Transcript Highlights:

• We know our students learn best when their behavioral health is not impeding their academic focus, so
• We know our students learn best when their behavioral health is not impeding their academic focus, so
• behavior.
• This legislation is a recommendation of the Student Behavior and School Climate Task Force, which is.
• .. ...is a recommendation of the Student Behavior and School Climate Task Force, which recognized that

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met with enough members present to conduct business and approved the June 17 minutes. It first heard HB 459 with House Amendment 1, which would prohibit the sale of energy drinks on public middle and high school campuses during school hours or school events. The sponsor and Department of Education explained that the bill targets beverages containing caffeine and marketed as energy drinks, not ordinary soft drinks or coffee/tea products. Public testimony from the Medical Society supported the bill on health grounds, while the beverage industry said its companies already voluntarily limit school offerings and that the bill does not reflect current practice. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then heard HB 461, a follow-up to prior legislation on New Castle County property reassessment and school tax rates. Senator Cruz said the bill would let New Castle County school districts adjust and reset tax rates to reflect reassessment changes without increasing projected operating revenue, and that it includes a sunset. DSEA supported the measure, saying fair property values are important to public education funding. The committee also heard HB 452, which would require additional background checks and training for DIAA sports officials and strengthen DIAA enforcement procedures. Members questioned how checks would be handled, who would see the results, and who would provide training; the DIAA compliance coordinator said the checks would be maintained through the state process and that associations would verify eligibility. The bill’s sponsor and DIAA said the goal was to align officials with existing child-safety standards. Next, the committee considered HS1 for HB 425, which raises the salary supplement from 6% to 12% for nationally certified school counselors, nurses, and school social workers, and allows DOE to identify additional qualifying positions by regulation. Supporters, including school social workers, nurses, and DSEA, argued the change would improve retention and recognize advanced credentials. Senator Hansen raised concerns that school psychologists were not included; sponsors said a broader study and possible future legislation or budget language would address other nationally certified school-based professionals. The committee then heard HS1 for HB 358 on student elopement notifications, inspired by Ace’s Law, but administrators and the chair raised concerns that the bill may be too prescriptive and difficult to implement in practice, especially when schools may not immediately know a student has left campus. Finally, the committee discussed HB 379 on the comprehensive school discipline improvement program; DOE said the substitute was intended to consolidate prevention and intervention supports and avoid competition for funding, while DASA asked that the bill be paused or tabled. The meeting ended before action on the remaining bill, and HB 443 was deferred to a future executive meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• THAT IS WHY OUR THREAT ASSESSMENT MODEL FOCUSES ON STUDENTS OF CONCERN AND CONCERNING BEHAVIORS.
• CONCERNING BEHAVIORS.
• TIP REGARDING CONCERNING BEHAVIORS, IT COULD BE A STUDENT TEACHER, HOWEVER IS RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION
• BEHAVIOR.
• BUT IF YOU KNOW AND INTERACT WITH THE STUDENT DAILY YOU WOULD KNOW IT IS A BASELINE BEHAVIOR AND IT IS

Transcript Highlights:

• who's remaining because of the student who's remaining because of the<04:09:37.120> behavioral
• Prior to that, as a teacher of students with emotional behavioral disorders, working in both a private
• You might have one student who has really significant behaviors in a given year.
• Or students who have really significant mental health or behavioral struggles over time, where we know
• because those students may more often engage in self-injurious behavior or may more often run out of

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you think it could potentially create deviant behavior or even criminal behavior at some point?
• of students. who can help deliver services.
• well-being of students in the school settings.
• And you say now, if a student passes the PSAT, that school can get credit for that.
• To monitor our schools and student success.

Bills: HJR175, HJR88, HB21, HB49, HB216, HB346, HB573, HB565, HB954, HB1953, HB2686, HB1441, HB2734, HB1650, HB3161, HB2876, HB3185, HB3388, HB2761, HB3233, HB 1186, HB1534, HB5506, HB5129, HB3619, HB778, HB2867, HB3221, HB3672, HB2434, HB4903, HB3687, HB3675, HB4609, HB4582, HB4921, HB3866, HB3901, HB4534, HB2446, HB3984, HB700, HB4012, HB4491, HB4088, HB229, HB4234, HB722, HB4136, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB2858, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB2200, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HCR9, HCR40, HB5138, SB17, HB4944, HB2284, HB3421, SB1569, SB2420, SB1968, SB2351, SB2544, SB1490, SB1349, SB1568, SB2776, HB3531, HB2149, HB4327, HB3158, HB3717, HB4520, SB888, SB552, HB3138, HB3704, HB2921, HB4853, HB4506, HB3892, HJR161, HJR175, HJR88, HB1937, HB3334, HB5444, HB5137, HB361, HB321, HB5447, HB464, HB678, HB2294, HB4172, HB3225, HB1769, HB5394, HB1837, HB1787, HB2271, HB2440, HB5134, HB5149, HB2151, HB2073, HB2186, HB2025, HB1936, HB1777, HB1663, HB 1306, HB 1290, HB1527, HB4802, HB3462, HB2963, HB2462, HB2560, HB644, HB2725, HB2621, HB2588, HB1443, HB1403, HB3032, HB1557, HB1664, HB2811, HB2088, HB2598, HB3062, HB3134, HB3940, HB4027, HB4097, HB4862, HB4170, HB4157, HB4205, HB4279, HB4377, HB4838, HB5424, HB5294, HB4870, HB4763, HB5639, HB4112, HB2275, HB1677, HB5014, HB3848, HB3797, HB3727, HB3709, HB3177, HB3057, HB4176, HB4202, HB2180, HB3528, HB3658, HB21, HB49, HB216, HB346, HB573, HB565, HB954, HB1953, HB2686, HB1441, HB2734, HB1650, HB3161, HB2876, HB3185, HB3388, HB2761, HB3233, HB 1186, HB1534, HB5506, HB5129, HB3619, HB778, HB2867, HB3221, HB3672, HB2434, HB4903, HB3687, HB3675, HB4609, HB4582, HB4921, HB3866, HB3901, HB4534, HB2446, HB3984, HB700, HB4012, HB4491, HB4088, HB229, HB4234, HB722, HB4136, HB4105, HB4413, HB170, HB551, HB2858, HB3053, HB3142, HB3180, HB3722, HB2200, HB1794, HB1784, HB1581, HB2530, HB4308, HB1896, HB2974, HB3359, HB4580, HB2458, HB2215, HB3332, HB2278, HB3015, HB3151, HB1368, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40

Keywords: constitutional amendment, medium of exchange, currency rights, digital currency, financial autonomy, tax exemption, rainwater harvesting, graywater system, local government, ad valorem taxation, housing finance, multifamily residential, low income, audit requirements, affordable housing, development bonds, oil waste, gas waste, liability, treatment processes

Transcript Highlights:

• . a community of students of sorts or some students that have hair like mine, which is natural, which
• How are we going to ensure that student data and student information is protected from these third-party
• I didn't see a problem maybe with behavior.
• And that became a concern and a red flag because I saw these students that I didn't consider to be students
• student conduct.

Bills: HB 1520, HB 1545, HJR 110, HJR 203, HB 245, HB 1465, HB 1482, HB 294, HB 793, HB 809, HB 3928, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 1973, HB 285, HB 4341, HB 4264, HB 1043, HB 837, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 1194, HB 1646, HB 1729, HB 2498, HB 1314, HB 2295, HB 1353, HB 1531, HB 1988, HB 5398, HB 3960, HB 3923, HB 1407, HB 1764, HB 2221, HB 2214, HB 2517, HB 2518, HB 2213, HB 5008, HB 5092, HB 3421, HB 3663, HB 3748, HB 3800, HB 3756, HB 2613, HB 3782, HB 5246, HB 4344, HB 4044, HB 4066, HB 2702, HB 2807, HB 2869, HB 2898, HB 3181, HB 3250, HB 4153, HB 2091, HB 2115, HB 2542, HB 2768, HB 3349, HB 3352, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 3133, HB 4432, HB 4960, HB 3214, HB 3915, HB 3508, HB 2145, SB 304, SB 608, SB 2312, SB 494, SB 530, HB 45, HB 2520, HB 35, HB 47, HB 318, HB 349, HB 554, HB 1359, HB 1373, HB 2254, HB 2259, HB 2853, HB 3073, HB 3088, HB 353, HB 355, HB 786, HB 762, HB 705, HB 932, HB 849, HB 1119, HB 3041, HB 713, HB 3104, HB 3970, HB 4042, HB 4490, HB 1731, HB 2607, HB 3689, HB 1788, HB 1612, HB 138, HB 15, HB 1971, HB 1338, HB 2989, HB 267, HB 1201, HB 2954, HB 5265, HB 1804, HB 5061, HB 1520, HB 1545, HJR 110, HJR 203, HB 1887, HB 1914, HB 2402, HB 2306, HB 1809, HB 2350, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 3211, HB 1056, HB 2081, HB 2187, HB 3092, HB 3308, HB 3526, HB 3750, HB 3527, HB 4219, HB 4230, HB 4290, HB 5238, HB 4804, HB 4749, HB 245, HB 1465, HB 1482, HB 294, HB 793, HB 809, HB 3928, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 1973, HB 285, HB 4341, HB 4264, HB 1043, HB 837, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 1194, HB 1646, HB 1729, HB 2498, HB 1314, HB 2295, HB 1353, HB 1531, HB 1988, HB 5398, HB 3960, HB 3923, HB 1407, HB 1764, HB 2221, HB 2214, HB 2517, HB 2518, HB 2213, HB 5008, HB 5092, HB 3421, HB 3663, HB 3748, HB 3800, HB 3756, HB 2613, HB 3782, HB 5246, HB 4344, HB 4044, HB 4066, HB 2702, HB 2807, HB 2869, HB 2898, HB 3181, HB 3250, HB 4153, HB 2091, HB 2115, HB 2542, HB 2768, HB 3349, HB 3352, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 3133, HB 4432, HB 4960, HB 3214, HB 3915, HB 3508, HB 2145, HCR 6, HCR 12, HCR 34, HCR 50, HCR 55, HCR 58, HCR 70, HCR 71, HCR 72, HCR 74, HCR 75, HCR 78, HCR 80, HCR 93, HCR 100, HCR 107, HCR 116, HCR 117, HCR 90

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Summary: The Florida House considered multiple bills on Day 59 of the legislative session. Key legislation included CS for HB 1103 on developmental disabilities services, which expanded a pilot program statewide while maintaining current contracts. CS for SB 1730 addressed affordable housing with amendments protecting historic districts. CS for HB 443 on charter schools allowed stricter codes of conduct and virtual student athletic participation. CS for HB 209 prohibited golf courses and hotels in state parks. Lucy's Law (CS for HB 289) increased boating safety penalties and education requirements. CS for HB 1205 significantly restricted citizen ballot initiatives by requiring petition circulator registration, limiting volunteer collections to 25 signatures, adding financial impact statements, and imposing new penalties. The House also passed bills on animal cruelty databases, waste incineration restrictions, and spectrum alerts for individuals with developmental disabilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• In behavioral health to rural areas of the state.
• But your question is about medical students.
• If you want to expand medical students, that's great.
• ...this new school, and would we look at maybe having more in-state students, students from our tribal
• If the behavioral trust is not made whole, the Behavioral Health Reform and Investment Act, in my mind

Bills: SB5, SB6, SB8

Keywords: physician residency, healthcare, rural communities, medical education, appropriation, education, medical school, New Mexico, construction, behavioral health, funding, mental health services, general fund transfer, 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, students with behavioral expertise, if you have data that shows your district has a high number of
• students with autism or those type of behavioral needs, we would want representation on the teaming
• It's supporting the students' mental health needs, those positive behavior intervention and supports,
• When we think about maybe the behavioral or social needs of the students with autism, we want to make
• or social needs of the the behavioral or social needs of the students<00:41:53.360> with<00:41

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• behavior interventions, principal involvement,<00:15:06.240> student<00:15:06.560> codes
• We’ve put behavior plans together for students.
• implications for for has had behavioral implications for for our<00:35:41.280> students<00:35
• Um, I've heard a lot of things that could contribute to positive student behavior.
• I've heard a lot of things that could contribute to positive student behavior.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Schools often try several interventions to help troubled students who engage in harmful behaviors or
• this will be particularly hardest felt for students least likely to be able to control their behavior
• So we're going to see students with disabilities, students with behavioral problems instead of, you know
• in which students' lack of academic achievement is conducive to that type of behavior?
• It contains no protections for students with disabilities and no requirement to identify behavioral issues

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee began with brief announcements and thanks to staff and members as this was described as the last regular House Education Committee meeting of the 57th Legislature. Chad Heinrich of the University of Phoenix invited members to an upcoming lunch-and-learn on artificial intelligence and education. The chair and ranking member both offered closing remarks recognizing staff, pages, and public testimony over the session. The committee then heard SB 1497, which requires school districts with at least 300 employees and a self-insurance program to seek quotes for health coverage and related services at least every four years, with some exceptions for certain self-insurance arrangements. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to increase competition, transparency, and better benefits for school employees. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill passed 10-0 with a due pass recommendation. Members next considered SB 1711, which directs the State Board of Education to compile age-appropriate resources on preventing and recognizing inappropriate contact, including sexual conduct, and requires schools to make those resources available to students and parents. Supporters said it would provide vetted, voluntary resources without mandating curriculum; opponents argued it was too limited and should include more robust, trauma-informed, age-appropriate sex education and accessibility requirements. The bill passed 7-3. SB 1798, creating a FAFSA awareness program and school designation for schools that promote FAFSA completion, also passed after testimony from a college student and the Arizona Board of Regents in support; the vote was 8-2. The committee also heard SB 1143, which requires schools to submit federal civil rights data collection information to ADE and directs ADE to publish an annual school safety report. Supporters framed it as a transparency measure for parents and policymakers, while opponents said it was duplicative, could be misused, and should apply to private schools as well. It passed 7-3. Finally, SB 1684, as amended, creates a private right of action against public schools for serious physical injury caused by bullying after a prior report and a negligent failure to respond; an amendment narrowed the bill to on-campus or school-sponsored events and removed verbal reports from the definition of prior report. Trial lawyers and the ACLU opposed it, warning about litigation and zero-tolerance discipline, while supporters said it would hold schools accountable for serious bullying. The amended bill passed 6-3.

Transcript Highlights:

• behavior.
• behavior.
• And then we had medical students, two medical students by my side and a pre-medical student.
• We also operate three community behavioral health centers and two behavioral health urgent care mental
• We also operate three community behavioral health centers and two behavioral health urgent care mental

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing on a large docket focused on primary care, workforce development, and medical debt. Chairs Cindy Friedman and John Lawn outlined hearing procedures and noted that testimony would be taken on 17 matters. The committee first heard testimony on bills to establish a community health center nurse practitioner residency program and to strengthen mental health centers. Senator Keenan, Rep. Keefe, and health center leaders described the Worcester nurse practitioner residency as a successful pipeline and retention strategy, citing workforce shortages, training needs in community health centers, and the cost of the program. Rep. O’Day also supported the mental health centers bill, saying it would raise payment rates, improve reimbursement for behavioral health services, and help clinics retain staff and expand access. The committee then took testimony on bills to address medical debt through hospital financial assistance reform. The Attorney General’s Office, Health Care for All, Health Law Advocates, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and individual patients supported the measure, arguing that hospital financial assistance policies are inconsistent, hard to find, and difficult to navigate. Witnesses said the bill would standardize eligibility criteria, create a uniform application, improve notice requirements, and expand access to discounted care up to 400% of the federal poverty level. Several personal stories described medical bills being sent to collections, confusion over insurance billing, and the burden of debt on low-income and chronically ill patients. Committee members asked about hospital concerns, the role of the health safety net, and whether the bill addressed root causes of medical debt; testimony emphasized that the proposal was meant to improve transparency and access rather than replace broader insurance reforms. The hearing also focused heavily on “Primary Care for You” legislation, H. 1370 and S. 867, which would increase primary care investment and create a new payment model. Rep. Haggerty, physicians, a patient, community health center leaders, and the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers described a primary care crisis marked by low reimbursement, staffing shortages, long waits, burnout, and difficulty recruiting clinicians. Supporters said the bills would shift spending toward preventive, team-based care, improve access and equity, and reduce long-term costs. The Massachusetts Association of Health Plans said it was directionally supportive of increased primary care investment but warned that any new spending must stay within the cost growth benchmark and preserve existing contracting structures. The hearing ended with additional testimony on a community health center workforce and loan repayment grant bill from Rep. Stanley, and with further discussion from Dr. Alan Garo about the need for payment reform in primary care.

Transcript Highlights:

• Notification and support are provided when a student with a history of violent behavior is placed in
• So, sort of not fun to hear that type of behavior. So what happened to a student?
• So, sort of not fun to hear that type of behavior. So what happened to a student?
• So when we talk about students who have increased behavior needs, increased...
• So when we talk about students who have increased behavior needs, increased So when we talk about students

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to discuss special education funding and retention, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and then hearing a presentation from North Dakota United on a statewide special education survey and retention rubric. Presenters described how the rubric and survey were developed from special educator input around four domains: paperwork and due process support, workload, student and staff safety, and paraprofessional management. They reported high levels of stress and burnout, including increased workload, difficulty taking prep and lunch time, concerns about mental health, and widespread difficulty filling special education positions. Committee members questioned the survey’s lack of a general-education comparison group, the interpretation of terms like “rarely” and “sometimes,” and whether results could be broken down further by district size, unit, or disability area. The survey results showed the weakest area was workload, with respondents reporting caseloads increasing without corresponding adjustments, little additional support or compensation when workloads rise, and few negotiated-agreement protections. Paperwork and due process also scored poorly, with many teachers saying they rarely receive dedicated time during the duty day, often work outside contract hours without compensation, and take work home on evenings and weekends. Student and staff safety scored somewhat better but still showed gaps in crisis follow-up, notification about violent behavior, protective gear, and leave options after incidents. Paraprofessional management also drew concern, especially low pay, insufficient staffing, limited administrative support, and the burden placed on teachers to supervise and train paras. Several teachers then testified directly about the practical impact of these issues. One special education teacher described the job as combining instruction, legal compliance, and paraprofessional supervision, often requiring work beyond contracted hours and contributing to burnout and turnover. Another testified that special education case managers are effectively doing three full-time jobs and that the paperwork and caseload demands are a major reason people avoid or leave the field. Committee members discussed whether the problems are primarily local or state-level, whether more funding would solve them, and whether changes to the funding formula or weighting for high-cost students might be needed. No formal vote or action was taken beyond a recess and return to order for the next presentation, which continued the discussion of possible special education study objectives and potential policy directions.

Transcript Highlights:

• No doubt it is harder to have students work through their behavior mistakes at school than it is to send
• > students<00:19:56.120> with low-income students, and students with low-income students
• to students not making meaningful progress, and sometimes leading to crisis behaviors that could have
• . students. students.
• . students. students.

Bills: HF3493, HF4114

Keywords: safe schools, charter schools, nonpublic schools, Tribal education, funding increase, special education, funding, education finance, appropriations, budget, cross subsidy

Transcript Highlights:

• With that as the goal, it is essential that both county behavioral health and managed care behavioral
• our country's behavioral health systems.
• This, we know, is not all of the students in the state of California that are getting school-based behavioral
• We know this is not all of the students in the state of California that are getting school-based behavioral
• Okay, let's move on then to the behavioral...

Summary: The hearing focused first on behavioral health, especially serious mental illness and anosognosia, a condition described by witnesses as a neurological symptom that prevents people from recognizing they are ill. The chair framed the issue around families cycling through emergency rooms, jails, conservatorships, and short-term stabilization without lasting treatment, and warned that federal changes under H.R. 1 could reduce Medi-Cal funding and worsen access. Dawn Marie Anderson gave a personal account of her son’s long history of psychosis, homelessness, arrests, repeated jail and state hospital stays, and eventual stability when he received sustained medication and coordinated support. She argued that the system often treats the problem as criminal rather than medical and that voluntary programs and short-term services are not enough for people who lack insight into their illness. Other panelists, including representatives from the California Behavioral Health Association, Santa Barbara County Behavioral Health, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association, agreed that anosognosia is not denial or noncompliance and said the system needs long-term, coordinated care, including assertive community treatment, mobile crisis, supportive housing, medication support, and stronger handoffs between county and managed care systems. They said CalAIM and other reforms have improved some coordination, but significant gaps remain, especially for people with serious mental illness, for those in jail or locked settings, and for people with private insurance, which witnesses said often offers little meaningful coverage for early psychosis or intensive behavioral health services. Several witnesses urged the Legislature to protect Medi-Cal, shore up county safety-net services, and invest in training and family engagement. The committee then turned to the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, with a focus on the virtual services platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna and the CYBHI fee schedule. DHCS reported strong growth in app registrations, coaching sessions, referrals, and positive user outcomes, saying the platforms provide free, culturally responsive, early-intervention support statewide and help connect users to higher levels of care when needed. On the fee schedule, DHCS said more than 500 LEAs, colleges, universities, and school-linked providers are participating, 181 LEAs have submitted claims, and $9.6 million has been reimbursed to date, with 41,556 students represented in claims. The chair and several members criticized the pace of implementation and the amount of money spent relative to reimbursement levels, saying the Legislature had requested data earlier and that the return on investment still appeared low. DHCS responded that many claims are still being submitted, that 70% of denials are correctable, that $400 million in capacity grants has been distributed locally, and that reimbursement is increasing rapidly as more districts come online. Public comment included a rural county behavioral health director who said private insurance denials leave counties with significant uncompensated work, especially for unlicensed staff providing case management and mobile crisis services.

Transcript Highlights:

• approach to change adult perceptions of student problem behaviors, alternative approaches to addressing
• approach to change adult perceptions of student problem behaviors, alternative approaches to addressing
• approach to change adult perceptions of student problem behaviors, alternative approaches to addressing
• approach to change adult perceptions of student problem behaviors, alternative approaches to addressing
• of student problem adult perceptions of student problem behaviors,<00:43:42.800> alternative<

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Seclusion Working Group approved the minutes from its November 5, 2025 meeting and then heard presentations from Jessica Heiser and Aaron Sansmark of Solutions Not Suspensions and the Minnesota Disability Law Center on the misuse and illegal use of seclusion in schools. They described illegal seclusion as including use outside emergencies, for discipline or noncompliance, beyond the emergency period, in unregistered rooms, without parent notice, without required observation or documentation, for students outside the grade-limit rules, when meals/restroom/water are withheld, or when staff are not properly trained. They emphasized that Minnesota lacks a single reliable data source for identifying illegal seclusion and that families often learn about incidents late, if at all, making complaints and legal action difficult because of barriers such as time, cost, language, and access to advocates. The presenters summarized Minnesota Disability Law Center records, saying they receive about one seclusion-related case per month during the school year, statewide, and that in the cases reviewed over the last year the children were all boys with disabilities, including autism, ADHD, developmental delay, or emotional disabilities; three were white and two were children of color, and four of the five were age 10 or younger. They said all of those families pulled their children from school afterward, and that five of five cases potentially had valid illegal-seclusion claims, though only three pursued legal action. They also noted PACER reports many discipline and behavior calls involving seclusion but does not keep hard records. The presenters proposed better statewide data collection, including identifying school buildings, staff, or students involved, reporting incident duration, and adding a checkbox on MDE complaints to flag restraint/seclusion allegations. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on disproportionality. The presenters cited national research showing students with disabilities and students of color, especially Black boys, are disproportionately restrained or secluded, while acknowledging Minnesota does not have a single statewide racial aggregate for seclusion. Members discussed whether banning seclusion would reduce misuse and disproportionality, whether it could increase physical holds or injuries, and whether the issue should be viewed in the broader context of emergency interventions. Heiser argued Minnesota is moving in the same direction as federal actions and other states that have restricted or banned seclusion, and noted that the current birth-through-third-grade ban has reportedly reduced seclusion by 40%. Other members agreed disproportionality is a serious systemwide problem, but emphasized the need to keep the conversation focused on seclusion and emergency use. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• It enhances behavioral health services and school hours for California students, for all students across
• At my school, we have a student enrollment of over 1,500 students.
• Recovery students.
• an entire class of students.
• students and my peers.

Summary: The hearing focused on youth mental health and treatment access in California, with opening remarks emphasizing that youth distress, self-harm-related emergency visits, and difficulty obtaining care remain elevated, while workforce shortages and reliance on one-time funding continue to limit access. Assemblymember Lori Davies echoed concerns about unstable funding and said lawmakers need to hear directly from providers and families as they prepare for the budget and legislation. The chair framed the hearing as a chance to hear from county, school, provider, and student perspectives, especially in San Diego County, where needs are high and investments have not always matched demand. County and school officials described the current system and recent state initiatives, including the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, school-linked fee schedules, payment reform, and the Behavioral Health Services Act transition. San Diego County Behavioral Health said it serves Medi-Cal youth with specialty mental health needs through a broad continuum of care, including outpatient clinics, school-based services, crisis response, residential treatment, and new crisis and residential facilities. San Diego County Office of Education and San Marcos Unified School District described efforts to expand school-based services and reimbursement through CYBHI, but said implementation is slowed by complex billing rules, insurance-data collection concerns from families, administrative burden, and uncertainty about sustaining staff positions funded by grants or soft money. School counselor testimony highlighted reduced stigma through campus outreach and clubs, but also noted that counselor-to-student ratios remain well above national standards and that budget cuts threaten supports. Provider testimony stressed that the system remains fragmented and that youth often move between emergency rooms, inpatient care, outpatient therapy, schools, and county programs without smooth handoffs. A child psychiatrist described crisis cases in which the main choices are brief hospitalization or discharge with limited follow-up, and argued for stronger warm handoffs, more outpatient and intensive outpatient options, better school-clinic coordination, and broader use of mobile crisis and 988. Rady Children’s Hospital and Aurora Behavioral Health described large increases in behavioral health demand, expansion of integrated care, and major barriers tied to low reimbursement rates, delayed payments, and administrative complexity. Across the panel, witnesses called for more stable funding, clearer reimbursement rules, better parent education on warning signs, and stronger collaboration among schools, counties, hospitals, and community providers to reduce stigma and improve timely care for youth.

Transcript Highlights:

• , for students like our students.
• students with disabilities, our Native American students, and our students that are experiencing poverty
• So it learns about the student as the student is responding immediately and over time.
• as it works with the student.
• are ELL students.

Transcript Highlights:

• With that as the goal, it is essential that both county behavioral health and managed care behavioral
• our country's behavioral health systems.
• that's gone to these behavioral health online apps.
• This, we know, is not all of the students in the state of California that are getting school-based behavioral
• Let's move on then to the VH behavioral health platforms.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused first on behavioral health, especially hard-to-treat serious mental illness through the lens of anosognosia, and the impact of potential federal Medi-Cal reductions under H.R. 1. A family member, Dawn Marie Anderson, described her son’s long cycle of psychosis, homelessness, arrests, jail-based stabilization, and repeated relapse when treatment ended, arguing that anosognosia is a symptom of illness rather than refusal of care. She and other witnesses urged more consistent, long-term treatment, family involvement, medication support, and stronger county and state coordination. County and provider representatives said the current system still relies too heavily on crisis response and leaves people with serious mental illness falling through gaps between managed care, county specialty care, housing, and justice systems. Testimony from the California Behavioral Health Association, Santa Barbara County Behavioral Health, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association emphasized that people with anosognosia often cannot self-navigate care, making a “no wrong door” system essential. They said H.R. 1 could destabilize coverage and shift costs to counties, while existing private insurance coverage is inadequate for early psychosis and related services. Witnesses highlighted CalAIM, jail in-reach, assertive community treatment, mobile crisis, supportive housing, and LEAP-style family training as promising tools, but said counties still need more resources and that the state should strengthen both Medi-Cal and private insurance behavioral health coverage. A public commenter from Lake County said private insurers denied most claims, especially for unlicensed staff providing case management and mobile crisis services. The committee then heard an update on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, including the virtual services platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna and the CYBHI fee schedule program. DHCS reported strong growth in app registrations, coaching sessions, referrals, and positive user outcomes, and said the platforms are serving children and youth statewide, including many who had never previously accessed care. For the fee schedule, DHCS said 72% of school districts and 50 of 58 county offices of education are participating across six cohorts, with $9.6 million reimbursed to date and 41,556 students represented in claims. Members pressed the department on the program’s roughly $69.3 million administrative cost, the slow pace of reimbursement relative to the investment, and the late delivery of requested data. DHCS responded that many claims are still being submitted, most denials are correctable, and local implementation is still scaling up through technical assistance and capacity grants.

Transcript Highlights:

• dysregulated student behavior. dysregulated student behavior.
• student and other students trauma to the student and other students and<00:15:19.760> staff<00
• No doubt it is harder to have students work through their behavior mistakes at school than it is to send
• No doubt it is harder to have students work through their behavior mistakes at school than it is to send
• student behaviors. student behaviors.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3493, the Safe Schools Revenue Increase bill, and first adopted the DE amendment before moving the bill on for re-referral to Ways and Means. Representative Lawrence described the bill as a multi-layered school safety package for all students and schools, including public, nonpublic, charter, and tribal schools, with increased safety funding, mental health support, anonymous threat reporting, school safety plans, and student discipline changes. Several supporters emphasized the need for flexible safety funding and cited real-world safety concerns, including anonymous tip systems that had generated many reports, classroom evacuations, staff injuries, and the need for more resources for mental health and safety infrastructure. Some supporters, including charter school leaders and Catholic Conference testimony, argued the bill’s flexibility and broader safety approach were important, while others supported the K-3 suspension language as a needed tool in severe cases. Opponents focused heavily on the bill’s repeal of Minnesota’s K-3 suspension ban and non-exclusionary discipline requirements. Legal aid, disability advocates, and education groups argued that suspensions harm young children, worsen disparities, and disproportionately affect students of color and students with disabilities, and they urged the committee to keep restorative and non-exclusionary practices in place. Disability advocates also asked that any safety planning explicitly account for students with disabilities and that the bill remain aligned with IDEA protections and individualized education decisions. Several testifiers opposed using public funds for private schools, saying public money should stay in public programs. Other testimony came from school administrators and staff who supported restoring limited suspension discretion, describing serious elementary incidents, classroom evacuations, and injuries that they said required a short-term removal option to stabilize classrooms and plan for students’ return. Mental health and school support personnel witnesses stressed that safety and mental health funding should remain distinct and that more counselors, social workers, and related staff are needed to address student crises. No final vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion provided beyond adoption of the DE amendment and the motion to re-refer the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• that are struggling the most academically, namely our students of color, students with disabilities,
• We have alternative ways to address student behavior, especially when nearly half of our exclusions from
• What are some of the other causes for students, I guess, structural and systemic causes for students
• the behavior and sending kids out.
• the behavior and sending kids out.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Juvenile and Emerging Adult Justice held an informational hearing focused on diversion programs and services for high-risk youth, with no bills before the committee and no votes taken. The chair and members emphasized that the session was intended to hear from invited testimony and discuss how to strengthen diversion, reduce court involvement, and improve outcomes for youth. The committee heard first from the Office of the Child Advocate and diversion providers, who described the Massachusetts Youth Diversion Program, its statewide expansion to 10 of 11 court counties, and its reported success rate of about 80% completion without reoffending. Testimony highlighted that diversion keeps youth out of court, connects them more quickly to community-based services, and can address needs such as mental health, education, and substance use. Witnesses also pointed to racial and ethnic disparities in arrests versus summonses, regional variation in diversion access, and the need for clearer statutory authority, more funding, and broader use of pre-arrest diversion. Committee members asked about the difference between arrest and summons, who can initiate diversion, why arrest rates have increased relative to summonses, and how diversion might prevent harmful downstream consequences such as detention or immigration enforcement involvement. Witnesses said police, clerk magistrates, district attorneys, and judges can refer youth to diversion, and argued that local policy, training, and legislative changes could expand use. They also discussed the impact of detention on youth, including stigma, lost school time, and the lack of credit for time served in the juvenile system. Testimony from Citizens for Juvenile Justice focused on prevention, school discipline, and the school-to-prison pipeline, arguing for more restorative practices, better data, and legislation to limit suspensions and expulsions, especially for younger students and nonviolent conduct. They also raised concerns about DCF-involved and foster youth, who are disproportionately represented in the juvenile system. The final panel, the Children's League of Massachusetts and transition-age youth providers, shifted to child welfare and young adult supports. They supported reducing court involvement in child requiring assistance cases, expanding family resource centers, and strengthening services for transition-age youth leaving DCF or DYS custody. Providers described housing instability, homelessness, and the need for education, employment, behavioral health, and supportive housing services for young adults ages 18 to 23. Across the hearing, witnesses consistently argued that early intervention, community-based supports, and diversion are more effective than court processing or detention for most youth, and that the legislature can help through funding, statutory clarity, expanded eligibility, and stronger data collection.

Transcript Highlights:

• , students of color, students with disabilities, and other high-need students.
• , students of color, and students with disabilities, and other high-need students.
• So we've had persistent disparities impacting low-income students, students of color, and students with
• Currently, our school discipline also allows principals to suspend and expel students for behavior that
• students.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with much of the testimony focused on school discipline and student equity. Bills discussed included measures to address inequities in suspension and expulsion, clarify school exclusion rules, reduce discipline for dress and grooming violations, and expand protections related to fair educational practices. Committee members repeatedly reminded witnesses of the two-minute limit and asked for written testimony to supplement oral remarks. A substantial portion of the hearing centered on the RAISE Act and related school discipline bills, including H. 730/S. 376 and H. 731/S. 380. Testifiers from advocacy groups, legal services, and the legislature argued that exclusionary discipline disproportionately affects Black and Latino students, students with disabilities, low-income students, and DCF-involved youth. They said current law is overly broad or unclear in areas such as “assault on educational staff,” indefinite suspensions tied to felony complaints, and definitions of weapons, leading to unnecessary removals from school. Supporters said the bills would add due process, clearer definitions, and better accountability, while one legislator testified in support of the discipline reforms and opposed several other bills on the agenda. The committee also heard testimony on H. 576/S. 368, which would prohibit suspensions and expulsions for dress and grooming violations and require clearer, non-discriminatory dress code policies. Witnesses cited research and personal stories about disproportionate enforcement against Black girls, girls of color, non-binary students, and students wearing religious attire, and said the bill would prevent physical contact used to enforce dress codes. Another major topic was H. 641/S. 349, which would add “special medical status” protections in education; supporters said it would prevent exclusion based on medical decisions or conditions, though members questioned how it would interact with existing disability law and vaccination-related school requirements. The committee also heard testimony on H. 625, which would extend the ban on corporal punishment from public to private schools, with witnesses citing research on harm and disproportionate impact. Additional testimony covered bills on accelerated learning and gifted education, with parents, educators, and advocates saying Massachusetts under-identifies advanced learners and lacks adequate acceleration pathways. A senator also testified for S. 406 on recovery high schools, saying the funding formula should be updated to better support students in recovery. No votes were taken during the hearing; the chair closed testimony on several bill groups and noted that written testimony would remain open for a week.