Transcript Highlights:

• a quick reminder, the food service appropriation has allowed us to keep pace with our growing. enrollment
• The world, as you know, our students' interests and the workforce needs are changing rapidly.
• OK, hey, on one of your strategic focus areas, it's to increase enrollment.
• So, what is your max enrollment?
• I think we could change the- world.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We and to be at 10,000 students enrolled.
• Because the world of cyber changes so much.
• But in others, the staff has changed.
• But then within within one year, students are enrolled.
• needs of our local workforce, it will always change.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for their dual enrollment students.
• So, for instance, I'm looking at dual enrollment for 2023-24.
• I'm sorry, on some of the... there's one, the dual enrollment.
• There's one, the dual enrollment.
• That would probably be toward the dual enrollment pieces of tuition and fees.

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2025 session and received an overview of add-on weights in the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP), followed by a Department of Education presentation on a legislatively required study of add-on weight funding and expenditures. The chair explained that add-on weights apply to acceleration and career programs such as AP, IB, ACE, CAPE, dual enrollment, early graduation, and certain small-district needs, and noted that add-on funding has grown substantially as the base student allocation increased. The chair also raised concerns that the department’s report did not clearly show whether districts’ reported costs included the full costs required by the proviso, and asked for more specificity on any recommended adjustment to the weights. Deputy Commissioner Suzanne Pridgen said the department surveyed districts on how they spent add-on revenue for fiscal years 2021-22 through 2023-24, with categories including teacher compensation, materials, equipment, professional development, exam fees, counseling, apprenticeship costs, and other expenditures. She said most add-on funds were spent on teacher bonuses and compensation, with AP, ACE, CAPE, and dual enrollment showing the largest increases in spending in 2023-24 due to higher FEFP funding; IB and early graduation were relatively flat. The department reported that add-on revenue covered between 41.8% and 79.2% of total program expenditures in 2023-24 and recommended adjusting add-on weights to better align with pre-2023-24 funding relationships, though no specific percentage was given during the meeting. Members asked about how “other” expenditures were categorized, whether teacher compensation included only statutory bonuses, how dual enrollment tuition and fees were counted, the small district factor, and whether the weights incentivize districts to offer advanced programs. The department clarified that teacher compensation in the study referred only to bonuses, that some “other” costs included charter school payments and dual enrollment tuition/fees, and that the small district factor is 1.0277, increasing base funding by 2.77% for fiscally constrained counties. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentation and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they would not be affected by this change.
• There's been some attempts to change that, whatever.
• What has changed since she spoke to? Students.
• why we pass that law in 2014 have not changed.
• They have not changed. 6,500 students. 500 students currently enrolled in our institutions of higher

Summary: The Appropriations Committee took up SB 2B, a major immigration bill by Senator Gruters, described by supporters as a Trump-aligned package to strengthen Florida’s role in immigration enforcement. The bill would create a grant program for local law enforcement, expand jail-ICE agreements beyond sheriff-operated jails, establish a chief immigration officer and a state immigration enforcement council, require more coordination on E-Verify and detention-bed reporting, allow immigration status to be considered in bail decisions, increase penalties for certain offenses tied to illegal reentry and voting, and repeal in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Much of the sponsor’s presentation and debate emphasized focusing on criminal offenders, improving coordination with federal authorities, and using state resources to support detention and enforcement. Committee questioning focused heavily on the tuition-waiver repeal, reimbursement for jail costs, E-Verify coverage, and whether the bill could lead to street-level immigration enforcement in schools or churches. Senator Smith, Senator Pizzo, Senator Polsky, Senator Sharief, and others challenged the tuition repeal as unfair to students who were brought to Florida as children and argued for grandfathering current students or studying the fiscal impact first. Senator Fine defended the repeal as ending a state subsidy for people who are not lawfully present and argued the change would save tens of millions of dollars. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified that the bill was limited to jail-based enforcement, said there was no current street-level 287(g) program in Florida, and stated he did not believe the bill raised concerns for law enforcement or schools/churches. A representative of the Florida Supervisors of Elections supported the voting-related section, while a Florida Highway Patrol representative said state agencies would need additional funding if they were expected to take on more enforcement duties. The committee adopted Senator Gruters’ late-filed amendment correcting a drafting error. Senator Smith’s amendment to require an OPAGA study on the tuition-waiver policy was withdrawn after discussion, and his handwritten amendment to delete the repeal of in-state tuition for undocumented students failed on a roll-call vote. The bill then advanced as amended, with several members speaking in debate both for and against it. Supporters framed it as a focused public-safety and enforcement measure; opponents criticized the special-session process, the cost, and the tuition repeal’s impact on students already enrolled.

Transcript Highlights:

• They could still go and enroll and go to classes. You're recognized.
• They can change schools based on an academic choice as much as they would like.
• You know, coaches change lives. Athletes trust coaches.
• You know, coaches change lives. Athletes trust coaches.
• So in the state of Florida, we do not pay on enrollment; we pay on attendance.

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum and first heard House Bill 731, which would address coach and extracurricular sponsor compensation and change how student-athlete transfer eligibility is determined. The bill would allow local school boards to adopt policies letting booster clubs or similar associations support coaches and activity sponsors, and it would let superintendents treat certain coaches and athletic leaders as administrative personnel for compensation purposes. It would also shift eligibility decisions for transferred student-athletes to the governing athletic association and require clearer bylaws and timelines for those determinations. Members raised questions about booster club oversight, pay equity, the new athletic administrator language, and safeguards against abuse or unequal treatment, while supporters argued the bill would help retain coaches and better support student athletics. The bill was debated and then reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then received presentations from the Department of Education’s Division of Early Learning and the Florida Association of Early Learning Coalitions on school readiness fraud prevention and mitigation. Speakers explained that Florida’s school readiness program pays providers based on verified attendance rather than enrollment, requires daily parent sign-in/sign-out records, and uses multiple layers of oversight including coalition anti-fraud plans, annual audits, programmatic monitoring, DCF inspections, and referrals to state fraud investigators when needed. They emphasized that Florida delayed implementation of a federal rule that would have required prospective enrollment-based payments, and said the state’s current system makes fraud difficult. Members asked about military and grandparent guardianship situations, audit findings, and the number of fraud referrals; presenters said fraud cases are relatively limited and that the existing controls and public enforcement act as deterrents. The meeting ended after members thanked the presenters and the committee adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a big change.
• I mean, you take a kid's phone or change the channel on them, you've upset their entire life.
• And the vast majority of these individuals, their income and assets haven't changed.
• Well, I'll just add: my son's financial is never going to change. He's never working.
• As some people come off the wait list, others come on, so it is always changing.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee met to organize the new term, take roll, and hear introductory presentations from the six agencies under its jurisdiction: the Agency for Health Care Administration, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Department of Children and Families, Department of Elder Affairs, Department of Health, and Department of Veterans’ Affairs. The chair outlined the committee process, including assigning members to review agencies and make budget recommendations. Each agency head gave a high-level overview of their budget, staffing, major programs, and priorities, with recurring themes including Medicaid, long-term care, disability services, child welfare, mental health, aging services, public health, and veterans’ health care. Several agency leaders highlighted recent initiatives and funding priorities. AHCA emphasized Medicaid managed care, provider regulation, Hope Florida, hospital-at-home, and cancer-related efforts; APD discussed iBudget services, Hope Florida, a managed-care pilot, online applications, and forensic care costs; DCF focused on child protection, foster care, adult protective services, food/cash/medical assistance, mental health, and opioid treatment; Elder Affairs highlighted Alzheimer’s services, community-based senior care, guardianship, ombudsman services, and disaster outreach; DOH covered cancer innovation, maternal telehealth, cybersecurity, HIV/hepatitis/syphilis screening, and school nursing; and Veterans Affairs described benefits and health care access for veterans, long-term care, and federal reimbursement. Several speakers also raised concerns about rising costs, provider rates, disaster response, and access to services. The committee heard two public comments from disability advocates about Medicaid redeterminations affecting iBudget waiver recipients and provider payment delays. In response, AHCA and APD said they were coordinating on data sharing, early outreach, escalation processes, and efforts to reduce disenrollments and make recertification smoother. Members then asked questions about provider rates, opioid settlement spending, managed care quality measures, pediatric rare disease grants, group home transparency, senior outreach, ABA services moving into managed care, annual Medicaid recertification, veterans’ service utilization, waiting lists for elder services, and prevention spending. No formal votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• While scalp cooling didn't change my diagnosis, it profoundly changed my treatment experience.
• AB 2651 does not change any vaccine law.
• Under current California law, individuals can enroll in or make changes to their health insurance only
• up or to make changes.
• I would say overall they make some good changes, they make some bad changes.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:01:48.479> options<00:01:49.360> uh post-secary enrollment options uh post-secary
• enrollment options uh statute.<00:01:50.000> That's<00:01:50.360> PSO.
• > refer<00:02:25.840> only<00:02:26.080> to enrolling district to refer only to
• stat with changes that were being<00:04:01.040> phased<00:04:01.799> in.
• for courses to agreement those changes for courses to agreement as<00:15:57.360> well.

Bills: HF1306

Keywords: education, school policy, teacher training, student health, emergency response, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It would add a 10% late enrollment penalty to individuals who decide to enroll during the open enrollment
• enroll during the open enrollment<00:02:13.400> period<00:02:13.840> rather<00:02:14.160
• and they're trying to change the policy or amount of money they're paying?
• and they're trying to what enrollment and they're trying to what Short<00:07:48.520> change<00
• So currently the changes that we affected two years ago have not gone into effect yet.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any additions, corrections, or changes to the minutes?
• The legislature enacted the benefit in 2013, and last year members made changes to move toward licensure
• The legislature enacted this man a fit and 2013 and last year you all made some changes to move towards
• You know, we saw the trends of rapidly increasing enrollment in 2020 to 2024.
• We've paused new EI/DBI businesses from enrolling in fee-for-service.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are changing areas of our curriculum. We're attracting different faculty.
• We are changing areas of our curriculum. We're attracting different faculty.
• It was mentioned earlier how enrollment in Senator is done.
• What this means is that we change lives and trajectories of families for the better.
• We are changing the lives of not just those individual students, but creating change for our economies

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on the economic impact of Massachusetts higher education institutions, with opening remarks noting the significance of September 11 and the role colleges and universities play in the state’s economy, workforce, and research ecosystem. UMass leaders testified first, describing UMass as a major employer and economic driver that educates large numbers of Massachusetts residents, supports thousands of jobs, and generates billions in annual economic activity. They emphasized the importance of research funding, warned that federal grant cancellations, suspensions, and slowdowns were harming research operations and talent retention, and voiced strong support for Governor Healey’s proposed DRIVE initiative as bridge funding to protect research capacity and jobs. Committee members focused heavily on workforce preparation in emerging fields such as AI, cyber, quantum computing, and engineering. UMass leaders said AI is being embedded across curricula and research, but also warned that financial constraints forced reductions in PhD admissions, especially in computer science and engineering, which could weaken the future workforce pipeline. They also described the practical effects of grant uncertainty, including reduced graduate admissions and concerns about losing researchers to institutions abroad. Members asked for more detailed data on grant timing, funding gaps, and where students and researchers were going. A second panel from private colleges and universities, including AICUM, Suffolk, Smith, and Clark, highlighted the broad economic and civic contributions of private higher education. Testimony cited large annual economic impacts, job creation, tax revenue, community service, legal clinics, dual enrollment, entrepreneurship support, sustainability investments, and access programs. Speakers also discussed enrollment pressures, COVID-related social and mental health challenges, student visa and federal policy concerns, and the need to preserve liberal arts alongside career-focused training. The committee then heard from MIT, where testimony focused on research commercialization, biotech spinouts, and the role of federal, philanthropic, and industry funding in sustaining innovation; members pressed for more data on funding sources and asked what state policy could do to keep talent and businesses in Massachusetts. The hearing continued with additional public higher education testimony, including Bridgewater State, Bristol Community College, and Northeastern, which emphasized workforce-aligned programs, social mobility, apprenticeships, co-op education, and the need for better coordination between higher education, employers, and state workforce systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• , provider enrollment, provider enrollment, creating<00:09:54.800> unique<00:09:55.440>
• So, we have changed that approach.
• changes that he's making. changes that he's making.
• and to change the provider enrollment requirements.
• the provider enrollment requirements. the provider enrollment requirements.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We trust in your ability to soften hearts and bring about change.
• Number two makes conforming changes. Very good. Any discussion on the amendment?
• The next bill, please: House Bill 2423, relating to advanced math course student enrollment.
• in the school not in their parents' district and can now be directly enrolled in the district where
• Automatic enrollment is a good solution to a very personal and individual situation.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, recorded attendance, approved the journal, and then moved into Committee of the Whole to consider several bills. Early floor action included House Bill 2369 on photo-enforced traffic citations, amended so the citation would be signed by the mayor rather than the municipality’s presiding judge; House Bill 2423 on advanced math course enrollment, amended to narrow eligibility to students showing high proficiency on statewide assessments and to remove duplicative reporting; House Bill 2481 on school district financial records, amended to change how the state responds to USFR deficiencies by directing districts to approved training programs; House Bill 2621 on special education/public school enrollment, amended to allow students placed in residential facilities to enroll directly in the district where they live; and House Bill 2756 on public utilities and high-load-factor customers, amended to extend reporting deadlines, exempt smaller utilities, and remove some integrated planning requirements. Each of these bills received do-pass recommendations from Committee of the Whole, with some senators raising concerns about math staffing, school funding, and data-center impacts on rates and infrastructure. The chamber then adopted the Committee of the Whole report and heard a proclamation supporting stronger Arizona and U.S. relations with Taiwan, including trade, technology, education, and Taiwan’s participation in international organizations. The Senate also calendared House Bill 2192 for additional Committee of the Whole consideration, adopted a Bolick amendment excluding telecom and broadband providers from the definition of online hosting platform, and advanced the bill with a do-pass recommendation. In third reading, the Senate passed House Bill 2249 on the parents’ bill of rights, House Bill 2482 on out-of-school facilities, House Bill 2641 on firefighting foam, House Bill 2661 on dependent children, House Bill 2662 on parenting time, House Bill 2673 creating a study committee on inmate mental health services, House Bill 2745 on legislative subpoena enforcement, House Bill 2752 on the Arizona Commerce Authority, House Bill 2895 on public education, House Bill 2923 on mental health services, and several concurrent memorials urging Congress to address foreign authoritarian property ownership and endangered species issues. Several members explained votes, often citing budget concerns, staffing shortages, or policy objections. Senators Epstein and others repeatedly argued that many problems in education and mental health require more funding and personnel rather than statutory changes alone. Senator Kuby and Senator Epstein also criticized House Bill 2756 as insufficient to address data-center costs, water use, and ratepayer impacts, though the amended bill passed. The session concluded with passage of House Bill 2192 on employment, committee announcements for the following Monday, and adjournment until April 20, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• contracting or if any adding any changes contracting or if any adding any changes uh<00:23:54.799
• So, if they say they're going to enroll 100 people, then we check to make sure that they're enrolling
• their enrollment their enrollment ended.<00:50:55.599> And<00:50:55.760> just<00:50
• funds when you have zero enrollments? funds when you have zero enrollments?
• maybe when you had to make some changes maybe when you had to make some changes and<01:09:46.480

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• summary with the changes.
• So on page 17 for the square foot variance changes in columns O, P, and Q, the only items that have changed
• They have an enrollment projection of 95.
• Heiser is a replacement with an increase in square footage due to that enrollment and anticipated enrollment
• And there's an award language change request. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Enrolling in an address confidentiality program is a very big safety step.
• Around the time of enrollment, there's relocation to a confidential address.
• Uh it um initial enrollment purposes.
• Enrolling in an address confidentiality program is a very big safety step.
• Enrolling in an address confidentiality program is a very big safety step.

Bills: HF3676, HF2959, HF3233

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Transcript Highlights:

• That means what we expect of this Bureau also changes regularly.
• That means what we expect of this Bureau also changes regularly.
• The Bureau is, of course, monitoring these changes closely.
• Students, when they enroll in an institution, pay an assessment as part of their enrollment process.
• Institutions have to evolve their enrollment procedures, change their catalogs, and enrollment agreements

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• On row 3, you have a subsection called unit changes.
• There are no changes here from FY26.
• The same amount as FY26, so no change for CTE.
• Education, which is when I often is like, when did that change?
• So why is it steady if we have an enrollment decline? Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, 60% enrollment to meet our student needs.
• Uh, 60% enrollment to meet our student needs.
• Uh, 60% enrollment to meet our student needs.
• Uh 60% enrollment to meet our growth. Uh 60% enrollment to meet our student<00:15:03.600> needs.
• <01:26:08.960> Questions, be a recommended change. Questions, be a recommended change.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Education met on March 19 and moved through several bills under time pressure, hearing mostly brief testimony. SB 2024 SD2 and SB 896 SD2, both concerning public-private partnerships for charter school facilities, drew support from the Department of Education, the Charter School Commission, White Kids Can, and Hawaii Technology Academy. DOE said any P3 model should apply only to charter schools on private land and not affect public schools on DOE land. Supporters argued the approach could speed construction, reduce costs, and keep public money in public assets, while UPW and HGA raised concerns about privatization. In response, SFA said the intent was to mirror the existing conversion charter school model, with public ownership of assets and unionized staff, and noted some regions have waited years for schools. SB 2613 SD1 on TMK transfers was heard next. DOE said the bill had originally been supported as part of the governor’s package but was amended to require DOE to convey lands for 13 libraries on DOE property, which DOE said would create “donut holes” in campuses and was unnecessary because existing agreements already govern library use. The State Public Library System supported the bill, saying it has long coexisted with DOE but needs clearer separation and more reliable control over its sites. The Attorney General’s office said the library system currently lacks express statutory authority to own real property and flagged implementation issues because some of the affected parcels are not currently owned by DOE. Committee members questioned both sides about current agreements, communication, and how the bill would change operations. SB 494 SD2, concerning charter school audits, received comments from the Charter School Commission, which said the bill was redundant because charter schools already undergo annual audits during the term of their contracts. The Office of the Auditor was also present. SB 2391 SD2, relating to automatic pay increases for teachers, drew strong opposition from the Office of Collective Bargaining, which said step movement and longevity increases are negotiated in each contract and do not automatically carry over when a contract expires; it warned the bill could affect upcoming negotiations with HSTA. HSTA and several other supporters argued the bill would standardize annual step movement, improve retention, and reflect existing contract language. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not junk change. It's a jump change, but it's not a game changer. Yeah. Representative Luna.
• It's a jump change, but not junk change.
• But the changes in the plan, I think that's really under schools, that each time you make a change in
• <01:07:50.559> um<01:07:50.640> you enroll in the in the program. um you enroll in
• parent that they're aware of the change. parent that they're aware of the change.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to begin work on HB 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and more broadly to study special education aid/differentiated aid and related costing issues. The chair said the group was starting early because the issue has been debated for years without resolution, local districts are being forced to absorb prorated costs, and the committee wants to send the Department of Education and HHS Medicaid a clear request for data and recommendations before retained bills return in the fall. A committee clerk was also selected, with Representative Reverend volunteering to take notes for the meeting. Members reviewed background materials on special education enrollment, high-cost students, and possible funding formulas, including data on students in high-cost brackets and prior ideas such as category-based funding and caseload-based approaches. The chair also referenced research on other states, including Arkansas, which uses a different special education funding structure and audits IEPs. The committee emphasized that it was focused on the funding mechanics and costs, not on questioning whether services should be provided. Henry Lipman of HHS explained how Medicaid-to-schools currently works in New Hampshire. He said 172 school districts participate, but utilization dropped during the pandemic and remains below historical levels, in part because districts need the capacity to bill Medicaid. Under the current system, schools receive reimbursement based on half of the Medicaid fee schedule, with the school district effectively providing the state share. He said the federal government is requiring a shift by July 1, 2026, to a true certified public expenditure model based on actual costs, which should allow schools to recover 50% of their true costs and some administrative overhead. The department has received a roughly $2.5 million grant to hire a vendor and support districts through the transition, and an RFP and stakeholder meetings are underway. Committee members asked about how costs would be determined, whether the new system would use actual district-specific costs rather than averages, and how the department would support districts that do not currently participate. Lipman said the cost model would be based on each district’s own reasonable costs, subject to audit standards, and that the department expects to provide templates and technical assistance through the vendor because its staff is limited. He also said about one in four New Hampshire children are enrolled in Medicaid, that child enrollment has been relatively stable, and that continuous coverage rules should reduce churn. No votes or formal actions on HB 742 were taken during the meeting beyond organizing the subcommittee and beginning testimony and discussion.