Transcript Highlights:

• It's the students.
• > to<00:05:08.160> be<00:05:08.320> students students that that happen to be students
• Representative Schultz. Representative Schultz.
• Representative<00:09:57.440> Schultz. Representative Schultz. Representative Schultz.
• Representative >> Any further discussion? Representative Lawrence.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Blanca here, Representative Dunkley here, Representative Gerwig Representative Hinson
• Representative McFarland here, Representative Michael here, Representative Oliver here, representative
• He represents the student academic success. She's been. Here's a red. Thank you.
• Representative Anderson Road down here and in a spot on we won't well-rounded students and will around
• We want to make sure, as Representative Anderson said there, we put in 30,000 student athletes in the

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Decker said that the bill specifically and explicitly exempts student centers and supports
• , low-income students, non-traditional students, transfer students from KCTCS, or the students with unique
• I'm not speaking on behalf of the University of Louisville, and I'm here to represent the Kentucky Student
• , Black and Latino students, veterans, low-income students, and students with disabilities.
• , Black and Latino students, veterans, low-income students, and students with disabilities.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met with a quorum and first considered two concurrent resolutions. SCR 76, sponsored by Sen. Amanda Bledsoe, would create a Kentucky School for the Deaf Governance Task Force to examine the school’s future governance and its relationship with the Kentucky Department of Education. Bledsoe described the school’s long history and said the task force would give the small deaf-school community more voice. The committee adopted the resolution unanimously with favorable expression. The committee then took up SCR 131, sponsored by Sen. Max Wise, to continue the Efficient and Effective Districts Task Force from 2024. Wise said the prior task force met about 10 times and focused on student achievement and district policy, and the new version would continue that work as a legislature-only task force. The resolution passed unanimously with favorable expression. Members next considered HB 240 on primary school promotion. Rep. Truitt explained that the bill would require students who are not ready in kindergarten to repeat kindergarten, while a committee substitute softened the approach by allowing a school to hold a child back in kindergarten but requiring action in first grade. He said the bill aligns with existing reading-screening efforts and is intended to strengthen early literacy foundations. The committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill unanimously with favorable expression; Sen. Williams briefly explained his support as favoring performance-based advancement. The committee also approved HB 298, which would change the identification of schools for comprehensive support and improvement from every three years to annually, require KDE recommendations during management audits, add professional development in reading and math, and require effective instructional resources. The committee substitute also allowed districts with multiple CSI schools to contract for a turnaround vendor. The bill additionally carried employee-misconduct provisions from prior sessions, including disclosure requirements for applicants; the only change discussed was removing the word “investigation” from one disclosure section. HB 298 passed unanimously with favorable expression, and the committee also adopted a title amendment. Finally, the committee heard HB 424 on employment at public postsecondary institutions. Rep. Tipton said the bill would require performance and productivity reviews for faculty at least every four years, clarify appointment and removal authority for presidents at certain institutions, and expand “cause” for dismissal to include failure to meet performance and productivity requirements. Dr. Ray Horton, speaking for faculty groups, proposed a small substitute that would tie any performance measures to existing employment contracts to preserve academic integrity and avoid unintended changes to tenure processes. Members discussed how tenure works at Kentucky universities, and the committee was still in the middle of considering the proposed substitute when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• proficient students.
• proficient students.
• And then we have the Yazoo Martinez case where nearly 70 of our students are represented in those subgroups
• Chair, and representative.
• Chair, and representative.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Representative Dela Cruz.
• I'm State Representative Joy Garratt.
• If it's students who...
• No, sir, representative.
• I represent 110 chapters.

Transcript Highlights:

• So next up, we have representatives from the North Dakota Student Association.
• represent the entirety of the NDUS system of students to this committee and what we've been working
• represent the entirety of the NDUS system of students to this committee and what we've been working
• Students are fed.
• The student representative asked for student advising to make sure students were not enrolling in a program

Summary: The committee met at Dakota College at Bottineau, approved the January 15, 2026 minutes, and heard an extensive campus update from Dean Corey Gorder and other DCB leaders. Gorder described the college’s affiliation with Minot State and its growing use of shared services, including business office functions, HR, institutional research, Title IX, printing, financial aid support through UND, and payroll support through NDSU. He said the arrangement lets DCB focus on its core mission while relying on system partners for specialized administrative work, and noted that accreditation concerns were not believed to limit those shared-service arrangements. He also highlighted DCB’s mission, enrollment growth, dual-credit reach across rural schools, and the college’s emphasis on nursing, dental, paramedic, farm management, and other workforce-oriented programs. Committee members asked detailed questions about dual credit, program delivery, and whether DCB’s partnerships were exclusive. Gorder said the relationships are generally collaborative rather than exclusive, that schools can choose other providers, and that many partnerships began through personal outreach and ongoing relationships with rural schools. Lisa Johnson of the university system added that transfer complaints are rare and that dual credit generally transfers well within North Dakota, though highly selective out-of-state institutions may treat credits differently. Members also asked about stipends for high school instructors, the share of K-12 versus DCB instructors, and the capacity limits in dental hygiene and other programs. Gorder said dental hygiene is capped by space and staffing, that there were more applicants than seats, and that expansion is being considered; he also said he would provide follow-up information on the paramedic program and instructor breakdowns. Gorder closed by identifying long-term challenges, including aging residence halls, recruiting faculty and staff, and the need to review low-enrollment programs. He said DCB should consider expanding into more high-demand trades such as welding, HVAC, and electrical work, and should streamline dual credit and strengthen its Minot programming. The committee then heard from the North Dakota Student Association, whose leaders outlined student priorities from the last session and the interim. Their main concerns included campus housing quality and affordability, food insecurity and food pantries, mental and physical health resources, student-led research funding, academic and career readiness, internships, and campus collaboration. They also discussed dual credit, saying it is valuable but uneven across the state, and raised questions about how to better retain students in North Dakota through the system. Members asked follow-up questions about housing, transferability of dual credit, and whether incentives could be used to encourage students to stay in-state for higher education.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am Representative Sean Garballey, the State Representative from the 23rd Middlesex District, representing
• Representative Moakley, Representative Luddy, Representative Wong, and I know we will have other members
• to these students and their right to be seen and represented—it's not a game or a political gimmick.
• It protects educators acting in good faith and ensures students' freedom to read and feel represented
• I want our students to be able to see themselves and to have their experiences validated and represented

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on several bills related to access to library materials, including measures addressing book bans and censorship in public and school libraries, as well as legislation on digital library collections and e-book licensing. Committee leaders said testimony would be limited to three minutes and encouraged written submissions. Early testimony from Chair Brian Murray highlighted H. 3595, which would address challenges facing public libraries and digital resource collections by limiting restrictive publisher-library contract terms, protecting patron confidentiality, and creating a special legislative commission to study the issue. A large number of legislators, librarians, authors, students, publishers, and advocacy groups testified in support of the free expression bills, including H. 3594 and S. 2328, arguing that book challenges in Massachusetts disproportionately target LGBTQ+ and BIPOC titles and that librarians and educators need protection from retaliation and harassment. Witnesses described local incidents of book removals, threats, and pressure campaigns, and several said the bills would create transparent challenge procedures, keep materials available during reviews, and ensure decisions are made by trained professionals rather than political actors. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley’s office also submitted support, and multiple speakers cited national trends and Massachusetts-specific censorship attempts. Testimony on the digital access bills emphasized that e-books and audiobooks are essential for readers with disabilities, homebound patrons, students, and others who rely on accessible formats, but that current licensing terms are far more expensive and restrictive than print purchasing. Library representatives said libraries spend millions on digital content, face long wait times for popular titles, and often must repeatedly re-rent the same materials. Legal and library experts supported the proposed commission as a practical step toward fairer licensing and stronger bargaining power for libraries. The hearing ended after extensive testimony; no votes or final committee action were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think they are proposing that Representative Berg be replaced with Representative Berg.
• Some students automatically apply, or some students automatically are eligible, yes. Mr.
• Representative Hager said she wanted to respond to Representative Bosch's question.
• Representative Halk and then Representative Bosch. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Representative Halk and then Representative Bosch. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Summary: The Legislative Management Committee met to address the fiscal impact of Initiated Constitutional Measure No. 3, which would require public schools, public school districts, and public charter schools to provide breakfast and lunch at no cost to students and allow reimbursement from the state, with implementation beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The committee first filled a vacancy created by Representative Jared Hagert’s resignation by appointing Representative Berg to the committee. Legislative Council and DPI staff explained the measure’s requirements, including federal reimbursement participation, possible use of the legacy earnings fund if other funding is unavailable, and the authority of the Legislature and superintendent of public instruction to clarify implementation details. Linnell Johnson of DPI testified that the estimated fiscal impact for the 2027-2029 biennium is between $124 million and $134 million, based on participation assumptions, federal reimbursement rates, and the extent to which schools continue to collect applications or use community eligibility/provision 2 options. She also noted a likely additional administrative cost of about $300,000 for DPI to operate the program. Members asked about school participation, Title I implications, special diets, staffing, and whether the measure could reduce federal reimbursements if families stop applying. Johnson said the estimate is uncertain and could be higher if applications decline, but that schools would still have incentives to participate in federal programs because of reimbursement and other funding ties. After discussion, the committee adopted a motion to report a fiscal impact range of $124,300,000 to $134,300,000 per biennium to the Secretary of State. The committee then received an informational update from Legislative Council attorney Dustin Richard on the ongoing redistricting litigation. He explained that the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back for reconsideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais, while the district court-imposed map remains in effect for now. No action was taken on that update, and the meeting adjourned after members noted minutes from the prior meeting were not yet available for approval.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:02.320> representative<00:30:02.919> Cornell<00:30:03.919> thank students
• representative Cornell thank students representative Cornell thank you<00:30:04.240> mam<00:30
• :01:20.280> representative representative tenar yes representative representative tenar yes representative
• > representative Representative kuger no representative Representative kuger no representative
• :06:38.440> representative representative tenar yes representative representative tenar yes representative

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Policy Committee opened a hearing on HB 748, which would establish a local education freedom account (EFA) program. The prime sponsor, Rep. Kevin Verville, described the bill as enabling legislation that would let local voters decide whether to create a local EFA program by petition and ballot vote, with a 60% threshold to approve or repeal it. He argued that public education is about funding rather than a specific school building, said the proposal would expand parental choice, and cited Deerfield’s move from a single high school option to multiple tuitioned options as an example of local flexibility. Verville said the local EFA would be funded at twice the state adequacy amount, with the district matching the state portion, while other aid categories such as free and reduced meals, English language learner, and special education aid would not be doubled. He said students using a local EFA would still count in average daily membership, that unspent EFA funds would revert to the district, and that the bill would prohibit double-dipping with other scholarship or EFA programs. He also said special education services would remain under district discretion and that local EFA participants would still take statewide assessments for accountability. Committee members pressed him on several issues, especially special education, transportation, and fairness. Rep. Woodcock and Rep. Murray asked whether districts would still have to provide special education and transportation services if a student used a local EFA; Verville responded that special education would remain in the local district at district discretion, while transportation would generally become the family’s responsibility unless already required in an IEP. Rep. Cornell raised an equity concern about no income eligibility cap, asking whether higher-income families should receive the same public support; Verville replied that New Hampshire does not means-test public education and that the local EFA is a public funding mechanism, not a tuition subsidy that would cover full private-school costs. No vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to welcome, to my left, Representative John Marcy, who is our Ranking Member; Representative Judith
• Well, thank you, Representative Gordon.
• , and educators, and this has a direct impact on our most vulnerable high-needs students and students
• There are classrooms, and there are quite a few students, and there needs... ...just one student.
• ESPs work directly with some of the most vulnerable students, students who need the highest levels of

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with most testimony focused on two main topics: improving access to augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) for students with disabilities, and raising educator pay statewide. On the AAC bills (House 514/Senate 418), parents, advocates, and attorneys described how AAC devices and communication books help nonverbal or minimally verbal children communicate, participate in class, and reduce frustration and behavioral issues. Testimony emphasized that while districts are generally required to provide devices, many teachers and school staff lack training to use them effectively; the bill would direct DESE to update licensure and training requirements so newly licensed teachers are prepared to support AAC users. Committee members asked about current teacher-prep practices, implementation, and whether DESE could act without legislation, and witnesses said the proposal was intended as a long-term solution and had previously received some support and compromise language. The committee also heard extensive testimony on House 733/Senate 370, which would set a statewide minimum salary of $70,000 for teachers and $55,000 for education support professionals (ESPs/paras), with inflation adjustments and a phase-in structure that would shift costs over time from the state to municipalities. Supporters, including the bill sponsor, MTA leaders, and school employees from several districts, argued that current pay is not a living wage, contributes to staffing shortages and turnover, and forces many educators to work multiple jobs or rely on public assistance. They said the bill would help recruit and retain staff and better reflect the importance of the work. Committee members raised questions about how the state would fund the mandate, how it would interact with Chapter 70 school aid and local budgets, whether other states have similar mechanisms, and whether the proposal could create disincentives for districts already paying above the floor. Witnesses pointed to the Student Opportunity Act, the Fair Share Amendment, and the need for a broader school funding formula review as possible parts of the solution. The committee also briefly heard and discussed Senate Bill 435/House Bill 736, which would require de-escalation training for school bus operators, with the training paid for by employers. The sponsor and a parent advocate said the bill was prompted by a school bus incident involving a child with cerebral palsy and epilepsy and would improve safety and reduce reliance on law enforcement. Members asked whether the bill should also cover bus monitors and other transportation staff, and whether private contractors and public operators currently provide similar training. At the end of the hearing, the chairs closed testimony on the full list of bills and adjourned the hearing without taking any votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think they are proposing that Representative Berg be replaced with Representative Berg.
• Some students automatically apply, or some students automatically are eligible, yes. Mr.
• Representative Hager and then Representative Bosch. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Representative Halk and then Representative Bosch. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• I'm going back to Representative Hager's statement about the Title I, with the direct certification students

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Coulter, uh your bill significantly impacts many Minnesota students, but in fact, to my
• Representative Coulter, uh your bill significantly impacts many Minnesota students, but in fact, to my
• Representative Coulter, uh your bill significantly impacts many Minnesota students, but in fact, to my
• Representative Coulter, uh your bill significantly impacts many Minnesota students, but in fact, to my
• It would tell us, Representative Coulter, how Minnesota students would benefit from this.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up House File 4252, the higher education finance and policy bill, which the author described as a bipartisan agreement. Representative Wolgamott highlighted a $1.5 million appropriation to Minnesota State to create an identification verification system to combat “ghost students,” a one-time $5,000 appropriation for trees at Bemidji State University, and other noncontroversial recommendations from the Office of Higher Education. He urged support for the bill and noted that amendments would be considered. The main debate centered on an amendment by Representative Rarick to change how University of Minnesota regents are selected if the legislature fails to elect them. Rarick argued the amendment would keep the governor from appointing regents outside the legislative vetting process and prevent “pay-to-play” or donor influence, citing recent gubernatorial appointments and campaign contributions. Representative Kotter offered a secondary amendment to require that any fallback appointees meet RCAC eligibility criteria and to bar candidates who had recently contributed to legislative caucuses or leadership; supporters said it would reduce the appearance of pay-to-play while preserving the RCAC process. Opponents of the secondary amendment, including Representatives Robbins and others, argued it did not address the real concern because it did not restrict contributions to the governor and would weaken the legislature’s role in regent selection. Supporters of the secondary amendment said it was a more objective, statute-based approach and raised separation-of-powers concerns with the underlying amendment. After debate, the secondary amendment failed on a 67-67 tie and was not adopted. The House then continued discussion on the underlying Rarick amendment, with members divided over legislative authority, gubernatorial appointment power, and the influence of campaign donations.

Transcript Highlights:

• student, perhaps even a lot of students. student, perhaps even a lot of students.
• Representative<01:18:00.239> Belony. Representative Belony. Representative Belony.
• <03:34:41.279> to student, or parents of students to student, or parents of students to declare
• Representative<04:20:23.120> Murray. Representative Murray. Representative Murray.
• Representative Selig asked whether the phrase “aggrieved person,” including a student or parent, would

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative<00:24:46.679> Smith. Representative Smith. Representative Smith.
• Representative<00:25:26.840> Smith. Representative Smith. Representative Smith.
• Representative<00:40:54.760> Nadeau. Representative Nadeau. Representative Nadeau.
• . represented. represented.
• Representative Baker. Representative Baker.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, that funding varies by student depending on the students they serve.
• Chairman, Representative Baca, so the four student groups—Native Americans, students with IEPs, English
• Is this for all students? Mr.
• And as Representative Baca said, the student voices—I've had a president of DECA, and I've had a president
• that we hear from students.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Nathe. Mr.
• So these are like med students, pharmacy students, law students.
• the day, it's about the students.
• Progression milestones, that's what represents the approximately $750 per milestone that students are
• Thank you, Representative Hanson.

Summary: The Higher Education Funding Review Committee met to continue work on a draft higher education funding formula and related capital building fund changes. Lisa Johnson of the North Dakota University System updated the committee on the board’s developing policy for low-producing academic programs. She said the board is using a five-year rolling window, with thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, and that programs flagged in three consecutive review cycles would go to the board for review. Possible outcomes include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the policy would account for enrollment, program costs, workforce need, and programs that serve students outside their major. Johnson said the board would likely use an accompanying procedure to consider those factors. She also reported that about 200 programs could potentially be reviewed under current guidance, with 135 inactivated and 112 terminated, and said the process is intended to support quality and stewardship rather than simply cut programs. Jamie Wilkie then reported on the Capital Building Fund. He reviewed the fund’s history, matching requirements, and use for extraordinary repairs, deferred maintenance, and some legislatively authorized projects. He said about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with roughly 78.7% going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Committee members pressed for updated information on how much deferred maintenance has actually been reduced, and several members said they wanted clearer reporting on the return on investment from new buildings versus repairs. NDSU representatives said the tier funding has helped significantly reduce deferred maintenance and allowed demolition and renovation work on campus. The committee also discussed the need for updated five-year facility plans and space-utilization information from the institutions. The committee then began a section-by-section review of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and restructure the capital building fund. The draft would fund UND and NDSU differently from the other nine institutions, use fall enrollment rather than completed credits, add performance funding for completions in in-demand fields, create research incentives for UND and NDSU, and combine capital building fund tiers while changing matching requirements and eligible uses. Members raised concerns about the treatment of professional students, the use of CIP codes, incentives for waivers, and whether the formula should rely on more current data. The committee did not take final action on the draft during this meeting, but it continued detailed discussion and indicated more review would follow.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Cross. Representative Cross: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• Representative.
• Representative, why are we cutting weight funding for accelerated program incentives that helps students
• Representative, why are we cutting weight funding for accelerated program incentives that helps students
• Representative Greco, I'm a representative. Representative Rayner, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present, then adopted the special order report and moved into a series of budget-related bills. The chamber first took up HB 5011/SB 2506 on environmental resource management and natural resources funding, where Democrats argued the bill would reduce recurring support for the Resilient Florida program, the Florida Wildlife Corridor, invasive species removal, and other conservation efforts. Supporters said the change would shift money from recurring to nonrecurring funding so the Legislature could reassess priorities each year and rely more on private-sector stewardship. After a strike-all amendment and conference posture change, SB 2506 passed 97-12. HB 5013, reducing state-funded property reinsurance reserves, passed 108-0, and HB 5501, redirecting documentary stamp tax distributions from housing and transportation trust funds into general revenue, passed 82-26 after extended debate over its impact on affordable housing and transportation funding. The House also passed HB 5015 on state group insurance, which requires DMS to develop a formulary management system and was described as producing significant savings; members raised concerns about prescription access and implementation, but the bill passed 109-0. HB 5201 on state financial accounting and HB 5203 on the Capitol Center both passed unanimously, as did HB 5009, which creates a Florida Accountability Office and reorganizes audit functions. The chamber then passed HB 7031, a major sales tax reduction bill lowering the state sales tax rate and several related rates; supporters framed it as permanent relief for all Floridians, while opponents said property tax relief would be more meaningful and that the sales tax cut would also benefit tourists and out-of-state visitors. HB 7031 passed 112-0. The House then began consideration of HB 501, the proposed fiscal year 2025-26 budget, totaling $112.9 billion and emphasizing reduced recurring spending and large reserves. Subcommittee chairs outlined their budget silos: K-12 education at $20.6 billion with teacher raises, school hardening, literacy, transportation stipends, and security funding for Jewish day schools; health care at $47 billion with full Medicaid and KidCare funding, opioid settlement spending, mental health beds, and senior services; transportation/economic development at $18.5 billion; agriculture and natural resources at $5.8 billion with reduced Everglades spending but continued water, resiliency, and land management funding; higher education at $8.7 billion; state administration at $2.9 billion; justice at $7.3 billion; and IT at $529 million for Florida PALM, FX, and other systems. Members then began questioning the K-12 budget, focusing on FEFP funding, proration, voucher growth, stabilization dollars, mental health and school safety funding, and whether districts would be held harmless under the proposed allocations.

Transcript Highlights:

• 870 students. 870 students.
• . students. students. 870<00:08:21.360> students.
• Particularly in smaller districts, I represent many smaller districts, the one or two students who have
• Uh, as Representative Damon said, we're doing a better job of identifying students.
• > of Um, Representative Lad spoke of overidentification of students, and I wanted to speak to

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We talked about the health of students and how important it was to make sure that students have a full
• administration and there was students administration and there was students that<00:37:04.599>
• that came to test there were students that came to test there were students that<00:37:06.200>
• Representative? Thank you, Senator.
• <00:51:51.599> can take four courses a year students can take four courses a year students

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I work as a tour guide and an admissions representative, so I interact with prospective students and
• And as a student and representative of the class of '29, we do not want this bill to pass.
• And as a student and representative of the class of '29, we do not want this bill to pass.
• /c><04:25:27.680> representative<04:25:28.159> of And as a student and representative of
• And as a student and representative of the<04:25:28.479> class<04:25:28.720> of<04:25:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all