Transcript Highlights:

• in small school districts.
• in small school districts.
• Our districts tend to be very small.
• So district supports: we think about instruction. It's so important to our rural districts.
• Small and rural districts face the same challenges our urban districts do.

Summary: The Senate Education Pre-K-12 Committee met to discuss the needs of rural school districts and the role of Florida’s three regional education consortia: the Panhandle Area Education Consortium, Northeast Florida Educational Consortium, and Heartland Educational Consortium. Executive directors and several rural superintendents described the consortia as member-led organizations that provide shared services, professional learning, leadership development, grant support, cooperative purchasing, risk management, IT/cybersecurity help, and back-office assistance that small districts could not afford to provide on their own. They emphasized that rural districts are often very small, have limited staff, and must still meet the same state reporting and compliance requirements as large urban systems. Testimony focused heavily on teacher recruitment and retention, alternative certification, and the difficulty of staffing specialized roles such as CFOs, MIS directors, IT staff, and content-area teachers. Superintendents said many new hires are career changers or alternatively certified teachers who need consortium-supported training, and several argued for more flexibility in funding so districts can raise salaries and compete with neighboring districts and nearby states. Members also asked about the impact of declining enrollment, homeschooling, and voucher-related school choice; superintendents said those trends are reducing FTE and creating budget instability, while also requiring districts to right-size staff and programs. Several speakers described the financial strain on rural districts, including rising insurance costs, transportation costs, and the challenge of forecasting budgets when enrollment changes after the school year begins. One superintendent recounted major hurricane damage and said consortium risk-management support was essential to recovery. Others said the consortia help districts pool resources for property and health insurance, payroll, student data systems, and procurement, and that this shared approach saves money and improves services. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• six districts that were inactive.
• Two of the districts within this category assigned their authority to another district.
• Another district.
• Of the 15 active districts, 14 of the districts prioritized public safety as their main objective.
• We identified six districts.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to consider several audit requests and enforcement items involving local governments and special districts. The committee approved operational audits of the City of Miami Beach, the Delray Beach Downtown Development Authority, and the City of Daytona Beach. In each case, the requesting member described concerns about transparency, financial management, or internal controls, while local officials or representatives generally said they were willing to cooperate and, in Delray Beach’s case, noted that an internal audit had already been completed and that some issues were being corrected. The committee also received a presentation on the statewide review of neighborhood improvement districts. The reviewers reported that 15 of 21 districts were active and six inactive, with common findings including outdated or missing performance plans, weak web presence, inadequate meeting notices, and limited management mechanisms. They said staffing levels often correlated with the ability to meet statutory requirements, and they recommended updates to district governance and transparency practices. On enforcement, staff reviewed local governments and special districts that had failed to file required financial reports or had submitted audit reports missing required information. The committee approved staff recommendations to proceed under the statutory enforcement process for the noncompliant entities, with flexibility for the chair and vice chair to delay action if additional information is provided in good faith. The committee also voted to send a letter to the Union County Legislative Delegation encouraging a local bill to dissolve the Town of Rayford, based on staff’s view that the town lacked employees, services, debt, and a clear reason to continue existing as an incorporated municipality.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it appears that it's a lot of movement within districts, charter districts, and traditional districts
• So most of that is going to those charter districts. district would.
• So it appears that it's a lot of movement within districts, charter districts, and traditional districts
• It can be from a traditional district to another traditional district.
• It can be from a traditional district to another traditional district.

Summary: The committee approved the March 9 and 10 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Arkansas Department of Education on the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship, featuring three third-grade teachers from Cabot, Poyen, and Drew Central who are also teacher merit pay recipients. The teachers described the fellowship as a year-long Zoom-based collaboration with about 23 educators statewide, focused on sharing classroom strategies, data use, and professional support. Members asked about the teachers’ experience, how they share what they learn with their districts, the range of grades represented in the fellowship, and the relationship between the fellowship and merit pay. The teachers emphasized building relationships with students, using data to drive instruction, early intervention, and collaboration across grade levels, while the secretary said the program is intended to identify and elevate high-performing teachers and spread their practices. A major portion of the discussion focused on third-grade reading, retention, and the new ATLAS testing system. Teachers and the secretary said students are screened and progress monitored throughout the year, families are notified early if students are at risk, and schools are using interventions, tutoring, and individualized reading plans. They said ATLAS results are now available much faster than in the past, often within 24 hours or a few days, allowing teachers and parents to respond quickly. Members asked about the impact of poverty, trauma, foster care, DHS involvement, IEPs, and critical shortage areas; teachers said relationship-building, small-group instruction, and coordination with counselors and special education staff are key. The secretary said the fellowship is a small subset of a broader merit pay program, that participation was voluntary, and that the state is trying to build a coherent system with literacy coaches, high-impact tutoring, and clearer standards rather than teaching to the test. Members also discussed broader policy issues, including the need for more positive public messaging about public education, teacher input in decision-making, and support for early childhood education. Several legislators asked whether the state should expand funding for early learning and whether more literacy or academic coaches are needed in districts that improve and then lose eligibility for state support. The secretary said the state has committed literacy coaches to D and F schools and is still working through how to sustain support as schools improve. He also said the administration would look at data and return on investment before supporting additional funding, and he encouraged legislators to help recruit eligible teachers into future fellowship cohorts. After the teacher panel concluded, the committee moved on to the adequacy resource allocation study, where Bureau of Legislative Research staff began a presentation on state and local education funding sources, categorical funds, and district spending patterns.

Transcript Highlights:

• For each of the districts, we provided 21 separate reports, one for each district, as well as a 22nd
• six districts that were inactive.
• Two of the districts within this category assigned their authority to another district.
• Of the 15 active districts, 14 of the districts prioritized public safety as their main objective.
• While the district activities were largely within the scope of the statutory purpose, the districts'

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to consider several audit requests and enforcement items related to local government accountability. The committee heard requests for operational audits of the City of Miami Beach, the Delray Beach Downtown Development Authority, and the City of Daytona Beach. In each case, the requesting member cited concerns about transparency, financial management, or compliance with state law. Representatives from Delray Beach DDA testified that an internal audit had already been completed, that findings were limited, and that they were working to cure issues such as procurement, credit card, and disbursement policies; the DDA chair also said the organization was willing to cooperate and was considering transitioning out of operating Old School Square. For Daytona Beach, the sponsor pointed to excess building permit revenues, vehicle purchases, and reported P-card irregularities as reasons for a broader audit. The committee approved all three audit requests, directing the Auditor General to finalize the scope while considering the stated concerns. The committee also received a presentation on the statewide performance reviews of 21 neighborhood improvement districts. The reviewers reported that 15 districts were active and six inactive, with common issues including outdated or missing performance plans, weak web presence, inadequate meeting notices, and limited management mechanisms. They said staffing levels often correlated with the ability to meet statutory requirements, and recommended that several districts be reviewed to determine whether they were still needed. Members asked about staffing, inactivity criteria, and how the districts were administered, and staff explained that city or county liaisons often supplement district staffing. Later, staff reviewed enforcement actions for local governments that failed to file required financial reports or omitted required information from submitted audits. The committee discussed a list of noncompliant counties, municipalities, and special districts, including the town of Rayford, which staff said had long-standing reporting problems, no apparent municipal services, and no response to repeated outreach. The committee voted to send a letter to the Union County legislative delegation encouraging a local bill to dissolve Rayford. It also approved staff recommendations to proceed against entities still missing required filings or missing audit information, with authority for the chair and vice chair to delay action if additional information is later provided in good faith.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was wondering how we chose those school districts and also how many school districts applied.
• Additionally, districts and charters with a letter grade had more teachers Districts and charters with
• left because I left a district and went to another district?
• district?
• ...districts, back to the smaller school district, is that possibly influencing this data?

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a presentation from Legislative Audit on Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions. Auditors explained that the fiscal year 2025 report summarizes $4.6 billion in grants from state, federal, and miscellaneous sources, across school districts, charter schools, education cooperatives, and other entities, and that the report only shows amounts distributed, not how recipients ultimately used the money. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; department staff clarified that the Economics Arkansas grant is written into special language and that the CDC-related funding supports student surveys used by state agencies. Questions also focused on bonus and incentive programs such as master principal and National Board Certified teacher bonuses, with department staff saying the bonuses are generally tied to completion of the program or certification rather than classroom performance, though they would follow up on details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research update on Consumer Price Index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global. Dr. Carlos Silva explained the difference between CPI-U and core CPI and said the estimates show inflation slowing over the forecast period, with some near-term variation between the two data providers. Members asked about the historical accuracy of prior projections, and he said the forecasts generally tend to move toward about 2 percent over time, though recent shocks have caused earlier estimates to understate actual inflation. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reviewed Arkansas teacher demographics, shortage areas, educator preparation pipelines, licensure exceptions, survey results from teachers and principals, and teacher support programs. They reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with an average of 11.9 years of experience and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found shortages in multiple subject areas, especially special education, math, science, foreign language, and social studies, and identified 65 districts as high-need geographically. Survey results showed school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the biggest negatives; 30 percent of responding teachers said they were considering leaving the profession. The committee also reviewed teacher salary data showing a statewide average salary of $60,254 in 2025, Arkansas ranking 45th nationally by NEA methodology, and a long-term inflation-adjusted decline in district salaries, though LEARNS Act increases improved the trend. Members asked for additional follow-up information on survey methodology, alternative licensure costs, coursework, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, exit data, and how salary comparisons are calculated.

Transcript Highlights:

• And for some districts, these make up the majority, if not all, of the district.
• So it appears that it's a lot of movement within districts, charter districts, and traditional districts
• One note in... ...districts, charter districts, and traditional districts.
• to another. districts charter districts and traditional districts one note in 2023 the legislature removed
• Okay, so it could be from a traditional district to another traditional district.

Summary: The committee first approved the March 9 and 10 minutes, then heard a presentation from the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship Program featuring three third-grade teachers from Poyen, Drew Central, and Cabot, along with Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva. The teachers described the fellowship as a year-long collaboration among 23 merit-pay recipients from across the state, focused on sharing classroom strategies, data use, and professional support. Members asked about teacher experience, how the fellowship information is shared locally, the role of merit pay, and how teachers are addressing third-grade reading and retention concerns under the ATLAS assessment system. The teachers emphasized early intervention, relationships with students, small-group instruction, progress monitoring, and communication with families; they also described community supports such as churches, food backpacks, and local donations. Several members raised broader questions about poverty, trauma, social services, DHS involvement, and whether similar professional learning should be expanded to more teachers. Secretary Oliva said the fellowship is a small subset of a larger merit-pay program, that participation was voluntary, and that the state is working to improve literacy supports, clarity, and alignment across grades. He also said ATLAS results are now available to schools and families much faster than in the past, often within 24 to 72 hours, and that the state is using the data to identify at-risk students earlier and support intervention before retention decisions are made. The committee then moved to the adequacy/resource allocation presentation from the Bureau of Legislative Research. Staff explained that the report is part of the statutory adequacy review and focuses on state funding sources beyond foundation aid, including categorical and supplemental funds. They noted that districts and charters spent more than $7 billion in the 2025 school year, with roughly 49% from foundation funding and 51% from other sources over the last three years. The presentation outlined the four categorical funds—Alternative Learning Environment, English Learners, Enhanced Student Achievement, and Professional Development—describing their restricted uses, student-based funding formulas, and the ability of districts to transfer some money among categoricals while keeping it within allowable purposes. Staff said categorical funds account for about 4% of total spending, or less than $300 million, and reviewed superintendent feedback on whether those funds met district needs, with responses varying by category and district.

Transcript Highlights:

• school districts apply.
• If we break that out by districts and charters, the district average was very similar at $60,458, and
• 72, average teacher salaries at districts based on various district-level attributes.
• leaving that district.
• We want to help districts do that.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.

Transcript Highlights:

• children and many districts most children and many districts most districts<00:36:36.200> in<
• we<00:59:33.000> do District rural District when we do District rural District when we do
• my district of 150 sick days or even more in some districts.
• my district of 150 sick days or even more in some districts.
• > to<01:19:25.880> lose district district is projected to lose district district is projected

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As you and I both talked about many times, districts have diverse needs, district to district.
• can only qualify for the enhanced TIA program if they are already a TIA-approved district. district.
• there are districts where.
• But these districts that we labeled at 5,000 students and under represent 80,000. 3% of the districts
• We give them a to $10,000, any district over $5,000. and ADA, we give those districts, those teachers

Bills: SB26, SB28, SJR36, SB26, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB28

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, lottery, gambling, internet gaming, mobile application, criminal offenses, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, compliance agreement

Transcript Highlights:

• districts.
• that were coalition districts or majority minority districts?
• I live in the 18th Congressional District. District.
• That's TX9, House District 27, and Senate District 13.
• District 14.

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we have, uh, no public meetings within our district. We're a small district.
• as opposed to, uh, in the, uh, district itself, uh, outside of the district.
• OK, we met last this month in our district. We had 2 people in the district to attend.
• I don't in my district.
• My district and all districts in Rockwall and Kaufman counties.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you know from these districts?
• district and charter spending.
• districts.
• So it appears that it's a lot of movement within districts, charter districts, and traditional districts
• It could be from a traditional district to another traditional district.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• This is awesome stuff because it let you compare district to district.
• district budget? district budget?
• <00:45:01.680> then<00:45:02.000> district within the same district, then district within

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The support of the district.
• Allegations as it relates to our school districts, our public school districts.
• District had on.
• Districts are pressured.
• The school district has no control over the county appraisal district.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• or Senate district.
• the district is to draw a district that has lines that... ...draw a district that has lines that would
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• and House districts?

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you want the amounts for each district or just the district names?
• district names?
• In our district.
• In my district, I have nine school districts, seven of which...
• know the district, who care for the district, who carry the pulse of the district in their hearts, minds

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's broken down into district and non-district production.
• District.
• district.
• This district was... This district was created in 2001.
• district, yes.

Summary: The committee held a hearing on high-capacity groundwater wells proposed in Anderson, Henderson, and Houston counties, with members framing the issue as one of local water supply, fairness, and the need to modernize groundwater law while protecting private property rights. Opening remarks focused on the scale of the proposed Redtown Ranch and Pine Bliss projects, the potential export of tens of thousands of acre-feet of groundwater annually, and concerns that the applications lacked sufficient technical detail and could harm nearby landowners, cities, agriculture, and manufacturing. Members also noted the broader context of the recent flooding tragedy in central Texas and the Legislature’s intent to address water-related loss of life in the upcoming special session. Witnesses from the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts and the Texas Water Development Board explained the current groundwater management framework. They described groundwater conservation districts as the state’s preferred management method, the role of groundwater management areas and desired future conditions, and how the Water Development Board uses those conditions to calculate modeled available groundwater. They emphasized that districts rely on local data, monitoring wells, and planning processes, but that information is often more limited in areas without a district, where the rule of capture applies. Members pressed witnesses on recharge rates, export permits, subsidence, the effect of pumping on nearby wells, the age and real-time availability of model data, and whether the proposed project would exceed modeled available groundwater in some counties. TCEQ explained its limited oversight role over groundwater conservation districts, including inquiries, compliance actions, and, in extreme cases, dissolution authority. Water Development Board staff also outlined funding programs, saying the New Water Supply for Texas Fund is limited to projects such as brackish desalination, reuse, ASR, and other new-supply projects, and does not fund fresh groundwater exports alone. They said the project at issue had not applied for board funding. A water lawyer then testified on the rule of capture, ownership in place, and district regulation, arguing that districts must use permitting and other tools to manage production within modeled available groundwater and that the Legislature could consider additional authority over groundwater exports under current law.

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe they're in your district, or your district. is next to them.
• district.
• If you don't have a groundwater district, you may consider creating a groundwater district. water district
• The district rules.
• of their district.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or Senate district.
• 5 and Congressional District 6.
• Congressional District 5 and Congressional District 6.
• into that district.
• and House districts?

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.