <01:00:40.920> that did have an initiative last year that did have an initiative last year

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair. timing taken tests taken that they timing taken tests taken that they wanted<00:06:40.840>
• <00:08:05.960> within to go and take their their test within to go and take their their test
• daughter and we just did her 15-year-old daughter and we just did her permit<00:10:52.839> test
• After two fails, the third test, the customer has to pay $10 before they can take the test.
• there a charge for driver tests there a charge for driver tests today<00:20:41.280> director<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I did try to check kind of where we were this year so far, since we are in the assessment testing window
• I do have one slide that starts at third grade, but because of the years we have testing, I also did.
• I do have one slide that starts at third grade, but because of the years we have testing, I also did
• Also, we have school psychologists, especially for testing every three years. They are included.
• And I know that they're, particularly this time of year, just busy testing.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.