Transcript Highlights:

• We also have Superintendent Chambers and Superintendent Hughes to hear about their practices related
• —I'm sorry—Superintendent Chambers and Superintendent Hughes from Okaloosa and Walton counties, respectively
• Thank you, Superintendent Chambers, Superintendent Hughes. I appreciate the input. Any questions?
• Thank you, Superintendent Chambers, Superintendent Hughes. I appreciate the input. Any questions?
• One of the superintendents, I can't remember, I thought it was Superintendent Hughes, a very interesting

Summary: The Education Pre-K through 12 Committee heard a presentation from Florida High School Athletic Association Executive Director Craig Damon, joined by student athletes Sydney Daniel and Taylor White. The students spoke about the value of education-based athletics, leadership, and the need for safe, equitable opportunities. Damon then discussed FHSAA issues including rising sportsmanship problems, ejections, violent incidents, recruiting allegations, transfers, mental health pressures on student athletes, and the need for qualified coaches. He said the association tries to be proactive, work with schools on discipline, and emphasize that school changes should be for academic reasons rather than athletics. Senators asked about mental health, transfer rules, and a recent Jacksonville incident; Damon explained the current transfer exceptions and said the association lacked authority over the Jacksonville football game because the schools were not in FHSAA football. The committee then heard a panel on high school coaches’ compensation led by Florida Coaches Coalition Executive Director Dr. Andrew Ramgett, with Coach Mike Hickman, Coach Charlie Ward, and superintendents from Okaloosa and Walton counties. Ramgett argued that coaching supplements are outdated, have not kept pace with the expanding year-round demands of coaching, and amount to very low hourly pay in many sports. He also said Florida’s restrictions on booster club funding and minimal certification requirements contribute to turnover and difficulty retaining qualified coaches. Hickman and Ward described coaching as a demanding, year-round profession that affects students beyond athletics, including academics and mental health. The superintendents said they value coaches but must balance compensation against limited district funds and other staffing needs; one noted Walton County uses a dedicated administrative lane for football coaching and athletic administration. Senators discussed whether booster club funding should be allowed, whether compensation should be tied to performance, and whether any increase in base student allocation would actually reach coaches. Public commenters, including Florida Athletic Coaches Association Executive Director Shelton Cruz and former coach Tyrone McGriff, urged support for coaches and emphasized their broader impact on students’ lives and school safety. At the end of the meeting, the committee took up confirmation hearings for appointments on tabs 3 through 6 and, with no appearance forms filed, voted unanimously to recommend confirmation. Senator Burgess then moved to adjourn, and the committee concluded the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• To appoint the state superintendent of public instruction as the superintendent of the Utah Schools for
• , the superintendent...
• I cannot agree with having the superintendent be the superintendent for the state school for the deaf
• And I cannot support this bill by taking the state superintendent and making them the superintendent
• And right now, the superintendent has been appointed as the interim superintendent for the schools of

Committee: Joint Education Interim Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• We're also joined by Superintendent Crabtree and Alan McGordo. So, Superintendent.
• Good afternoon, Michael Crabtree, Superintendent.
• You're well aware, so I'll give the floor to you, Superintendent Gonzalez. You're muted.
• Superintendent, if you wouldn't mind restating your question. So my biggest question is...
• Chair, Senator Stewart, Superintendent, I apologize that you are experiencing this.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• Next up, we have Superintendent Debbie Critchfield.
• Chair and Superintendent Critchfield.
• Thank you, Superintendent, for being here.
• Chairman, and thank you, Superintendent.
• Thank you, Chairman and Superintendent.

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation on the K-12 public school support budget, including how support units, career ladder funding, health insurance, discretionary funding, transportation, facilities, and the Public Education Stabilization Fund (PSIF) work. Legislative Services explained that FY 2026 support units were revised downward, creating a $22.3 million ongoing general fund reduction, and walked through the FY 2027 agency request and governor’s recommendation. The governor recommended no increase for population forecast adjustments, but did recommend some statutory and policy changes, including shifting certain interest earnings to the general fund and reducing funding for some virtual school and IDLA-related items. The agency request also included one-time proposals for a high-needs special education fund and a regional service model for related services. Members asked extensive questions about how career ladder dollars are distributed, how health insurance and discretionary funds interact, why the health insurance increase in the budget differed from current plan estimates, and how facilities money under House Bill 292 is used. There were also questions about the size and use of the Idaho Career Ready Students fund, the maintenance-of-effort implications of special education funding, and whether some special education costs are being used for student housing or other noninstructional expenses. The superintendent and budget staff emphasized that many of the budget lines are formula-driven or statutorily required, that local districts determine actual staffing and spending within those formulas, and that special education costs continue to outpace available funding. Superintendent Debbie Critchfield then framed the budget request around enrollment trends, shifting demographics, and the need for more flexibility in how districts use existing dollars. She highlighted proposed categorical flexibility for some funds, changes to digital content and curriculum distribution, continued literacy gains, growth in career technical education programs funded through Idaho Career Ready Students, and the importance of endowment and Millennium Fund support. She also described the special education proposals as a temporary bridge while the state considers larger formula changes and noted a near $100 million gap between special education spending and funding. She further outlined planned federal waiver requests on assessments and flexibility, and said the department is seeking more state control over testing and reporting requirements. The committee did not take final action on the budget during this portion of the meeting. Members raised concerns about interest transfers from dedicated funds, the complexity of the funding formula, special education accountability, and whether the state should revisit the overall school funding model. Several follow-up data requests were made, including information on health insurance participation, regional special education service needs, and school contingency fund balances.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> superintendent that'd be great. Yeah. superintendent that'd be great. Yeah.
• Superintendent.
• You go talk to the superintendent, superintendent says, "No, that's not happening."
• Superintendent.
• Superintendent. Madam that correctly? Superintendent.

Summary: The conference committee took testimony on Senate File 3051, which would allow law enforcement to release unredacted collision crash investigation video and related data to certain requesters, rather than requiring redaction first. Joel Carlson, speaking for the Minnesota Association for Justice, said the bill is intended to save local governments time and money because redacted video is often later released unredacted through court motions anyway. He emphasized that the proposal is limited to people already entitled to crash reports, requires a written request and accident report, does not create an affirmative duty to release data, and preserves law enforcement’s ability to withhold data for active investigations or other protected information. He also cited the Burks decision as support for the view that a subject of data is entitled to the full data even if it includes other subjects. Colonel Christina Bogavich of the Minnesota State Patrol raised concerns that the bill would still require staff to review videos for exceptions, including private data involving bystanders, juveniles, undercover officers, CAD information, and other protected material, so it would not create the claimed time savings. She also said the bill expands the number of potential requesters and lacks a liability provision if released data is improperly disseminated. Committee members and staff discussed the current Data Practices Act, including that private data can still be discoverable in litigation through a court balancing test and that protective orders may apply. A preliminary fiscal note estimated a Department of Public Safety cost of $4,026,334 annually, and members requested copies of the note. Members questioned whether the bill would actually reduce work or simply shift when the work occurs, and whether a litigation-specific exception to redaction should be added. Carlson said he was open to changes, including making release permissive rather than mandatory and strengthening the use restrictions, while members noted the proposal had not yet been heard in the House and would need more vetting. No vote or final action was taken on the provision during this discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• It could be an assistant superintendent, or it could be the superintendent.
• , and in some, it would be the superintendent.
• And I've worked with great superintendents and other superintendents.
• And then I have a current superintendent who I meet with monthly.
• And it's also for superintendents.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Summary: The committee first met in executive session on House Bill 3532 and House Bill 3483, which were combined by amendment into a House Committee Substitute. Representative Kelly explained the amendment corrected a clerical error and merged the two bill strings; members discussed removing the phrase “public school” so the measure would apply more broadly. The committee adopted the amendment and substitute, then voted the combined House Committee Substitute do pass by a 16-0 roll call vote, sending it next to the Rules Committee and then potentially to the House floor. The committee then heard House Bill 2965, sponsored by Representative Bosley, which would require Missouri students to complete one unit each of Black history and Black literature before graduation, with standards and model curriculum developed by the State Board of Education. Bosley argued the bill would provide a fuller and more accurate account of American history, improve student engagement and outcomes, and empower all students. Supporters from the NAACP and committee members praised the goal, but several members raised concerns about making the courses graduation requirements, the burden on transfer students, and whether the bill should instead be tied to existing social studies credits or broader K-12 standards. No opposition testimony was offered. Finally, the committee heard House Bills 2126 and 2197, presented together as similar measures on building-level administrator evaluations. The sponsors said the bills would require annual evaluations of principals and other building administrators, set a March 1 timeline for renewal or nonrenewal decisions, and allow administrators with at least five consecutive years to request written reasons if their contracts are not renewed. Committee members and witnesses generally supported regular evaluations and timely notice, but several questioned whether the bills were too restrictive on reasons for nonrenewal and whether the language created a kind of tenure-like protection. Supporters from principals’ groups, Missouri NEA, and Missouri State Teachers Association backed the bills, emphasizing fairness, feedback, and professional growth. The hearing concluded without a vote on these two bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fred Hyde is the superintendent of Polk County Public Schools. Dr.
• I do know other superintendents were not aware of it.
• Thank you, Superintendent, and thank you, Madam Chair.
• Pridgin, superintendents, thank you for being here today.
• Pridgin, superintendents. Thank you for being here today.

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met to review how Florida’s Education Finance Program (FEFP) works, receive an update from the Department of Education on the October 2024 FTE survey and third FEFP calculation, and hear from three county superintendents about forecasting enrollment and reconciling scholarship students. The chair explained that FEFP is funded by both state and local dollars, is recalculated multiple times during the year, and is now closely tied to school choice policy. Department staff said the third calculation was still being rerun but should be completed soon, and described the forecasting process as collaborative among districts, DOE, and the Education Estimating Conference. Superintendents from Polk, St. Lucie, and Hendry counties said enrollment shifts, especially students moving to Family Empowerment Scholarships, homeschooling, or private schools, make budgeting and staffing difficult. They said districts often must hold back funds to protect against midyear losses, which affects collective bargaining, staffing, transportation, and classroom organization. Several members raised concerns about duplicate counting, transparency, and whether students receiving scholarship funds can also remain in district classrooms. DOE said districts can access scholarship information through a secure portal and that scholarship funding organizations are paid quarterly, with a new process requiring certification and possible future payment adjustments to reduce duplication. The superintendents urged better real-time tracking of students through a statewide ID or student information system and suggested scholarship students should be funded separately from district FEFP calculations. Members also discussed whether more frequent or daily attendance-based calculations would improve accuracy, though some warned that daily attendance could create new problems for high-poverty districts. The committee also briefly discussed categoricals, including mental health and ESE funding, with DOE saying it evaluates programs through studies, reporting requirements, and legislative direction. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with a motion to rise and adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I don't know what our feedback has been from superintendents this time.
• But the superintendents didn't even mention that.
• And then some results from our superintendent survey.
• Seventy-one percent of superintendents reported that they did.
• And then, talking with the superintendents, I've seen this same thing come up.

Summary: The House/Joint Education committee continued its adequacy study with a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, focusing first on matrix spending and then non-matrix spending. Staff explained the methodology for mapping APSCN expenditure data to matrix lines, reviewed district and school categories used in the analysis, and highlighted key findings: foundation funding covered a large share of matrix costs but total spending on matrix items exceeded foundation funding, with classroom teachers making up the largest share. Members asked for additional breakdowns on waivers, superintendent survey responses, trend data, and spending by district type, size, and rural/urban status. Staff also noted limitations in tracking two matrix lines—salary enhancement for other employees and all personnel health insurance—because of coding and definition issues. The committee then reviewed non-matrix expenditures, including instructional aides, facilities, school safety, mental health, dyslexia services, gifted and talented, and career and technical education. Staff reported that non-matrix spending remained above $2 billion over the last three years, with most of it coming from other funds rather than foundation funding. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, mental health needs, school safety, food service, athletic transportation, and whether some items should be added to the matrix. The Department of Education clarified that the building fund reflects district-held funds for construction and maintenance projects, while the facilities partnership program is a separate state process for approved projects. In the final discussion, staff summarized total spending as more than $15,800 per student in 2025, with about 69% going to matrix resources and 31% to non-matrix resources. The chair explained the adequacy process and the committee’s role in setting future funding recommendations, and members discussed the recommendations worksheet included in the binder. The chair then proposed postponing the remainder of Part Two of the presentation until a May meeting after the fiscal session, along with inviting the Department of Education back for more detailed questions; with no objections, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Superintendent of the Education Innovation and Support Division for the Fresno County Superintendent
• I'm the assistant superintendent at the Fresno County Superintendent of Schools.
• Christina Sarasara with the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools and strong support. superintendent
• On behalf of the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools, in respectful opposition.”
• Nicole Glensner, on behalf of the California County Superintendents, and we support.

Summary: The committee heard several education-related bills, with the most extensive discussion focused on AB 2189, AB 2615, AB 2496, AB 1750, and AB 1644. AB 2189 would create an $800,000 grant program through the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to support a statewide parent network for special education advocacy and training. Supporters said families need stronger coordination and information to navigate special education, while an opponent argued the bill could duplicate existing family-led organizations. The bill passed 6-0 and was sent to Appropriations, held on call for add-on votes. AB 2615, a cleanup bill to AB 715 on antisemitism and instructional materials, drew the most controversy. The authors said it was intended to clarify prior commitments by removing references to professional responsibility standards, refining the “factually accurate” language, and clarifying how discriminatory materials are handled. Supporters said it would help protect students from discrimination, while many educators, civil rights groups, and other organizations opposed it unless amended, warning that the factual-accuracy language could chill teaching and be applied too broadly. The committee chair and members raised concerns about implementation but ultimately supported moving the bill forward; it passed 5-0 and was held on call. AB 2496 would streamline school accountability reporting by making the California School Dashboard the primary transparency tool, phasing out the School Accountability Report Card over time, and making mid-year LCAP reporting optional. Supporters said this would reduce duplication and administrative burden while preserving access to key data; opponents worried families could lose the simplicity and accessibility of the current SARC and that the mid-year update still serves an important purpose. The bill was approved 3-0 and held on call. AB 1750, which would extend full salary for an additional five months for school employees who exhaust sick leave due to illness or injury, was supported as a dignity and retention measure but opposed by administrators over staffing and cost concerns; it passed 4-0 and was held on call. AB 1644 would require a bell-to-bell smartphone ban in TK-8 and recommend it for high school, with exceptions for instructional and safety needs; supporters said phones are harming attention and learning, while opponents argued districts had just adopted local policies and needed more flexibility. The transcript ends during discussion of that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Presenters have a little more time, and Superintendent Barton and Superintendent Rudolph, if you'd like
• </c><00:14:40.560><c> of</c> Rudolph I serve as superintendent of Rudolph I serve as superintendent of
• Very good, thank you, Superintendent Rudolph. Thank you, Superintendent Rudolph.
• And so at this time, I'd ask the two testifiers, Superintendent Barton and Superintendent Rudolph, if
• Thank you, Superintendent Barton. Thank you, Superintendent Rudolph.

Bills: HF56 , HF780

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• . superintendent. superintendent.
• </c> understanding what our superintendents understanding what our superintendents do.<01:31:53.520><
• </c> orders to set superintendent. orders to set superintendent.
• </c> superintendents, they're taxpayers, too. superintendents, they're taxpayers, too.
• </c> than the superintendent. than the superintendent.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the concern about the board members being included and the superintendent, that's just by design.
• But the concern about the board members being included and the superintendent, that's just by design.
• It doesn't mean those on the outside would easily take that to mean, well, why the superintendent?
• It doesn't mean those on the outside would easily take that to mean, well, why the superintendent?
• It doesn't mean those on the outside would easily take that to mean, well, why the superintendent?

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first considered the executive nomination of John Snyder to the State Board for Charter Schools. Snyder described his background in municipal finance, charter school financings, and prior service with Arizona charter school organizations, and said his finance experience would help the board evaluate school viability and oversight. The committee voted 6-0 with one not voting to recommend his confirmation to the full Senate. The committee then heard HB 2093, which would remove the statutory requirement that health education include mental health instruction and would repeal related consultation requirements over time. The sponsor argued schools should focus on academics and that social-emotional learning and mental health content belong with parents, while opponents, including students, a suicide-loss parent, and mental health advocates, said school-based instruction saves lives, helps students seek help, and preserves parental choice through opt-out provisions. After debate, the committee voted 4-3 to give HB 2093 a do pass recommendation. Members also considered HB 4043, requiring at least one campus employee trained in CPR, first aid, and AED use where applicable; HB 4005, requiring districts to teach ethical and educational uses of AI beginning in 2027-28; HB 2895, allowing Native American language proficiency to satisfy a world language graduation requirement; HB 2383, renaming trampoline court safety legislation as Ty’s Law; HB 4109, requiring school district public safety policies, notifications, and annual reporting after serious violence or weapon incidents; HB 2376, appropriating $40 million for the school safety program; and HB 2380, requiring public access to board meeting materials and tighter rules on out-of-state travel. HB 4043, HB 2895, and HB 2383 all received unanimous or near-unanimous do pass recommendations, while HB 4005, HB 4109, HB 2376, and HB 2380 each advanced on 4-3 votes, with some members citing concerns about unfunded mandates, criminal penalties, local control, or the scope and timing of required disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next to testify, Joshua Superintendent.
• </c><00:42:45.280><c> Superintendent.</c><00:42:45.920><c> Hello,</c> Just kidding. Superintendent.
• Superintendent.
• </c> superintendent to testify. superintendent to testify. I<01:00:05.440><c> see.
• </c> committee, Keith Aayashi, superintendent committee, Keith Aayashi, superintendent testifying<01:

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education heard several advice-and-consent nominations to the School Facilities Authority. For GM779, Shelley Pa was introduced as a nominee for a term ending June 30, 2029. The Department of Education supported her nomination, citing her large-scale operations and stakeholder-engagement experience. In her testimony, Pa said she retired from community policing, wanted to give back to teachers and students, and believed her strengths were collaboration, listening to community input, and helping balance differing priorities. Committee members questioned her about the construction and infrastructure focus of the board, her lack of direct construction experience, and how she would handle disagreements and budget limits; she responded that she would rely on collaboration, ask questions, and keep decisions centered on students, teachers, and the community while staying within budget. The committee then heard GM777 and GM778 for Robert Davis, with terms ending June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2029. Davis described more than 30 years with the Department of Education, including roles as teacher, coach, counselor, vice principal, principal, and complex area superintendent, and said he had worked on major facilities projects and managed pandemic-era funding. He emphasized communication, transparency, and trust, and explained that his experience on the Early Learning Board helped him understand how to set policy, identify schools for pre-K, and use data and community factors in decision-making. Members asked how he would handle SFA’s growing pains, the need to balance DOE wishes with practical and budgetary limits, and the board’s role when the legislature controls funding; Davis said the board must keep communication open, include the right people, and make sensible decisions that move projects forward without stalling. For GM780, nominee Michael Unbasami was introduced for a term ending June 30, 2029. The Department of Education supported him, highlighting over five decades of public service and experience in facilities management, finance, and legislative affairs. Unbasami said he had recently retired after 31 years as associate vice president for administrative affairs for the community colleges and had extensive experience with facilities planning, construction, renovation, repairs, and working within budgets. He stated that the DOE should be treated as the SFA’s client because it knows student, teacher, and facility needs best, while SFA’s role is to implement construction work and collaborate on priorities. Committee members pressed him on how to balance DOE requests with practical project delivery, especially for teacher housing and other non-classroom needs, and he said the legislature funds the work, SFA must keep projects moving, and the workflow should involve collaboration but also realistic decisions that fit the budget and avoid delays.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> who is the superintendent of the BCA. who is the superintendent of the BCA.
• Superintendent,<00:13:56.560><c> proceed.</c> Superintendent, proceed. Superintendent, proceed.
• </c> Superintendent Evans. Superintendent Evans.
• &gt;&gt; Superintendent<00:58:26.960><c> Evans.</c> &gt;&gt; Superintendent Evans.
• &gt;&gt; Superintendent Evans.

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• accruing 48 hours after a principal or superintendent becomes aware of the misconduct.
• members cannot meet, even with a quorum, unless the superintendent is present.
• Imagine you're a school board member and you're trying to hire a new superintendent.
• who have equivalent STAAR scores, but Superintendent A comes from a very affluent district and Superintendent
• While Superintendent A has 50% of students reading and doing math on grade level, Superintendent B also

Bills: SB2920 , SB2929 , SB2398 , SB865 , SB401 , SB2619 , SB2927 , SB1395 , SB1972 , SB2540 , SB1635 , SB1581 , SB2008

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> please sign in um superintendent please sign in um superintendent McIntyre<00:02:55.159><c> please
• </c> would um we have up next superintendent would um we have up next superintendent David<00:19:09.640
• </c> David law and on Deck superintendent David law and on Deck superintendent Jeff<00:19:12.280><c>
• Superintendent McIntyre, Superintendent Thomas McIntyre, Superintendent Mary Peri Reid from Hopkins-St
• Superintendent McIntyre, Superintendent Thomas McIntyre, Superintendent Mary Peri Reid from Hopkins-St

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So charter school head administrators and superintendents will choose their peers from these two groups
• My name is Wil Hawkins, Superintendent for Silver Consolidated Schools.
• Chair, members of the committee again, Bonnie Lightfoot, School Superintendents' and NEMSA.
• So Superintendent White. Good morning. You have up to two minutes. Welcome. Good morning, Mr.
• I'm the superintendent of schools for Loving Municipal Schools.

Bills: HB30 , HB120 , HJR1 , SB210 , SB306

Committee: House House Education

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 64, which would codify the existing Office of Special Education within the Public Education Department, create a deputy secretary position, and formalize responsibilities for enforcing special education law, monitoring disability protections, and supporting a statewide online IEP system. The sponsor and PED officials said the bill would provide continuity, improve compliance with IDEA, help students who move between schools, and keep gifted education unchanged in its current curriculum-and-instruction placement. An amendment requiring quarterly consultation with superintendents and charter school leaders was also described as a way to improve collaboration and continuous improvement. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive from educators, disability advocates, parents, superintendents, unions, and charter school representatives, who said the bill would improve accountability, transparency, and services for students with disabilities. One parent testified in opposition to the gifted-education language, warning that removing gifted students from the special education umbrella could weaken protections and services. Committee members asked about cost, the office’s current structure, the role of 504 plans, and how the bill would affect military and foster students; PED said the office is already staffed and funded primarily through federal IDEA dollars and that 504 enforcement remains separate, though the office may monitor related protections. The committee then voted do pass. The committee next heard House Bill 256, which would require schools to include cardiac emergency response procedures for athletic activities and ensure AEDs are clearly marked and accessible at those events. Supporters, including the American Heart Association, nurses, and school leaders, emphasized that AEDs and trained staff can dramatically improve survival in sudden cardiac arrest cases. Questions focused on how many AEDs schools would need, whether schools already have them, and how the bill would affect middle school athletics and budgets; the sponsor said schools would determine the best placement, with at least one AED available for athletic events. The committee voted do pass. Finally, the committee heard House Memorial 43, which asks LESC and PED to study how New Mexico and other states measure school performance, including the use of the Lexile reading framework. Superintendents argued that Lexile provides a more consistent, apples-to-apples comparison than some state accountability measures and could better reflect student growth. There was no opposition, members asked about possible study costs, and the memorial passed on a do pass motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• It might be for the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
• Senator Carlson, I will turn it over to the Superintendent.
• I'm Jan Baer, Superintendent for Boundary County School District.
• Okay, we have one other superintendent.
• Superintendent, thank you so much for coming up today to testify.

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• It could be an assistant superintendent, or it could be the superintendent.
• It could be an assistant superintendent or it could be the superintendent. an executive director.
• It could be an assistant superintendent or it could be the superintendent.
• And I've worked with great superintendents and other superintendents.
• And it's also for superintendents.

Committee: House Elementary and Secondary Education

Transcript Highlights:

• That is in the superintendent survey report, and that's in the back of the binder in tab 3C1.
• That is a superintendent question, so we can do that by type of district. Okay, that'll be great.
• And I don't know what our feedback has been from superintendents this time.
• And then some results from our superintendent survey.
• So 71% of superintendents reported that they did.

Summary: The joint education committee continued its adequacy study with a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, covering how Arkansas school districts and charters spend foundation and other funds on matrix and non-matrix items. Staff explained the methodology for mapping expenditures, the district and school categories used in the analysis, and key findings showing that districts spend more per student from all fund sources than the foundation amount alone. The presentation highlighted that classroom teachers account for the largest share of matrix spending, while operations and maintenance, student support staff, nurses, and other lines also drew significant attention. Members asked for additional breakdowns by district type, size, rural/urban status, and trend data, and several questions focused on how waivers affect funding and spending, especially for library media specialists and other positions. The committee then discussed non-matrix spending, including instructional aids, non-technology-related facilities, school safety, mental health services, dyslexia support, food service, gifted and talented, career and technical education, and other items not explicitly defined in the matrix. Staff reported that non-matrix spending exceeded $2 billion in 2025, with most of it coming from other fund sources, and that the top superintendent-identified unmet needs over recent surveys were mental health services, school safety, and dyslexia support. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, possible over-identification, and whether some support costs are being coded in ways that obscure the true spending picture. There was also discussion of facilities funding, the building fund, and the Department of Education’s partnership program for school construction and maintenance, with staff agreeing to provide more information and potentially bring department officials back for a future meeting. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly requested more granular data and clarifications, including waiver counts and funding impacts, trend lines for superintendent-reported needs, district-by-district spending spreadsheets, and definitions for certain matrix and accounting terms such as salary enhancement, LEA indebtedness, and other employee health insurance. The chair noted that the committee would continue the adequacy process over the coming months and use the worksheet in the binder to develop recommendations for the next biennium. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; instead, the committee received the report, asked for follow-up data, and agreed to continue the discussion at future meetings.