Transcript Highlights:

• The eligible uses of scholarships provide flexible academic and enrichment support such as tutoring,
• The eligible uses of scholarships provide flexible academic and enrichment support such as tutoring,
• The eligible uses of scholarships provide flexible academic and enrichment support such as tutoring,
• ,<00:37:26.800> afterchool<00:37:27.599> enrichment tutoring, afterchool enrichment tutoring
• <00:43:19.200> There tutoring uh uh are structured. There tutoring uh uh are structured.

Bills: HF3490, HF4040

Keywords: education finance, scholarship-granting organizations, charitable purposes, student scholarships, nonpublic schools, K-12 education, tax credit, advance payment, Minnesota tax law, child education expenses, taxpayer assistance, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We can connect them to an expert tutor who we have vetted to get them the help that they need in that
• We vet all of our tutors.
• We have 4,000 tutors who work for us, and they are all put through a very rigorous process to ensure
• <01:38:20.239> we<01:38:20.400> have<01:38:20.599> 4,000<01:38:21.280> tutors
• tutors who work for tutors we have 4,000 tutors who work for us<01:38:22.920> and<01:38:23.639

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1292 will establish a high dosage tutoring program.
• So last year we had a lot of conversations around high dosage tutoring, and I want to thank the other
• , and looking specifically at literacy for now kindergarten through 3rd graders, the high dosage tutoring
• conversations that we have had in the past to be able to really talk about the definition of high dosage tutoring

Bills: SB1632, SB1594, SB2045, SB1251, SB1884, SB1250, SB1630, SB1262, SB1374, SB1292, SB1432, SB1199, SB1790, SB1481, SB1614, SB1734, SB1437, SB1489, SB1718, SB1778

Keywords: career readiness, education reform, high school assessments, workplace skills, state education, credentialing, teacher certification, principal requirements, education administration, special education, Oklahoma education law, SB2045, Grow Your Own Educator Program, teacher recruitment, teacher retention, alternative certification, alternative teacher certification, teacher preparation, tuition reimbursement, course fee reimbursement

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, Representative Tutor, you had your hand up. I'll wave off.
• Representative Tutor, you had your hand up. I'll wave off.
• Representative Tutor, did you have another comment?
• with representative tutor with representative tutor first<00:02:22.239> yeah<00:02:22.480
• The majority report will come from Representative Tutor. And that was 123.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On row 128, the first consideration for you all is high-impact tutoring.
• High-impact tutoring over three years or $10.2 million a year for three years.
• In the current year, you have a $15 million bucket for out-of-school learning programs and tutoring.
• $1 million must be used for out-of-school learning, and $1 million must be used for tutoring.
• We've extended our tutoring program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Tutor, >> yes.
• >> Representative<00:27:15.919> Tutor. >> Representative Tutor.
• >> Representative<00:28:10.480> Tutor. >> Representative Tutor.
• >> Representative<00:38:46.560> Tutor. >> Representative Tutor.
• Tutor, >> yes.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:16:14.360> helping have AI as a personalized tutor, helping have AI as a personalized
• AI programs are able to provide 24/7 personalized tutoring.
• to provide 24/7 personalized tutoring. to provide 24/7 personalized tutoring.
• made with AI between the tutor made with AI between the tutor that's<01:39:53.080> essentially
• the tutor or the the<01:40:22.760> companion?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We could use the funds for tutoring, extracurricular activities, services for students with special needs
• We could use the funds for tutoring, extracurricular activities, services for students with special needs
• public school students probably even more because that money could be used to pay teachers to provide tutoring
• We could use the funds for tutoring, extracurricular activities, services for students with special needs
• public school students probably even more because that money could be used to pay teachers to provide tutoring

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republican leaders and Speaker Melissa Hortman held a press event promoting House File 3490, which would opt Minnesota into a federal education tax credit program. They argued the bill has no state cost and would keep donations made by Minnesotans benefiting Minnesota students and schools rather than out-of-state scholarship organizations. Supporters said the funds could help with tutoring, extracurriculars, school supplies, special education-related services, learning loss, and other school needs, and they repeatedly urged Governor Tim Walz to opt in or publicly explain why he would not. Rep. Andrew Myers, the bill’s chief author, said the proposal is personal to him as a parent and legislator and described recent school budget pressures, including staff and resource cuts and larger class sizes. Rep. Ben Bakeberg, a middle school principal, said the bill could generate significant funding if many taxpayers participate and argued it could help offset school district shortfalls and the Blue Ribbon Commission. Rep. Griesbach also backed the bill, calling it a “no-brainer” and saying he would not work with the governor on other budget items unless the governor opted in. In response to questions, supporters said scholarship-granting organizations could be created by a variety of entities, including education foundations, and could support both private-school tuition and public-school-related costs such as extracurricular fees, field trips, and transportation for summer learning. They rejected the idea that the bill pits public and nonpublic schools against each other, saying it is meant to expand educational opportunity for all students. No vote or formal committee action was taken during the event; it ended with questions from reporters on the bill and other Republican priorities such as rental assistance, gas taxes, and energy costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• individual, but in the case of, like, the co-op that we use, we have a director, we have multiple tutors
• We engaged with this particular co-op, and then they have a director, and then there are tutors that
• it's fine but with regard to the providers would it just be like the director or would it be any tutor
• We engaged with this particular co-op, and then they have a director, and then there are tutors that
• are paid to instruct, you know, up and then they have a director and then there are tutors that yeah

Summary: The committee first heard the proposed Pre-K-12 education budget for fiscal year 2025-26, totaling $34.7 billion. The chair highlighted major increases for the FEFP, including $29.6 billion for public schools and K-12 scholarships, a $984 million year-over-year increase, along with higher per-FTE funding, $4 billion for the Family Empowerment Scholarship, $431.4 million for VPK, funding for school safety, the Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, school hardening, Jewish day school security, and an education enrollment stabilization fund. With no public comment, the committee adopted a motion for staff technical corrections and then approved the budget proposal as a recommendation to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee then considered SB 1402 on dropout retrieval programs. The bill expands eligibility so any individual who has withdrawn from high school may enroll in dropout retrieval services and clarifies how school grades are calculated for virtual instruction providers that offer those services. An amendment clarifying the grading calculation was adopted, and the committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up SPB 7030 on educational scholarship programs, a broad measure addressing school choice funding and administration. The bill would fund the Family Empowerment Scholarship as a separate categorical, expand the education stabilization fund, create fall and spring application windows, require a single scholarship application and more documentation, assign student IDs, standardize payment timing to monthly installments, require continued eligibility verification, and add Level 2 background checks for providers receiving state funds. Members raised questions about background-check enforcement, payment timing, data sharing, and the impact on homeschool and private-school families. Public testimony included support from school-choice advocates and concerns from private-school representatives about added regulatory burdens and deadlines. The committee adopted the bill as a committee bill and reported it favorably, with Senator Osgood voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 508 on the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program, which requires private schools to disclose in writing what accommodations, modifications, and services they will provide to students with existing plans such as IEPs, EEPs, 504 plans, or ELL plans before enrollment. An amendment was adopted to require public schools to consult with private schools about equitable services. Testimony was mixed: supporters said the bill would give parents needed information for informed choice, while private-school representatives said the language could be burdensome and vague. The committee reported the bill favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some examples here include an HB2 language change this last session for tutoring programs and changes
• We lose support services such as tutoring programs.
• But she relies on academic intervention and free math tutoring to build skills she needs to succeed.
• It's fewer educators, fewer tutors, fewer health staff, less support for the students.
• He stays at the after-school programs so that he can get the benefit of mathematics tutoring.

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation on strategic resource management in public education. LESC staff and PED officials argued that New Mexico has increased school funding, but local budgeting and planning remain fragmented and overly compliance-driven. They described long-term pressures including declining enrollment, rising special education costs, falling cash balances, changes in federal funding, and leadership turnover, and said schools need more intentional multi-year planning tied to student outcomes. They also outlined the many disconnected planning requirements schools must complete, compared New Mexico’s current approach with Ohio’s three-year budget forecasting model, and recommended continuing multi-year appropriations, adding $2.5 million for state grants in the unified application, and directing LESC, LFC, and PED to develop a long-term financial planning proposal. PED said it is working to reduce administrative burden through school accreditation, a unified application for federal and state funds, and internal alignment of guidance and coaching, with pilot schools reporting time savings and better alignment. Members raised concerns about four-day school weeks, the burden on small districts, the need for outcomes and return on investment, and whether the state should move toward a two-year or three-year planning cycle; staff clarified that the proposal was to streamline or eliminate redundant requirements, not add another layer. The committee then received an update on the Educator Fellows program. PED described it as a Grow Your Own pipeline that employs candidates as supplemental educational assistants while they work toward licensure, providing salary, benefits, paid leave, mentoring, and coursework support. Officials said the program helps address teacher shortages, improves student-to-teacher ratios, increases workforce diversity, and supports the Martinez-Yazzie action plan. They reported 370 current fellows across 86 LEAs and about 180 schools, with many fellows being people of color, first-generation college students, or second-career educators; roughly 85 are expected to become certified this year. A local HR director from Belen testified that the program has been especially valuable in small communities, where fellows are already rooted in the community and several have moved into teaching roles. Members asked about high school recruitment, tuition, retirement and benefits, the relationship to the Higher Education Department’s Grow Your Own scholarship, and the role of university partners. PED said fellows choose among accredited higher education partners, the program is separate from the scholarship but complementary, and the state is also building an apprenticeship model and seeking to expand the program to more LEAs, though some districts are on a waiting list because of funding and local match requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• So on Row 117, we have $36 million for high impact tutoring, a $10.2 million appropriation each year
• We talked about high impact tutoring in West Las Vegas, I believe, where LAC staff and PED staff spoke
• They can be tutoring; they can be an after-school program of some other kind.
• And then the last thing was regarding the tutoring.
• High-impact tutoring, I saw ours is about $30 million. I thought that was great.

Transcript Highlights:

• The final component of PED's plan is to provide 75 secondary schools with a tutoring software platform
• For instance, the Amira AI-powered reading tutor has Some evidence of positive effects on elementary
• And $5 million for high-impact tutoring, and $7 million for community schools.
• But with that also comes the supports through our high-impact tutoring. We know...
• programs, tutoring, and out-of-school programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, it can be transportation, tuition, tutoring, technology if students don't have access to
• So, you know, it can be transportation, tuition, tutoring, technology if students don't have access to
• So, you know, it can be transportation, tuition, tutoring, technology if students don't have access to
• already afford to get you tutoring already afford to get you tutoring services,<00:16:05.199>
• ,<00:18:48.240> any special needs students, tutoring, any special needs students, tutoring

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call: 0:03 Bills for Consideration: 3:10 Adjournment: 56:19, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Education Committee heard House Bill 1, which would have Kentucky opt into a federal education freedom tax credit program allowing donations to scholarship-granting organizations (SGOs) for K-12 educational expenses. The bill sponsors said it would not use Kentucky general funds, would be administered through the Secretary of State, and would let donors claim up to a $1,700 federal tax credit for contributions to SGOs. They argued the program could support public, private, religious, and homeschool-related educational needs, including tutoring, transportation, technology, special needs services, and other school expenses. Several senators raised concerns about whether the bill would favor larger districts with more school-choice options over rural counties with only one public school, creating a two-tier system. The sponsors responded that public school districts could also create SGOs and that the federal rules limit eligibility to families at or below 300% of area median gross income. They also said the program would not reduce existing state or federal school funding, but would instead redirect federal tax credit dollars that Kentucky donors might otherwise send to other states or back to the federal government. Members asked about the structure and oversight of SGOs, including whether they must be nonprofits, how broad their missions could be, and whether funds could be earmarked for specific purposes. The sponsors said SGOs must be certified, serve at least two schools and 10 students, spend at least 90% of receipts on scholarships, and cannot be directed to a specific student, though they can be targeted to categories such as elementary students or special needs services. They also said homeschool families would need to organize through a co-op or existing approved SGO. No vote was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some examples here include an HB 2 language change this last session for tutoring programs and changes
• Example, if we have high dosage tutoring and it is done as a state grant. Thank you so much, Mr.
• We lose support, which serves such as tutoring programs to help students in struggling areas.
• She struggled to read until the end of third grade, and even with intensive home support and tutoring
• He stays at the After-school programs so that he can get the benefit of math tutoring.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Around the innovation zones, the high-impact tutoring, the out-of-school learning. Thank you.
• Then, Sonny, if I could ask about line number 142, high-impact tutoring.
• I don't know what the difference is between school improvement and high-impact tutoring, but I'm sure
• How is that money distributed, Sonny, for high-impact tutoring?
• Those high-impact tutoring opportunities can happen during the school day.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, if they want to use it for tutors or something like that, they often...
• So, you know, if they want to use it for tutors or something like that, they often were restricted.
• And the tutoring is so vital to find out where they fall in between the cracks and help them get back
• They've gained mental health supports, tutoring, family engagement programs, all the things that help
• It will provide more tutoring, reading support, counseling, and bilingual programs.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools, with the kitchen infrastructure grants, Tier 2 ELOP funding, and ongoing community schools funding as the main budget issues. For universal meals, the Department of Education and the Department of Finance supported continued investment in school meal infrastructure and explained that federal changes, inflation, and underreporting in meal counts could affect future funding. The LAO recommended rejecting a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure grants, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and that future funding should be tied to clearer goals and data. Several public commenters and school groups supported continued kitchen grants and universal meals, citing supply-chain delays, workforce needs, and benefits such as more freshly prepared meals and higher participation. For ELOP, the administration proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and an additional $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended fully fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579 and tying future changes to program requirements, while CDE supported the proposal and said the program is improving attendance and academic outcomes. Senators and witnesses discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, with concerns raised about accountability, flexibility, and whether the program should better serve older youth. CDE said new CalPADS reporting and the biennial report will provide more data soon, and public testimony largely supported stabilizing Tier 2 funding while also asking for more support for middle and high school students. For community schools, the Governor proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing sites, along with new accountability through annual self-certification and future accreditation. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger number of grantees. CDE strongly supported the ongoing funding and asked for additional support for county offices and technical assistance. Committee members questioned how accreditation would work for a model meant to be locally tailored, and administration staff said technical assistance would come first, with schools losing eligibility only if they failed to meet standards after support. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive of community schools, with parents, students, county offices, and advocacy groups describing gains in attendance, graduation, mental health supports, family engagement, and student belonging, while some commenters urged clearer eligibility rules, stronger reporting, and continued support for related programs such as MTSS and homeless student services.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, if they want to use it for tutors or something like that, they often...
• So, you know, if they want to use it for tutors or something like that, they often were restricted.
• And the tutoring is so vital to find out where they fall in between the cracks and help them get back
• They've gained mental health supports, tutoring, family engagement programs, all the things that help
• It will provide more tutoring, reading support, counseling, and bilingual programs.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools. On universal meals, the Department of Education supported continued funding for the Universal School Meals Program and a fourth round of Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants, citing meal-count growth, improved meal service, and the need to offset federal uncertainty, inflation, and reduced direct certification tied to immigration-related policy changes. The LAO recommended rejecting another kitchen grant round, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and the state has not clearly defined unmet need. Members also raised concerns about the state’s ability to backfill federal meal funding and about how federal requirements affect programs like Summer EBT/SUN Bucks. Public commenters largely supported school meals and kitchen investments, with some urging support for plant-based milk options and continued infrastructure funding. For ELOP, the Department of Finance proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding, including $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended going further and fully fixing the Tier 2 rate, saying rate uncertainty complicates district planning. CDE supported the proposal and said the program has improved attendance and academic outcomes, while noting new CalPADS reporting will provide more data soon. Senators discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, and whether the state should require stronger outcome reporting. Public testimony generally backed stabilizing Tier 2 funding, but some speakers urged more support for older youth and more timely, user-friendly reporting. On community schools, the administration proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing grantees, along with stronger technical assistance, statewide alignment, and an accreditation/self-certification framework. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger cohort. CDE supported the ongoing investment but asked for additional county office and technical assistance funding. Senators and public commenters were broadly supportive of community schools, emphasizing improved attendance, graduation, and student engagement, while also debating accountability, accreditation, and whether non-classroom-based charter schools should be eligible. Public testimony strongly favored ongoing funding and highlighted community schools’ role in mental health, family engagement, and wraparound supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• They may be homeschooled or maybe some other type of students. ...extra tutoring for their students.
• For example, what if three families decide to hire a math tutor, and they want to use the meeting room
• at the library for the tutor to teach their children special math lessons...
• They may be homeschooled or maybe some other type of students. ...extra tutoring for their students.
• They're gathering for tutoring. It's a small group, a few people, a handful of people.

Bills: HR244, HR245, HR246, HR247, HR248, HR249, HR250, HR251, HCR101, HCR102, HR223, HR224, HR225, HR226, HR227, HR229, HR230, HR231, HR232, HR234, HR235, HR236, HR237, HR238, HR239, HR240, HR241, HR242, HR243, HCR94, HCR95, HCR96, HCR97, HCR98, HCR99, HCR100, SCR31, SCR33, SCR35, SCR37, SCR56, SCR57, SB171, SB251, SB252, SB353, SB367, SB433, SB461, HR170, HR191, HR206, HR207, HR208, HR217, HCR11, HCR53, HCR60, HCR66, HCR68, HB66, HB153, HB165, HB326, HB387, HB454, HB455, HB484, HB513, HB603, HB660, HB719, HB762, HB766, HB793, HB802, HB816, HB833, HB940, HB947, HB950, HB975, HB1028, HB1039, HB1051, HB1053, HB1080, HB1201, HB1215, HB1228, HB1251, HB1252, SCR2, SB26, SB28, SB29, SB30, SB41, SB44, SB64, SB84, SB87, SB93, SB98, SB107, SB118, SB142, SB192, SB195, SB199, SB219, SB222, SB234, SB241, SB255, SB275, SB277, SB292, SB294, SB306, SB314, SB482, SB233, SB326, HR171, HCR49, HCR65, HCR72, HR37, HCR64, SCR19, SCR3, SCR6, SCR18, SCR11, SCR22, HB64, HB68, HB92, HB130, HB258, HB633, HB801, HB89, HB341, HB451, HB456, HB579, HB595, HB621, HB818, HB841, HB1064, HB1101, HB1191, SB47, SB82, SB106, SB206, SB210, SB248, SB305, SB376, SB397, SB441, SB2, SB19, SB24, SB50, SB70, SB96, SB101, SB103, SB104, SB114, SB122, SB159, SB160, SB173, SB180, SB182, SB260, SB412, SB418, SB424, SB442, SB460, SB476, SB1, SB23, SB32, SB42, SB43, SB46, SB51, SB110, SB113, SB150, SB154, SB161, SB218, SB220, SB221, SB253, SB289, SB310, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB502, HCR32, HB955, HB284, HB617, HB730, HB926, HB1125, HB1194, HB1203, HB798, HB998, HB1084, HB1223, HB646, HB824, HB901, HB79, HR20, HR74, HB59, HB306, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB911, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1234, HB1240, SB89, SB68, SB149

Keywords: disclosure, local law, public notice, legislative transparency, Artists at the Capitol Day, art education, Louisiana Art Education Association, recognition, community engagement, House Resolution 247, HR247, Laura Lewis, birthday commendation, 104th birthday, centenarian, longevity, St. James Parish, Louisiana House of Representatives, Mount Calvary Baptist Church, ceremonial resolution

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, heard a prayer from Pastor Neil Bernard of New Wine Christian Center, and recognized a number of visiting groups and observances, including AMI Kids, Mother’s Day, the Hungarian Settlement Cultural Association, Pro-Life Day at the Capitol, the American Cancer Society and Cancer Action Network, Municipal Day for the Louisiana Municipal Association, Recreation and Parks Association Day, St. John Day, Hoopla basketball activities, Main Street program participants, Leadership North Shore, the Lack of Seeing High School basketball team, Literacy Champion recognition, Orleans Parish Sheriff Michelle Woodford, and LACE Day for chamber executives. Majority Leader Steve Scalise also addressed the chamber, praising recent economic investment in Louisiana, coastal restoration funding, and the state’s improved national reputation. The House received Senate messages and Legislative Bureau reports on numerous Senate bills, many of which were referred to committee or laid over, and several House and Senate resolutions were introduced or adopted, largely commemorative or study-related measures. The chamber then took up several House bills in regular order. HB 89, concerning district attorney retiree health insurance coverage in the Third Judicial District, was amended and passed 87-5. HB 451, dealing with ATC notice procedures, passed 98-0 after technical amendments. HB 456, revising workers’ compensation petition requirements and allowing employers broader access to disputed claims, drew extended debate over whether it would burden injured workers; it passed 67-30. HB 579, expanding the Sexual Assault Survivor Bill of Rights and related confidentiality and complaint provisions, passed 98-0. HB 595, requiring local authorities to respond timely to permit-related matters affecting natural resource development, passed 92-3. HB 621, requiring recycling of decommissioned renewable energy components and updating waste rules, passed 99-0. HB 818, requiring school systems to publish annual assessment schedules and related testing information, passed 98-0. Additional bills considered included HB 841, creating a code of conduct for landmen negotiating pipeline easements and authorizing penalties for bad-faith conduct, which passed 98-0; HB 1060, establishing a two-year domestic violence intervention court pilot program in the 19th Judicial District with coordinated services and data collection, which passed 86-13; and HB 1101, a workers’ compensation measure defining maximum medical improvement, adjusting benefit durations, and addressing misrepresentation and fraud, which was under debate at the end of the excerpt. Throughout the floor session, members repeatedly emphasized that the bills were intended to clarify procedures, improve transparency, or address public safety and economic development, while opponents of some measures raised concerns about added burdens on workers or injured claimants.

Transcript Highlights:

• of instructional resources, which are classroom teachers, instructional facilitators and coaches, tutors
• of instructional resources, which are classroom teachers, instructional facilitators and coaches, tutors
• of instructional resources, which are classroom teachers, instructional facilitators and coaches, tutors
• of instructional resources, which are classroom teachers, instructional facilitators and coaches, tutors
• , um tutors, um tutors, summer<00:20:14.400> school<00:20:14.559> and<00:20:14.720>

Bills: HB0150

Keywords: Wyoming business council, economic development, task force, evaluation, policy reform, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And could public school kids use this for tutoring, like my wife teaches English to help them with their
• Could they pay tutors to do this to help those public kids? In public age 12? Ms. Miranda.
• And could public school kids use this for tutoring, like my wife teaches English to help them with their
• Could they pay tutors to do this to help those public kids? In public age 12? Ms. Miranda.
• who has two special needs children, that the needs that could be addressed in this are academic tutoring

Bills: SB1142, SCR1028

Keywords: scholarships, tax credit, education funding, nonprofit organizations, Arizona Revised Statutes, constitutional amendment, state revenue, tax policy, legislative approval, two-thirds vote, 1182, all

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 1028, which would send to voters a constitutional change narrowing an existing exception to Arizona’s two-thirds vote requirement for tax increases. The resolution would require legislative approval for increases in state revenue through fees and assessments that are authorized by statute before January 1, 2027, and set by a state officer or agency without a prescribed formula, amount, or limit. The sponsor argued the measure would close a loophole that has allowed agencies to raise fees without direct legislative accountability, while opponents said it would make it harder for agencies to adjust fees for inflation, operations, and regulatory costs and could shift costs to taxpayers or slow services. After testimony and debate, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return SCR 1028 with a due pass recommendation. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1142, which would have Arizona opt into a federal tax credit program for donations to scholarship-granting organizations. Supporters said the measure would bring new private scholarship funding into Arizona at no cost to the state, expand school choice, and help students with tutoring, special needs services, transportation, and other educational expenses. Opponents argued the federal program was not yet fully written, lacked clear guardrails, and could further strain public schools by diverting resources away from the majority of students who remain in the public system. Committee members debated whether the program would benefit Arizona students without affecting state funds, and whether more transparency and rules were needed before adoption. After discussion, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return SB 1142 with a do pass recommendation. Several members explained their votes on both measures, with supporters emphasizing voter choice, accountability, and limiting fee increases, and opponents emphasizing the need for revenue, public school funding, and caution about the unresolved federal scholarship rules.