Transcript Highlights:

• That looks at salary increases due to demographic forces.
• And that's graphed against the blue line, which is general salary growth.
• Current general salary growth assumption of 3.25%. Director Chapman C.
• So salaries are going to increase, inflation is going to happen.
• We adopt general salary... Is there a motion to adopt general salary growth of 3.5%? I move.

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The committee approved the July minutes and then received an informational presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on the financial condition of the state retirement systems. The actuary reported that employer contribution rates are generally declining, helped by strong investment returns and reduced funding for PERS 1 and TERS 1, while funded ratios have continued to improve; on a combined basis the plans were reported at 100% funded in 2024, with open plans above 95% and legacy plans varying by system. The presentation also reviewed projected rates and funded ratios under current assumptions, noted that pension costs are taking a smaller share of the state general fund, and discussed risks from investment volatility, policy changes, and demographic experience. Committee members asked about savings from lower rates, deferred asset smoothing, and how Washington compares with other states. The committee then considered the state actuary’s recommendation on long-term economic assumptions and adopted all four recommendations by roll call votes: inflation at 3.0%, general salary growth at 3.5%, membership growth for Plan 1 funding at 1.0%, and investment rate of return at 7.25%. The actuaries explained that the inflation and salary growth increases were driven largely by higher long-term inflation expectations, while the investment return recommendation matched the current statutory assumption. Members discussed the timing of the Pension Funding Council’s decision, the effect of tariffs and inflation uncertainty, and how assumption changes would affect future contribution rates and budgets, particularly for open plans. Staff then gave an update on the LEOFF 1 study, explaining the difference between being “ahead of schedule” and truly overfunded, and summarizing responses received from DRS, the State Treasurer, and the State Investment Board on the merger and restatement proposals. DRS said both bills could be administered, though the merger bill’s COLA banking provision would be challenging until its new system is ready; the Treasurer urged caution, especially about the restatement bill and the use of one-time funds; and the Investment Board said removing assets from the trust would have some transaction costs but likely small impacts. The committee discussed whether to invite additional agencies and local government groups to testify, and staff said more responses, including from Ice Miller and the State Actuary, were expected for the October meeting. Finally, the committee heard a briefing on PERS 1/TERS 1 COLA policy and related bills from the last session. Staff reviewed the committee’s prior ongoing COLA recommendation, the SCPP-endorsed bills that would have created a one-time 3% COLA followed by an ongoing COLA, the Senate merger bill, and a separate ad hoc COLA bill. Public testimony largely supported Plan 1 COLAs and stable contribution rates, while several speakers urged caution about transferring LEOFF 1 surplus assets or merging legacy plans, and others raised concerns about climate risk and the pension fund’s investments. No further committee action was taken on the COLA item during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• midpoint of their salary classification range.
• I think salaries are a challenge across all state agencies.
• First, salaries, so that's one.
• So salary is our main focus. Optional item 1 seeks about $1.75 million for salary enhancements.
• In Texas, the starting salary is what, 102? 102. ...is kind of the starting salary.

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:30:04.240><c> certified</c><00:30:04.799><c> salary</c> each district's certified salary each
• </c> This map shows starting teacher salaries This map shows starting teacher salaries by<00:36:33.760
• </c> Differences in starting teacher salaries Differences in starting teacher salaries are<00:37:03.920
• </c> Kucky's average starting teacher salary Kucky's average starting teacher salary ranks<00:38:04.720
• </c> salaries and benefits for some states. salaries and benefits for some states.

Summary: The subcommittee opened its first meeting with roll call and procedural business, including elections of co-chairs. The House elected Representative Truett as House co-chair, and the Senate elected Senator Denine as Senate co-chair. After the organizational votes, the committee heard the Office of Educational Accountability’s annual report, beginning with Brian Jones and Deborah Nelson describing OEA’s investigations and research divisions and recent staffing turnover. On the investigations side, OEA said it handled complaints only when submitted in writing and generally opened cases only when it had enough facts to evaluate. Jones reported complaint volume declined from 805 in 2023 to 738 in 2024, with 325 in the first half of the current year. He outlined the kinds of matters OEA investigates, including school-based council issues, open meetings, board eligibility, nepotism, conflicts of interest, certification, activity funds, and surplus property, while noting that routine personnel matters, bullying, child interviews, and cases tied to litigation are generally handled locally or referred elsewhere. He also said OEA refers special education, assessment/testing, discrimination, and serious misconduct matters to the appropriate agencies, and that he did not see a need for statutory changes to improve OEA’s work, though he said cases should move more quickly. The research division presentation focused on OEA’s district data profiles and annual research agenda. Nelson explained that OEA reviews KDE-reported data and underlying datasets to verify accuracy, analyze trends, and produce reports for the General Assembly. She highlighted 2024 publications on district governance models and student achievement, and said this year’s agenda includes district data profiles, student discipline analysis, and a review of early childhood regional training centers. She also noted OEA received an NCSL notable document award for its 2023 staffing shortages report, its 10th such award. Sabrina Smith then walked through the district data profiles, which compile demographic, staffing, finance, and performance data for all 171 districts, plus statewide and comparative data. She noted changes in the report format, the continued availability of an online interactive version, and several trends: adjusted average daily attendance declined statewide from 2015 to 2024; the counselor-to-student ratio has improved but has not yet reached the statutory goal of one counselor per 250 students; the share of teachers moving from rank three to rank two has declined; special education identification has risen from 13% to 16%; and starting teacher salaries vary widely by district, with Kentucky’s average starting salary around $40,000 ranking near the bottom compared with surrounding states and the nation. Members asked about the history of the research division and whether the paper copies of the district profiles would continue, and staff said the printed versions would continue unless legislators asked otherwise.

Transcript Highlights:

• to what Senate Bill 2972 seeks to accomplish on college campuses every day, DPS professionals—our troopers
• Of course, people do come with these items at times, and very simply, a trooper or a special agent will

Summary: The joint Senate and House Select Committee on Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education convened for its first public hearing, adopted its proposed rules without objection, and framed the hearing as an organizational, invited-testimony-only session. Members repeatedly condemned political violence and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, saying the committee was created in response to concerns about civil discourse, intimidation, and hostility on college campuses. Several members emphasized that the goal was not to suppress speech but to protect open expression while maintaining order, due process, and institutional accountability. The first witness, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Commissioner Wyn Rosser, outlined implementation of Senate Bill 37. He described the General Education Advisory Committee, which is reviewing broad core-curriculum knowledge and skills and may recommend reducing the current 42-hour core, while leaving review of specific courses to individual institutions. He also explained the new Office of the Ombudsman, the board’s role in supporting it, and existing training and certification requirements for governing board members. Members asked about enforcement tools, transparency, and whether the ombudsman would investigate complaints involving censorship, retaliation, or political bias; Rosser said some enforcement exists in certain laws, but he deferred on the exact scope of the ombudsman’s investigatory authority and on issues outside the agency’s role. University of Texas at Austin President Jim Davis testified that UT Austin supports free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse, and he described three areas of focus: speech on campus grounds, classroom discourse, and how people treat one another. He said the university enforces time, place, and manner rules, expects professors to present alternative views on controversial topics, and has created internal reporting and appeal processes for students and faculty. Members questioned him about heckler’s veto incidents, protests, off-campus participants, complaints about professors, hate speech, and whether the university would protect speakers and students from disruption or unfair targeting. Davis said the university would not tolerate disruptions, would use due process and factual review, and is working to align campus practices with the new law and regents’ expectations. Ricky Adam Jr. of Turning Point USA’s Club America described the group’s campus and high-school organizing, praised Charlie Kirk’s approach to open debate, and said the organization is expanding in Texas. He raised concerns about school administrators and a counselor at an Early College High School in Killeen allegedly interfering with a student club and withholding footage, and committee members said they would seek information and, if necessary, use legislative process to investigate. Members from both chambers reiterated support for free speech, criticized political violence and campus suppression of viewpoints, and stressed that future hearings would continue examining implementation and enforcement issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• and prosecutor salaries, uh DPA salaries and prosecutor salaries, there<00:10:50.640><c> are</c><00:
• of 10620. salary of 10620.
• 59,850. salary of 59,850.
• </c> to benefit from salaries closer to that. to benefit from salaries closer to that.
• is our salary.

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary heard testimony from the Department of Public Advocacy (DPA) on attorney compensation and alternatives to incarceration. Because the committee lacked a quorum, the chair skipped formal roll call and minutes approval, then invited DPA Public Advocate Damon Preston, Deputy Public Advocate Melanie Lowe, and alternative sentencing worker Cena/Tina Mills to present. Preston said DPA is fully state-funded, has 698 funded positions, and was near full staffing with 673 filled positions and 42 new law graduates expected to join in August. He argued that DPA’s resources lag behind those of prosecutors, noting that local prosecutorial offices receive substantially more total funding and have additional revenue sources beyond the state budget. Preston focused on salary disparities and turnover. He said DPA trial-office attorneys total about $26 million in salaries, compared with about $41.9 million for prosecutors on publicly listed state funding, and estimated that more than 100 additional prosecutors are paid through other sources, bringing total prosecutor compensation to a little over $50 million versus DPA’s $26 million. He said starting DPA attorney pay is $58,200, experienced attorney pay averages about $73,000, and that these levels are too low given law school debt and the state’s constitutional obligation to provide defense counsel. He also said DPA attorney turnover is about 20%, median service time before separation was 15 months in 2024, and exit interviews often cite salary as the main reason for leaving. He gave examples of former DPA attorneys moving to prosecutor offices for raises ranging from 12% to 50%. Committee members asked about how often defendants are represented by private counsel versus DPA and how that affects workload. Preston said a 2017 study found about 50% of misdemeanor cases and about 75% of circuit court cases were handled by DPA, with DPA handling most of the most labor-intensive cases. He said DPA will step aside when a defendant hires private counsel or is found ineligible, and he acknowledged the system historically erred by denying counsel in some cases, though he said the current concern is whether DPA is now appointed too broadly. Members requested updated trend data on appointments over the past decade. Preston also described DPA’s pay scale and said the agency’s compensation structure makes retention difficult. Mills then described DPA’s alternative sentencing worker program, which she said has operated for about 20 years and has received national recognition. She shared a case example involving a client named Patrick, who faced a prison sentence on a possession charge and was referred to a horse-based treatment and certification program in Shelbyville. She said the client wanted treatment and a fresh start, a bed became available, and she and the client’s attorney presented an alternative sentencing plan to the court. The presentation was interrupted briefly by a technical issue, but the testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• Specifically, it caps compensation of those employees at 125% of the Governor's salary, prevents salary
• This is huge salary increases.
• This is huge salary increases.
• This is huge salary increases.
• This is huge salary increases.

Committee: House Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> salary is not adjusted by current law. salary is not adjusted by current law.
• It's not a beginning salary, and it's a salary that some teachers will clearly make less on a salary
• It's not a beginning salary, and it's a salary that some teachers will clearly make less on a salary
• It's not a beginning salary, and it's a salary that some teachers will clearly make less on a salary
• It's not a beginning salary, and it's a salary that some teachers will clearly make less on a salary

Committee: Joint Select Committee on School Finance Recalibration

Transcript Highlights:

• , but should any of that be voted down, it goes back to the current salary, the present salary.
• The court police chief is at a grade LESO5, with a salary range of $67,000 to $100,000.
• The maximum salary increases requested are shown on the right side of that middle section as well.
• When you're looking at a salary increase on this, you're looking at a pretty dramatic change.
• Any salary raises in nearly a decade.

Committee: All JBC-PERSONNEL

Summary: The committee met to consider several requests related to constitutional offices and court security staffing, with opening remarks noting that the fringe-benefit percentage had been updated to 40–45% and that the bills already filed would be amended if the committee approved the requests. Item B, from the Supreme Court, requested one new Supreme Court police chief position at LESO5 with no appropriation change; the committee approved it. Item C, from the Secretary of State, requested five additional State Capitol Police corporal positions, a reclassification and consolidation of several job titles, and salary maximum adjustments, along with a $498,000 appropriation increase for salaries and matching funds; after questions about how the office would absorb the changes and whether the new security role would replace a contract, the committee approved the item. Item D, from the Lieutenant Governor’s Office, sought to move from line-item maximum salaries to state pay-plan grades, with no change in the number of positions but an estimated $349,000 increase in salaries and matching funds. Office representatives said the change was intended to align with other constitutional offices, address a long period without raises, and improve retention, but Senator Hill placed the item on hold until the next day for follow-up questions. Item E, from the Auditor’s Office, requested a realignment of classifications, salary maximum increases, one UCP claims examiner position, and one UCP compliance agent, for a total increase of $579,468; the auditor said the office had withdrawn a government relations position from the request, that the new positions were revenue-neutral or needed to handle increased workload, and that salary increases were based on market comparisons and long-term stagnation. The committee approved item E, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Funding for the salaries and wages is decreased by 170,228.
• I'm just going back to the salary and the process, and how it was handled.
• This next line item adds funds for competitive market salary equity.
• Because it wasn't added as a salary piece, was it?
• We used that for salary because we could use that for salary. Oh, you just backfilled it. Yep.

Committee: House Appropriations - Human Resources Division

Summary: The committee reconvened to work through the amended version of Senate Bill 2025, beginning with a clarification from the Department of Veterans Affairs on the source of funds used to cover the commissioner’s salary equity increase. Commissioner Lonnie Wong explained that the money came from federal highly rural transportation grant administrative/salary funds, within the allowable 10% administrative cap, and that the department had not exceeded that limit. The committee then reviewed the major House changes to the veterans budget, including funding for a veterans benefits specialist FTE, salary equity increases for veterans service officers, additional operating funds, one-time funding for homeless veteran services and the Veterans Post-War Trust Fund, carryover authority for Fisher House and veterans transportation projects, accrued leave, and a document scanning project. Members also discussed a section changing governance authority for veterans affairs and the veterans home, with questions about the ACOVA board and the governor’s appointment authority. The committee debated the appropriateness of using federal grant administrative funds for salary adjustments and the broader shift in authority over veterans affairs, with some members emphasizing legislative control over salaries and budget decisions and others supporting the reorganization as a way to improve administration. After discussion, Amendment 25.092.0203 was moved, seconded, and adopted on an 8-0 roll call. The committee then moved SB 2025 as amended, and that motion also passed 8-0. The meeting then shifted to Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation budget issues, where members reviewed FTE reductions, salary equity funding for correctional officers and parole/probation officers, and the status of federal ARPA dollars that had previously been used to backfill salaries and bonuses. DOCR officials described pay levels for correctional officers and compared them with county jail wages, arguing that the proposed equity funding was needed for retention and competitiveness. Members also discussed transitional facility costs, women’s treatment unit funding, and county jail overflow housing, including new or planned bed capacity in Grand Forks, Burleigh-Morton, Rugby, and other facilities. The committee agreed to continue refining the budget through a new long sheet and planned to request amendments for consideration in the following days before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• maximum if they choose to do so whenever they have a position that they want to change or increase salary
• But should any of that be voted down, it goes back to the current salary, the present salary.
• The maximum salary increases requested are shown on the right side of that middle section as well.
• Obviously, your maximum annual salary rate for every position is going up, anywhere from 1% to 15%.
• When you're looking at a salary increase on this, you're looking at a pretty dramatic change.

Committee: All JBC-PERSONNEL

Transcript Highlights:

• You're asking to go to a salary that is competitive within the market.
• And increasing their regular salary and match appropriation by $103,000.
• They’ve also requested to lower the regular salary and match appropriation by $948,000.
• I'm just not seeing where those employees regular salaries match.
• Section 3, tying into Section 1, takes the salaries from 1.4 to $969,000.

Committee: All JBC-PERSONNEL

Transcript Highlights:

• But when we do not provide a salary, we do. And so, Mr.
• But when we do not provide a salary, we do. And so, Mr.
• That just says repeal the prohibition on salary.
• It just says repeal the prohibition on salaries and entitle legislators to a salary equal to, and the
• We're talking salaries? Salaries?

Summary: The Senate debated House Joint Resolution 5, a proposed constitutional amendment to allow legislative compensation tied to median household income. Supporters argued that paying legislators would broaden access, improve representation, and help people who cannot afford to serve without outside income, while opponents said lawmakers should not raise their own pay given the legislature’s performance and the state’s budget and job losses. Three floor amendments were offered and all failed: one to change the ballot language to more directly say it would pay legislators a salary, one to add 16-year term limits, and one to deny per diem and mileage for meetings within 50 miles of a member’s home. After extended debate, the Senate adopted the resolution on a roll call vote of 23-19, sending H.J.R. 5, as amended, forward. The chamber then passed Senate Memorial 31, which creates a work group to study the 2020 suspension of COLAs for retired state employees and possible retirement-fund recommendations, by a 42-0 vote. Senate Memorial 17 also passed unanimously, calling for a task force to study the status and backlog of sexual assault examination kits in New Mexico. The Senate also received several House messages on bills returned or amended by the House, and adopted a committee report covering multiple House bills, including HB 20, HB 38, HB 108, HB 200, HB 270, HB 291, HB 306, and HB 309. The meeting ended with announcements about committee schedules and a recess until 10:30 a.m. the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• The new provost who's going to be voted on next week, base salary 675,000.
• The new provost who's going to be voted on next week, base salary 675,000.
• The new provost who's going to be voted on next week, base salary 675,000.
• The new provost who's going to be voted on next week, base salary 675,000.
• To be voted on next week, base salary 675,000.

Transcript Highlights:

• But my question was, like, you're asking to go to a salary that is competitive within the market.
• They've also requested to lower the regular salary and match appropriation by $948,000.
• of the requested salaries doesn't math for me.
• I'm just not seeing where those employees' regular salaries match.
• It takes the salaries from $1.4 million to $969,000. It's $500,000 for almost 50 employees, right?

Committee: All JBC-PERSONNEL

Summary: The committee first considered the Lieutenant Governor’s Office budget and personnel request. Office representatives said they wanted to move the office to the state pay plan to better align salaries with other constitutional offices and remain competitive, noting that OPM had approved the positions and grades. Senators questioned the size of the requested increases and the office’s workload, and after discussion the motion to adopt the proposal failed on an 8-8 tie. The committee then voted to expunge that vote and returned to the regular agenda. The committee approved a series of Governor’s letters involving position transfers and appropriation adjustments across several agencies. These included changes for AETN, the Department of Health and Nursing Board/Dietetics Board, multiple DHS divisions, DFA shared services and budget management, and the Department of Public Safety shared services division. Most of these items involved moving positions and associated salary appropriations between divisions, with no major opposition and motions passing. A lengthy discussion followed on the transfer of child nutrition and related nutrition programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Agriculture. Education and DFA officials explained that the programs fit better under Agriculture because the funding and commodities are tied to USDA programs, and they clarified that both state and federal funding and all related positions would move. Senators raised concerns about the math in the letters, the split between state and federal funding, and whether all program resources were being transferred. After the explanation, the committee approved the Education side of the transfer and then approved the Agriculture companion letter. The committee also discussed the Educational Freedom Account program budget. Officials said the $309 million request matched current participation and included a $70 million reserve in case applications increase. Several senators expressed concern about the program’s growth and its effect on public education funding and adequacy, while others noted that the program’s rules and funding levels could be adjusted through the State Board and future legislative action. The committee then approved a Public Safety classification change and a member amendment changing a title at East Arkansas Community College from assistant to the president to assistant to the chancellor, with no change in positions or appropriation.

Transcript Highlights:

• But my question was, like, you're asking to go to a salary that is competitive within the market.
• They've also requested to lower the regular salary and match appropriation by $948,000.
• of the requested salaries doesn't math for me.
• I'm just not seeing where those employees regular salaries match.
• It takes the salaries from $1.4 million to $969,000. It's $500,000 for almost 50 employees, right?

Committee: All JBC-PERSONNEL

Summary: The committee first considered the Lieutenant Governor’s Office budget and personnel request to move that office onto the state pay plan and increase salaries for its positions. Office representatives said the request was intended to make pay competitive with other constitutional offices and state agencies, that OPM had approved the grades, and that the office did not plan to max out any positions. Members questioned the size of the increase and the office’s workload. A motion to adopt the proposal failed on a tie vote, and the committee then voted to expunge the vote before moving on. The committee then approved a series of Governor’s letters and related personnel transfers, including cuts for Arkansas Educational Television Network, transfers within the Department of Health and several DHS divisions, and a DFA shared services reorganization. The committee also approved moving child nutrition and related nutrition programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Agriculture, with department officials explaining that the programs fit better under Agriculture because the grants come from USDA and the transfer would include the positions and funding tied to the programs. Members raised questions about how the appropriations and positions were split between state and federal funding, and about the broader implications of the transfer, but the committee ultimately approved both the Education and Agriculture sides of the move. The meeting also included extended discussion of the Educational Freedom Account program. Members questioned the $309 million appropriation, whether it matched current participation, and whether future demand could require additional funding. Department officials said the amount covered current participation and that the governor had set aside an additional $70 million in case applications increased, but that any amount beyond the appropriation would require returning to the committee. Some members argued the program’s growth could threaten funding for public schools and adequacy, while others noted that the program is governed by rules under the LEARNS Act. The committee also approved a technical title change at East Arkansas Community College from assistant to the president to assistant to the chancellor.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the board requests increasing the executive director salary cap to two in 3,337, aligning with salary
• This adjustment is necessary to address salary compression.
• salaries, enhanced compensation for staffing.
• to the midpoint of their salary classification range.
• Or being forced to pay a Planned Parenthood official a salary greater than the salary of the governor

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Articles VI, VII, & VIII

Transcript Highlights:

• Item E under other funding changes pertains to the biennialization of statewide salary increases.
• However, thanks to your investment and higher salaries last session, we made significant progress in
• OPUC's salaries have historically lagged other agencies.
• We had to cannibalize those salaries to increase salaries in other areas of the agency, and we are now
• A couple of key things I want to focus on, again, back to the salary issue.

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met to review Article 8, regulatory agencies, and began Article 9, general provisions, before recessing for floor action. The committee first heard budget presentations from the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and the Office of Public Utility Counsel (OPUC). The PUC budget recommendation was about $5.07 billion in all funds, including an additional $5 billion for the Texas Energy Fund, plus funding for staffing and technology needs tied to contested cases, infrastructure resiliency, and outage mapping. PUC witnesses emphasized the agency’s growing workload, the need for more staff and modern systems, and oversight of the Texas Energy Fund. OPUC’s recommendation was about $6.9 million, with a reduction in authorized FTEs to better match actual staffing; the agency requested additional funding for salaries, expert witnesses, and budget flexibility, and members highlighted OPUC’s role representing residential and small commercial consumers in utility proceedings. The committee then heard from the Behavioral Health Executive Council (BHEC), whose recommendation was just over $11.2 million. BHEC’s main requests included funding to fill vacant positions, money for continuous National Practitioner Data Bank queries, and a proposed Texas-owned psychology licensing exam in response to concerns about changes to the national exam. Agency leaders also discussed a rider request that would shift responsibility for certain judgments or settlements to the comptroller. Members asked about prior complaint backlogs, and BHEC said those backlogs had been cleared. The Board of Chiropractic Examiners followed, with a recommendation of just under $2.4 million; the board sought support for staffing, training, broadband, and salary retention, and described its work regulating chiropractors and workers’ compensation-related doctors. The Board of Dental Examiners was the last agency heard before the committee recessed. Its recommendation was just under $10 million, and it requested a 10% salary increase for eligible staff, three additional licensing staff, one staff member to handle required background checks, an additional attorney, and an executive director salary adjustment. Dental board witnesses said licensure growth, increased complaints, and low salaries were straining licensing and enforcement operations, even though the agency reported strong performance and high case completion rates. The chair ended the hearing early because the Senate had to return to the floor, and the committee remained in recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• is of course annual salary increases for Senate<00:01:19.160><c> employees.
• </c> of salaries. of salaries.
• This is a document that is sensitive in that it names members and salaries.
• This is a document that is sensitive in that it names members and salaries.
• </c> information about salaries. information about salaries.

Committee: Senate Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• They've just negotiated their starting salary, and they've just begun, right?
• So SB 26 increases teacher salaries, right?
• We're always looking at the salaries for all our employees.
• The average salary of that group of staff is about $40,000.
• , and salary growth tends to flatten over time.

Bills: SB26 , SB 26

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16