Transcript Highlights:

• I understand we have a district on the line.
• Discover the fault and leak detection that may occur in district utilities.
• It highlights the goals that we've created for the school districts.
• Elected school districts for a term of three years and a total cost of $1,277,928.
• We've all got individual questions; every district has specific needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• district. And um we have Chugwater, district.
• For example, districts can districts.
• So not district, not part of a district.
• . district. district.
• </c> District number one. District number one.

Committee: Joint Education

Transcript Highlights:

• districts.
• districts.
• districts.
• districts.
• </c> a great deal from district to district. a great deal from district to district.

Bills: HF1048 , HF1049 , HF745 , HF2210

Committee: House Education Finance

Keywords: charter schools, education funding, revenue calculation, general education revenue, special education, school library aid, education finance, school districts, funding eligibility, compensatory revenue, task force, free meals, school funding, education equity, HF2210, school unemployment aid, Minnesota Department of Education, general fund appropriation, unemployment insurance, unemployment claims

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman. districts districts um<00:01:20.280><c> that</c><00:01:20.560><c> existed</c><00:01:21.240>
• 48 districts.
• </c><00:19:19.480><c> cuz</c> square footage within the district cuz square footage within the district
• </c><00:20:15.840><c> to</c> committee beat our school district to committee beat our school district
• 27:14.080><c> their</c><00:27:14.200><c> block</c> district from expending their block district from

Bills: HB0034 , HB0035 , HB0036 , HB0106

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• That’s my district.
• Senate District 27.
• District 25.
• Assembly District 42.
• I am a sophomore of Kate School, Senate District 21, Assembly District 37.

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Education Committees held their annual joint hearing with the California Association of Student Councils and SABLE, where student delegates presented policy ideas developed over two days. Committee members repeatedly praised student voice and noted that several past student proposals had become law. The hearing began with opening remarks from legislators and student organizers, who emphasized the importance of civic participation and the value of hearing directly from students. The chair also reviewed hearing rules and explained that the panels would be treated as peers in a formal policy discussion. The first panel proposed an annual civic engagement day for grades 7-12, with flexible activities such as mock elections, civic fairs, Socratic seminars, and public comment practice. Members asked about costs, grade-level flexibility, voter registration, and how the proposal would fit within existing curriculum time. The second panel proposed amending Education Code Section 35012 to require at least one student board member in every unified and high school district, with expanded training and motion rights. Legislators supported the concept but raised technical concerns about fiscal impact, the need for odd-numbered boards, the scope of motioning authority, and whether districts would need reimbursement if the mandate became statewide. A third panel proposed adding middle school financial literacy instruction by embedding it into existing classes, with curriculum and teacher training developed over time by state agencies. Members questioned how it would fit into adopted materials and whether the state should wait until the new high school financial literacy course is fully implemented before designing middle school instruction. The fourth panel proposed expanding restorative justice by creating a CDE task force and authorizing PPS-certified staff to use restorative justice training materials in discipline processes. Senators discussed prior legislation, confidentiality concerns in closed-session hearings, and the fiscal cost of a state task force, while expressing support for stronger restorative practices. The final panel proposed more active mental health education through short, twice-semester classroom sessions for grades 7-12 focused on coping skills, time management, and awareness of resources. Assemblymember Castillo and Senator Cortese questioned whether teachers and counselors could effectively deliver the program, whether it would duplicate or overburden existing efforts, and whether wellness centers or student-led awareness efforts might be more effective. Committee members generally agreed the topic was important but were skeptical that another curriculum mandate was the best solution, and no votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> administrators uh your you know District administrators uh your you know District office<00:20:58.640
• </c> five but as a principal or as a district five but as a principal or as a district you<00:28:42.480
• </c> before they get tenured in my district before they get tenured in my district we<00:30:50.720><c
• </c><00:36:35.680><c> to</c> further um and require the districts to further um and require the districts
• </c> federal mandated that means my district federal mandated that means my district has<00:39:14.640

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 44, “Landon’s Law,” sponsored by Rep. Candy Massaroni. The bill would allow schools to keep anti-choking devices such as LifeVac on hand while limiting liability. Testimony from Equal First Aid and LifeVac emphasized that choking is a leading cause of death for children, that the devices are noninvasive and FDA-registered, and that updated Red Cross guidance allows their use when standard rescue protocols fail or are not feasible. Lauren McCubbins, Landon McCubbin’s mother, gave emotional testimony about her 8-year-old son’s death from choking at school and urged the committee to give schools an added rescue option. Members asked questions about how the device works, whether the Heimlich maneuver remains part of the protocol, and whether the bill is limited to LifeVac or applies to similar devices. The bill was reported favorably, with a roll call vote showing unanimous support from members present. The committee then heard a bill sponsored by Rep. J. Baker aimed at reducing administrative burdens in schools and supporting teacher recruitment and retention. The measure would lengthen the required evaluation cycle for tenured teachers from every three years to every five years, provide teachers a copy of their employment contract upon request, streamline professional development provisions, update continuous school improvement plan filing requirements, restore schools’ ability to use Title II funds for certain programs after an unintended consequence of prior legislation, and require KDE to review reporting requirements and eliminate those not required by law. Rep. Baker said the bill was developed with teachers and administrators through a working group and is intended to reduce “check-the-box” tasks so educators can focus on instruction. Amanda Butler of Spencer County Schools and other educators testified that the changes would save time, preserve funding for mentor and induction programs, and reduce repetitive paperwork. Rep. Fleming asked for clarification on the longer evaluation cycle, and an educator witness explained that each evaluation involves pre-observation, observation, and post-observation time and that districts would still retain flexibility to evaluate more often if needed. No final vote on this bill was included in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's what they school districts.
• </c><00:11:38.480><c> that's</c> Uh but it obviously a district that's Uh but it obviously a district
• , the resident district.
• </c> basis. the fact that um my district basis. the fact that um my district would<00:45:06.319><c> now
• ><c> that</c> just um one one other um district that just um one one other um district that their<00:

Summary: The committee first discussed HB 771, the open enrollment bill, which had returned from the Senate with language clarifying that districts should list both tuition expenses and offsetting revenue estimates from sending districts. The chair and Representative McGuire supported concurring with the Senate changes, while Representative Luno raised broader concerns about the bill’s structure and equity, arguing that tuition based on 80% of the sending district’s average cost could be unfair and could create problems for receiving districts with different cost structures. After a show of hands, the committee voted to concur and send that recommendation to the House floor, with Luno indicating he would speak against it there. The committee then took up SB 9 in executive session. An amendment, 1920H, was offered to clarify that the tuition calculation should use the sending district’s average cost and to support access to CTE programs, including allowing students to take academic courses at the receiving school and, in some cases, attend the nearest CTE center. Supporters said the bill would help more students participate in career and technical education and noted bipartisan sponsorship in the Senate. Opponents argued the amendment would increase district costs, strain property taxpayers, and could reduce CTE participation or create logistical problems. The committee adopted the amendment 10-8, then voted 10-8 to recommend OTPA as amended; Representative Lad was assigned the majority report and Representative Luno the minority ITL report. After closing the SB 9 executive session, the chair reminded members that committee reports were due immediately and announced retained-bill subcommittees. One subcommittee will address adequacy and school funding issues arising from HB 651, HB 772, HB 491, and HB 434, chaired by Representative Spillsbury. Another will address school building aid issues from HB 295 and HB 366, including whether to keep the current formula or revise it, and how to handle renovations, new construction, and lease arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> school district is. school district is.
• We don't run the district. We charts. We don't run the district.
• districts districts districts and<00:40:39.640><c> and</c><00:40:39.800><c> how</c><00:40:40.040><c>
• </c> actually take over this district." actually take over this district."
• </c> always provided by school districts. always provided by school districts.

Committee: House Primary and Secondary Education

Transcript Highlights:

• In Senate District 10, which is Senator King's district, a special district...
• , Municipal Management Districts, Water Improvement Districts, and Water Control Improvement Districts
• Supply District.
• You say it's your title that you are a district, or you are not a district? We're a district.
• Okay, so you're a district. We are a district. And you have a MUD and... Tiger District.

Bills: SB434 , SB844 , SB898 , SB1177 , SB1214 , SB1454 , SB1920 , SB1927 , SB1935 , SB1965 , SB2010 , SB2046 , SB2068 , SB2073 , SB2183 , SB2260 , SB3034 , SB907

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• District District 916<00:02:41.599><c> um</c><00:02:41.879><c> I'm</c><00:02:42.040><c> here</c><00:
• </c> superintendent of intermediate District superintendent of intermediate District 288<00:03:24.560
• I work for District 288.
• The districts do include intermediate school districts as well.
• they serve districts all over.

Bills: HF6 , HF52 , HF53

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Keywords: education, literacy, science of reading, school performance, funding flexibility, innovation zones, equity and inclusion, HF52, New Germany, wastewater treatment, wastewater facility, sewer infrastructure, capital investment, bonding bill, state bonds, Public Facilities Authority, municipal infrastructure, water quality, sanitation, sewage treatment

Transcript Highlights:

• The district proposes the IEP. The district holds the records. The district proposes the IEP.
• The district holds the records. The district controls the services.
• And it covers all districts.
• And it covers all districts.
• number of students who require intensive programming both in the district and out of the district.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing focused primarily on special education-related bills, with testimony centered on two major themes: transition planning for students aging out of school-based services at age 22, and the fiscal strain special education costs place on districts. Committee members explained hearing procedures, noted the House was in formal session, and periodically stepped out for votes while staff recorded testimony. A separate bill on special education due process was also taken up briefly, along with a bill on special education finance and another on equitable access/data reporting. On House Bill 752 and Senate Bill 313, witnesses from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, self-advocates, and Senator Comerford described the “Turning 22” transition as a crisis point that often leaves families without adult placements, services, or clear communication. Testimony emphasized earlier planning, more accountability, better data collection, and a commission to improve coordination and residential placement. Several parents and advocates shared personal accounts of traumatic transitions, delayed placements, and the need for plans to begin at least a year before age 22. The committee later closed testimony on these bills after hearing from all signed-up speakers. House Bill 4217, on special education due process, drew support from Representative Sullivan-Almeida, parents, and advocates who argued that the burden of proof should shift from families to school districts. Testimony described costly legal battles, delays, and parents having to become experts in reading instruction or hire advocates and attorneys to secure services. Brody Dwyer, a 10-year-old student with dyslexia, and his mother described how evidence-based instruction helped him after years of struggle. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 546/Senate Bill 317, which would require DESE to publish cross-tabulated data on race, disability, gender, income, and other factors; advocates said this would better expose disparities and help address the school-to-prison pipeline. Finally, on House Bill 691/Senate Bill 430, school leaders, educators, and union representatives testified that special education costs are outpacing district budgets and that increasing circuit breaker reimbursement and creating a commission to study long-term sustainability would help prevent staffing cuts and service reductions. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee repeatedly closed testimony on individual bills as speakers finished and moved through the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• The spouse of an officer of a school district may be employed in the district if it is particularly small
• district if they were employed by the district before the commissioner's election.
• district if the spouse was employed by the district before the date the director was initially elected
• Is this all districts, or is it limited to smaller districts? There is no limitation.
• school districts...

Bills: SB5930 , SB6075 , SB6216 , SB6233

Committee: Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources

Keywords: irrigation districts, director contracts, beneficial interests, transparency, governance, mitigation, habitat conservation, property rights, landowner compensation, fairness in mitigation, critical habitat, species preservation, riparian protection, salmon recovery, watershed planning, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Ecology, habitat conservation account, conservation easement, noxious weed control

Transcript Highlights:

• The spouse of an officer of a school district may be employed in the district if it is particularly small
• district if they were employed by the district before the commissioner's election.
• district if the spouse was employed by the district before the date the director was initially elected
• Is this all districts, or is it limited to smaller districts? There is no limitation.
• school districts...

Summary: The Washington State Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee heard public testimony on several bills. Senate Bill 5930 would create a new conflict-of-interest exception allowing spouses of irrigation district directors to be employed by the district if they were already employed before the director’s election, with disclosure and recusal requirements. The sponsor and a representative of the Washington State Water Resources Association said the bill would help rural irrigation districts recruit and retain workers while keeping safeguards in place. Written testimony was reported as 58 pro and 1 con, and the public hearing was closed. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6075, which would expand use of the Habitat Conservation Account to help landowners when mitigation requirements from Ecology or Fish and Wildlife are unusually costly or reduce the financial benefit of property by more than half. The sponsor said the bill is intended to provide relief to landowners facing expensive mitigation obligations. No one testified in person, though 296 people signed in pro and 2 con, and the hearing was closed. Next, the committee heard Senate Bill 6216, a DNR efficiency bill that would modernize timber and land sale notice requirements by moving publication to the agency website, eliminating pamphlet and certain physical posting requirements, and allowing more flexible methods for smaller sales. DNR and forest industry representatives supported the bill as a cost-saving and efficiency measure, and testimony noted that state trust land sales generate significant revenue for public services. Written testimony was reported as 60 pro and 1 con, and the hearing was closed. Finally, after waiving the five-day notice rule, the committee heard Senate Bill 6233, which would increase criminal wildlife penalty assessments for trafficking in covered animal species and direct half of the penalty revenue to the University of Washington’s Center for Environmental Forensic Science. Committee members asked about the scope of “trade,” the treatment of legally harvested animals, and the center’s role. The center’s director testified that the funding would support wildlife forensic research used to combat illegal wildlife trafficking. Written testimony was reported as 6 pro and 62 con, and the committee concluded its business for the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• of fte students for district Fte students.
• The slide shows the top 5 districts with the highest increase and the top 5 districts with the highest
• districts who had a larger decrease than others.
• to out of district virtual fte and now moving to slide 6.
• But if you'd like to see the trends and the school district or districts that you represent, please feel

Transcript Highlights:

• This is an amendment specific to a new school district that was formed in my district last year.
• was formed in my district last year. And was formed in my district last year.
• </c><00:06:08.800><c> As</c> District, SAU 108. I will be brief. As District, SAU 108.
• to Piscani school district.
• school district to Piscani school<00:07:29.199><c> district.

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• > who's</c> across districts versus a district who's across districts versus a district who's going<01
• </c> local district. local district.
• on</c> district to district depending how on district to district depending how on how<02:12:11.599><
• </c> districts in theory. districts in theory.
• </c> school district. school district.

Summary: The commission meeting focused on reviewing and correcting draft minutes and then working through a draft report on the cost of special education. Members made mostly clerical corrections, including clarifying references to Spalding, fixing acronyms such as LETRS, and cleaning up membership titles and appointee roles to match SB 57. The minutes were approved as amended, with some members abstaining because they were not present at the prior meeting. The chair also noted the commission’s deadline to complete findings and recommendations by July 1 and said the final report must be delivered to legislative leaders, the governor, the state librarian, and others. The main substantive discussion centered on the report’s findings about special education funding. Members agreed the report should emphasize that the commission was created to study the cost of special education and reduce reliance on local property taxes. One draft section described FY24 special education funding as coming from three primary state and federal sources totaling about $152 million, or roughly 15% of annual costs, with the remaining 85% paid by local school districts through property tax revenue, estimated at about $825 million. Members discussed adding historical or longitudinal data to show trends over time, and some suggested attaching charts or tables showing funding over the last 20 to 30 years. A second major topic was demographic data. The draft noted that statewide K-12 enrollment has declined since 2003 while the number and share of students with IEPs has increased. Members questioned whether the data compared like with like, especially given the growth of Education Freedom Accounts and charter school enrollment, and whether the figures included or excluded those students. Several members asked for clearer sourcing from the Department of Education and suggested keeping a list of unresolved questions, including the impact of the shift from ADMA to ADMR and the effect of the EFA program. The discussion ended with agreement to continue refining the report and to gather additional attachments and clarifications before finalizing recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:45.880><c> and</c> Commissioner for this district and Commissioner for this district and actually
• When we have 25, 27 school districts completely or partially in my school district, with about 23 or
• </c><00:43:13.000><c> um</c> know our community and our district um know our community and our district
• </c><00:47:26.680><c> yes</c> Hills Bieber Creek School District yes Hills Bieber Creek School District
• </c><01:02:21.960><c> uh</c> Becker again the school district uh Becker again the school district uh

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• in partnership with the educational service districts, or ESDs.
• If your district, and presumably the other districts that you reference that are seeing similar successful
• Other districts may not have had the good fortune of putting...
• This bill is in response to... legislative district.
• I represent the 49th Legislative District in Vancouver.

Summary: The committee first took up a motion from Ranking Member Root to promptly schedule public hearings on two citizens’ initiatives. Supporters argued the Constitution and public accountability required hearings so voters could hear pro and con arguments; opponents said the legislature was not obligated to act that way and the initiatives would still be heard at the ballot. On a voice vote, the motion failed. The committee then heard extensive testimony on House Bill 1295, which would require evidence-aligned, comprehensive literacy instruction for K-4 students, update teacher endorsement standards and preparation programs, and require literacy-related continuing education for some teachers. The bill also repeals several older literacy-related provisions. The sponsor and supporters said Washington’s reading results are too low and that structured literacy reflects the science of reading; districts such as Puyallup described strong gains after adopting evidence-aligned instruction. Opponents and alternative-program advocates argued the bill could narrow instructional approaches and exclude programs they say have worked well. PESB testified neutrally that much of the endorsement work is already underway but asked for clarification on recertification language. The hearing on HB 1295 was suspended and later resumed with additional pro testimony from students, parents, and literacy advocates. House Bill 2262 was then heard and completed. It would require high school civics instruction to include teaching students to produce a legible, repeatable official signature and explain how signatures are used in elections and ballot processes, while also requiring related outreach and reporting on signature mismatch ballot rejections. The sponsor and county auditor testimony emphasized that younger voters often have signatures that change over time and that better instruction could reduce ballot rejections; questions focused on whether the bill should account for printed signatures and diverse writing systems. The Secretary of State’s office and county auditors were reported as supportive, and the hearing closed after a large number of pro sign-ins. The committee also heard House Bill 2636, which would create a public education performance, operations, and funding review commission to evaluate whether education mandates and funding are effective, relevant, and adequately supported. Supporters said the bill would help identify unfunded mandates and reduce administrative burdens on districts; rural district testimony urged a narrower scope and earlier start date. Finally, House Bill 2007 was heard, proposing competency-based assessments as additional graduation pathway options in place of some existing course/exam requirements. Student testimony supported more flexible, equitable pathways, while the State Board of Education said it supports competency-based education but preferred to wait for its broader Future Ready graduation-requirements work and noted the bill would require additional rulemaking. The hearing on HB 2007 closed after testimony from students and a neutral statement from SBE.

Transcript Highlights:

• But 80% said they had no idea what their districts were doing and what the district policies are related
• These are systems that are district.
• And so if you're a Microsoft's district or Google District or OpenAI district, you, the tech companies
• I can imagine that is a great use to districts across the state. Aye.
• So we know some districts can and some are less stop able to.

Transcript Highlights:

• So an example to show comparison here, Pasco School District, Mount Baker School District.
• So an example to show comparison here, Pasco School District, Mount Baker School District.
• So the dark line represents Pasco School District, Mount Baker School District.
• We heard from a lot of school districts.
• We did take a look at all of the districts' BCA scores and their data, but many districts across the

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.