Transcript Highlights:

• There was, and still hasn't been, any education.
• He then continued that program on to middle school.
• why this program is as good as an evidence-based program or perhaps even better.
• , DESE may allow the district to engage in a pilot program to demonstrate why this program is as good
• This bill gives our students and teachers the education...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House took up several procedural orders early in the session, including extending the reporting deadline for the Housing Committee on H.4655 and suspending Joint Rule 12 for a petition seeking to rescind prior Article 5 constitutional convention applications. It then advanced three Ways and Means bills on education-related topics: personal financial literacy education (H.4670), expanded access to the state seal of biliteracy (H.4671), and teacher preparation and student literacy (H.4672), each moving through amendment adoption and third reading or engrossment procedures. A major portion of the meeting focused on H.4670, which would require personal financial literacy instruction in middle and high school and establish a financial literacy trust fund for curriculum and teacher training. Members spoke in support, emphasizing budgeting, credit, student loans, and long-term financial planning, and the bill passed to be engrossed by a 154-0 roll call. H.4671, which broadens access to the seal of biliteracy for students in public and private schools, also drew support and passed to be engrossed 155-0. The most extensive debate centered on H.4672, a literacy bill requiring evidence-based reading instruction, DESE-approved curricula or approved local alternatives, screening and progress monitoring, professional development, and related implementation measures. Members described concerns about declining reading scores and argued for a shift away from three-cueing toward phonics-based, science-of-reading approaches. Several amendments were considered: a proposal to change intervention language from “significantly” to “at risk of falling behind” failed, while amendments adding funding language, stakeholder collaboration, and other implementation details were adopted. One amendment clarifying that pictures may be used as a supplement in literacy curricula was also adopted, and the bill ultimately passed to be engrossed 155-0. The House also observed moments of silence for former Judge Leslie Harris, former Representative Mark Carron, and former Representative Dennis Rosa, and adjourned to meet the next day at 11 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Educating, programming, and scale, that's something that's always a challenge, right?
• I feel like it may be one of the most effective programs that PED has ever initiated to promote education
• That would allow us to make the programming adjustments that we need to deliver all the educational requirements
• Students that are involved in programs in CTE through collegiate education have pretty remarkable outcomes
• And so that's on our program progress report pre-kindergarten quality and educational outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, they run the waiver programs. I'm gonna go through the waiver programs in detail.
• Programs you have to pay attention to, of course, is our Office of Special Education, that's actually
• Programs.
• It's also Um, the one, the program that has the most oversight, but it's also the most rigid program.
• Programs is going to be the key.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the Massachusetts sex education program is inconsistent, inadequate, and unable to keep our
• have sexual education to no longer provide that education due to the radical ideology.
• education, which... ...comprehensive health education; it is in opposition to public education, which
• programs.
• program.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on a wide range of bills, with the largest portions focused on the Healthy Youth Act (S.340/H.656), comprehensive and inclusive curriculum bills (H.655/S.371 and related measures), climate literacy education (H.560/S.391), computer science coursework (H.534/S.362), arts education funding and STEM-to-STEAM proposals (H.561 and H.4297), and a homeschooling reporting bill (H.518). Supporters of the Healthy Youth Act argued it would preserve local control while requiring medically accurate, age-appropriate, LGBTQ-inclusive sex education and regular updates to state health frameworks; opponents raised parental rights, age-appropriateness, and opt-out concerns, with some calling for fetal development content. Supporters of inclusive curriculum bills said they would improve representation, belonging, and civic understanding, while opponents argued they could undermine parental authority or promote ideological content. Climate, computer science, and arts advocates emphasized workforce readiness, student engagement, and the need for state support and funding to expand access and teacher training. Testimony on the climate literacy bill described increasing climate impacts in Massachusetts and argued that interdisciplinary instruction would prepare students for science, policy, and green careers; witnesses said the bill was not a mandate but a support and funding measure. Computer science supporters said access remains uneven, especially for girls, students of color, and students with disabilities, and urged stronger statewide requirements and AI-related standards. Arts advocates backed both the STEM-to-STEAM bill and the Lowell Mason arts funding proposal, citing research on student achievement, attendance, creativity, and the economic importance of the arts sector. The homeschool bill was supported by a homeschool advocacy group as a modernization of reporting requirements. The committee closed testimony on numerous bills where no one remained signed up or testimony had concluded, including several education, curriculum, and commission proposals. No votes were taken during the hearing itself. At the end of the session, the committee closed out the remaining testimony and adjourned after a motion and second.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome back to I was gonna say Senate Education, since Senate Education, the LESC, the 2nd day.
• Um, you heard about Educator Fellows yesterday, and most of you are very familiar with Educator Fellows
• Um, $20 million for Educator Fellows continues that program that was initially started with federal funds
• , Black Education, and bilingual Multicultural Education Acts.
• And we're, and we're talking about quality both at the educator preparation program to ensure that when

Transcript Highlights:

• and private higher education.
• The idea of education, the idea of public education, first formed in the neural paths of a Bostonian
• We know that students, whether they're in K-12 or higher education, want their education to be engaging
• And I thank you for your commitment to public higher education, to our students, and our educators.
• They are forced to reduce educational staffing and reduce or outsource critical programs for students

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Higher Education held its second public hearing of the 194th General Court on capital investments in higher education, focusing primarily on H.54, the Bright Act, along with H.1426/S.949 on green and healthy public colleges and universities and deferred maintenance, and H.1424 on capital investment in Gateway Cities. Chairs and administration officials framed the hearing as a response to aging campus infrastructure, climate goals, workforce needs, and federal pressures on higher education, and explained that testimony would be taken from pre-registered speakers in person and virtually. University of Massachusetts leaders strongly supported the Bright Act, describing large deferred maintenance backlogs, aging buildings, and the need to decarbonize campuses while modernizing research and teaching facilities. UMass officials said the bill would help keep tuition and fees lower by reducing the need for campuses to finance capital work themselves, and argued that the investments would improve competitiveness, support research, and create construction jobs. Governor Healey, Lieutenant Governor Driscoll, Secretary of Education Tuttweiler, and Secretary of Administration and Finance Gorzkowicz also backed the bill, saying it would leverage Fair Share surtax revenues for a proposed $2.5 billion in campus investments plus additional targeted grants, and that it would support affordability, economic growth, and climate resilience. Committee members asked about the balance between deferred maintenance and decarbonization, the role of grant programs versus direct spending, the impact on tuition and fees, and how the plan would help campuses respond to federal cuts such as NIH and NSF funding. Administration officials said the proposal was designed to be phased in quickly, with some projects ready to start immediately and others taking longer, and that the grant programs would be structured to include all campuses equitably. They also said the plan would build on an existing financing model similar to the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and could help campuses avoid future tuition increases tied to capital costs. Additional testimony came from MassBay Community College, where President David Podell and recent nursing graduate Deanna Cavazos described the benefits of a new Framingham campus building and said community colleges need modern labs, better planning capacity, and deferred maintenance support to serve the enrollment growth from MassReconnect and MassEducate. State university leaders, including President Mary Grant, President Linda Thompson, and President John Keenan, said their campuses face outdated classrooms, insufficient electrical capacity, and aging facilities, and urged passage of the Bright Act as a long-overdue investment in student success and workforce preparation.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the highest possible quality education.
• And I worked in global education for one of the largest education companies.
• It just continues to drain the public schools, where our educators are one of the lowest paid educators
• If I'm going to be serious about education, however we're funding education, I believe that there should
• in the state of Florida is quality education, quality education... ...in the state of Florida is quality

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met with a quorum and took up several education bills. SB 1150, by Senator Calatayud, was presented as a measure to help school districts retain school social workers by removing an exam requirement unrelated to the profession. With no questions or debate, the committee voted the bill favorably. The committee then moved to SB 1514, by Senator Smith, on anaphylaxis response in public schools. After adopting a delete-all amendment and a late-filed amendment clarifying FDA-approved epinephrine devices and weight-based dosing, the committee heard support from Orange County Public Schools and reported the bill favorably. The most extensive discussion centered on SB 1708, also by Senator Calatayud, which would expand Schools of Hope by broadening the definition of low-performing schools from those in the bottom 10% in both math and reading to those in the bottom 10% in either subject, and would authorize co-location of Schools of Hope in underused public school facilities. Senators questioned how co-location would work, who could enroll, how liability and contracts would be handled, and whether the bill would help the specific students most in need. Many public speakers opposed the bill, arguing it would strain already underfunded public schools, reduce space and resources, and unfairly favor charter operators. The sponsor said the bill would not reduce classroom space in use, would require contracts to address safety and liability, and would provide a net positive to districts through a $600-per-student facility payment plus associated funding. After debate from both supporters and skeptics, the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also considered CS for SB 822, by Senator Rodriguez, which would give charter schools more autonomy over governance and operations, including deadlines, enrollment caps, student conduct policies, and data sharing. The Florida Charter School Alliance supported the bill, arguing it would create parity and reduce burdens on charter schools, while committee members pressed the witness on claims of district “harassment” and the basis for those concerns. The bill was reported favorably after a roll call vote. At the end of the meeting, members recorded votes on prior tabs, thanked staff, and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• UAB their program a much better program. UAB their program a much better program.
• that was on a program them on a program that was on a program them on a program that was on a program
• program program 975,975,000.
• program 800,000 three pilot program to support small Business program to support small Business program
• and of A Prosecution Training Education and of A Prosecution Training Education and Management Program

Bills: SJR 59, SCR 30, SCR 46, SB 31, SB 127, SB 324, SB 401, SB 407, SB 467, SB 482, SB 506, SB 529, SB 584, SB 619, SB 636, SB 646, SB 647, SB 659, SB 715, SB 732, SB 735, SB 771, SB 784, SB 800, SB 801, SB 816, SB 1013, SB 1026, SB 1049, SB 1055, SB 1065, SB 1137, SB 1169, SB 1181, SB 1383, SB 1395, SB 1410, SB 1433, SB 1524, SB 1531, SB 1568, SB 1640, SB 1666, SB 1681, SB 1718, SB 1754, SB 1757, SB 1972, SB 1980, SB 2004, SB 2007, SB 2041, SB 2046, SB 2050, SB 2075, SB 2076, SB 2154, SB 2173, SB 2206, SB 2225, SB 2253, SB 2268, SB 2306, SB 2308, SB 2314, SB 2322, SB 2330, SB 2351, SB 2366, SB 2371, SB 2392, SB 2398, SB 2476, SB 2533, SB 2540, SB 2544, SB 2589, SB 2610, SB 2623, SB 2660, SB 2662, SB 2693, SB 2707, SB 2717, SB 2722, SB 2742, SB 2753, SB 2779, SB 2807, SB 2843, SB 2844, SB 2858, SB 2877, SB 2880, SB 2885, SB 2920, SB 2938, SB 2986, HJR 4, HCR 35, SJR 3, SJR 18, SB 5, SB 260, SB 1786, SB 914, SB 963, SB 1197, SB 1415, SB 1437, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SJR 84, SJR 59, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 46, SCR 48, SCR 19, SCR 30, SCR 3, SB 2023, SB 1433, SB 2322, SB 2877, SB 407, SB 1718, SB 1395, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 1502, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1434, SB 1376, SB 1585, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 732, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 261, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 529, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 510, SB 2253, SB 584, SB 1085, SB 2314, SB 2046, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 1524, SB 1137, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1410, SB 1845, SB 1863, SB 2681, SB 2200, SB 2199, SB 1757, SB 2050, SB 2458, SB 2201, SB 1055, SB 2660, SB 2662, SB 1065, SB 801, SB 2533, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 647, SB 1721, SB 2268, SB 2366, SB 1013, SB 2797, SB 2371, SB 2383, SB 646, SB 1169, SB 1754, SB 2779, SB 2004, SB 2119, SB 2448, SB 1777, SB 1283, SB 2392, SB 2076, SB 2786, SB 2876, SB 2284, SB 2225, SB 1540, SB 2920, SB 2929, SB 1972, SB 2540, SB 2742, SB 2595, SB 2217, SB 715, SB 2330, SB 1383, SB 500, SB 1640, SB 2001, SB 2080, SB 2722, SB 506, SB 2514, SB 2623, SB 2753, SB 2398, SB 1241, SB 2927, SB 2173, SB 2538, SB 898, SB 467, SB 1449, SB 2529, SB 1531, SB 2846, SB 2476, SB 986, SB 1181, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2864, SB 31, SB 2880, SB 1359, SB 2386, SB 771, SB 2844, SB 2550, SB 1351, SB 1423, SB 1931, SB 2245, SB 2589, SB 2707, SB 2807, SB 2351, SB 410, SB 659, SB 816, SB 2776, SB 2693, SB 2580, SB 1980, SB 1886, SB 1234, SB 739, SB 482, SB 456, SB 127, SB 1666, SB 2843, SB 2801, SB 800, SB 2055, SB 784, SB 2986, SB 735, SB 1012, SB 324, SB 2926, SB 2938, SB 2007, SB 2138, SB 1242, SB 2615, SB 1049, SB 2310, SB 1224, SB 2972, SB 1568, SB 2841, SB 2885, SB 3016, SB 2858, SB 2610, SB 2139, SB 1856, SB 2035, SB 2308, SB 2306, SB 2041, SB 1528, SB 1681, SB 1141, SB 2401, SB 2530, SB 2375, SB 547, SB 1266, SB 1373, SB 1467, SB 2069, SB 2269, SB 2480, SB 2544, SB 672, SB 904, SB 2695, SB 2891, SB 2422, SB 2543, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 2539, SB 2532, SB 2925, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 2203, SB 457, SB 2357, HJR 4, HB 135, HB 1109, HCR 35, HCR 64, SB 2721, SB 243, SB 1285, SB 2568, SB 1959, SB 1442, SB 1454, SB 2520, SB 2541, SB 1708, SB 1237, SB 1844, SB 1586, SB 1, SB 260, SB 31, SB 467, SB 482, SB 647, SB 732, SB 816, SB 1055, SB 1137, SB 1169, SB 2004, SB 2253, SB 2268, SB 2314, SB 2351, SB 2371, SB 2623, SB 2722, SB 2779, SB 2920, HJR 4, SB 407, SB 1395, SB 1433, SB 1718, SB 2322, SB 2877, SB 619, SB 646, SB 1026, SB 2742, SB 2880, SR 443, SR 449, SR 456, SR 460, SR 465, SCR 46, SB 260, SB 3062, HJR 8, HJR 31, HJR 72, HJR 99, HJR 133, HB 29, HB 33, HB 50, HB 107, HB 116, HB 125, HB 140, HB 141, HB 155, HB 171, HB 227, HB 255, HB 363, HB 368, HB 491, HB 609, HB 630, HB 745, HB 767, HB 913, HB 917, HB 1135, HB 1188, HB 1238, HB 1242, HB 1261, HB 1318, HB 1404, HB 1495, HB 1507, HB 1606, HB 1708, HB 1748, HB 1851, HB 1922, HB 2002, HB 2003, HB 2198, HB 2355, HB 2358, HB 2415, HB 2457, HB 2495, HB 2546, HB 2637, HB 2763, HB 2765, HB 2798, HB 2818, HB 3228, HB 3307, HB 4116, HCR 29, SB 1410, SB 3062, HJR 8, HJR 31, HJR 72, HJR 99, HJR 133, HB 29, HB 33, HB 50, HB 107, HB 116, HB 125, HB 140, HB 141, HB 155, HB 171, HB 227, HB 255, HB 363, HB 368, HB 491, HB 609, HB 630, HB 745, HB 767, HB 913, HB 917, HB 1135, HB 1188, HB 1238, HB 1242, HB 1261, HB 1318, HB 1404, HB 1495, HB 1507, HB 1606, HB 1708, HB 1748, HB 1851, HB 1922, HB 2002, HB 2003, HB 2198, HB 2355, HB 2358, HB 2415, HB 2457, HB 2495, HB 2546, HB 2637, HB 2763, HB 2765, HB 2798, HB 2818, HB 3228, HB 3307, HB 4116, HCR 29, SB 1410

Keywords: education funding, Texas State Technical College System, capital projects, infrastructure, higher education, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature, Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment

Transcript Highlights:

• UAB their program a much better program. UAB their program a much better program.
• that was on a program them on a program that was on a program them on a program that was on a program
• program program 975,975,000.
• program 800,000 three pilot program to support small Business program to support small Business program
• and of A Prosecution Training Education and of A Prosecution Training Education and Management Program

Bills: SJR 59, SCR 30, SCR 46, SB 31, SB 127, SB 324, SB 401, SB 407, SB 467, SB 482, SB 506, SB 529, SB 584, SB 619, SB 636, SB 646, SB 647, SB 659, SB 715, SB 732, SB 735, SB 771, SB 784, SB 800, SB 801, SB 816, SB 1013, SB 1026, SB 1049, SB 1055, SB 1065, SB 1137, SB 1169, SB 1181, SB 1383, SB 1395, SB 1410, SB 1433, SB 1524, SB 1531, SB 1568, SB 1640, SB 1666, SB 1681, SB 1718, SB 1754, SB 1757, SB 1972, SB 1980, SB 2004, SB 2007, SB 2041, SB 2046, SB 2050, SB 2075, SB 2076, SB 2154, SB 2173, SB 2206, SB 2225, SB 2253, SB 2268, SB 2306, SB 2308, SB 2314, SB 2322, SB 2330, SB 2351, SB 2366, SB 2371, SB 2392, SB 2398, SB 2476, SB 2533, SB 2540, SB 2544, SB 2589, SB 2610, SB 2623, SB 2660, SB 2662, SB 2693, SB 2707, SB 2717, SB 2722, SB 2742, SB 2753, SB 2779, SB 2807, SB 2843, SB 2844, SB 2858, SB 2877, SB 2880, SB 2885, SB 2920, SB 2938, SB 2986, HJR 4, HCR 35, SJR 3, SJR 18, SB 5, SB 260, SB 1786, SB 914, SB 963, SB 1197, SB 1415, SB 1437, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SJR 84, SJR 59, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 46, SCR 48, SCR 19, SCR 30, SCR 3, SB 2023, SB 1433, SB 2322, SB 2877, SB 407, SB 1718, SB 1395, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 1502, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1434, SB 1376, SB 1585, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 732, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 261, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 529, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 510, SB 2253, SB 584, SB 1085, SB 2314, SB 2046, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 1524, SB 1137, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1410, SB 1845, SB 1863, SB 2681, SB 2200, SB 2199, SB 1757, SB 2050, SB 2458, SB 2201, SB 1055, SB 2660, SB 2662, SB 1065, SB 801, SB 2533, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 647, SB 1721, SB 2268, SB 2366, SB 1013, SB 2797, SB 2371, SB 2383, SB 646, SB 1169, SB 1754, SB 2779, SB 2004, SB 2119, SB 2448, SB 1777, SB 1283, SB 2392, SB 2076, SB 2786, SB 2876, SB 2284, SB 2225, SB 1540, SB 2920, SB 2929, SB 1972, SB 2540, SB 2742, SB 2595, SB 2217, SB 715, SB 2330, SB 1383, SB 500, SB 1640, SB 2001, SB 2080, SB 2722, SB 506, SB 2514, SB 2623, SB 2753, SB 2398, SB 1241, SB 2927, SB 2173, SB 2538, SB 898, SB 467, SB 1449, SB 2529, SB 1531, SB 2846, SB 2476, SB 986, SB 1181, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2864, SB 31, SB 2880, SB 1359, SB 2386, SB 771, SB 2844, SB 2550, SB 1351, SB 1423, SB 1931, SB 2245, SB 2589, SB 2707, SB 2807, SB 2351, SB 410, SB 659, SB 816, SB 2776, SB 2693, SB 2580, SB 1980, SB 1886, SB 1234, SB 739, SB 482, SB 456, SB 127, SB 1666, SB 2843, SB 2801, SB 800, SB 2055, SB 784, SB 2986, SB 735, SB 1012, SB 324, SB 2926, SB 2938, SB 2007, SB 2138, SB 1242, SB 2615, SB 1049, SB 2310, SB 1224, SB 2972, SB 1568, SB 2841, SB 2885, SB 3016, SB 2858, SB 2610, SB 2139, SB 1856, SB 2035, SB 2308, SB 2306, SB 2041, SB 1528, SB 1681, SB 1141, SB 2401, SB 2530, SB 2375, SB 547, SB 1266, SB 1373, SB 1467, SB 2069, SB 2269, SB 2480, SB 2544, SB 672, SB 904, SB 2695, SB 2891, SB 2422, SB 2543, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 2539, SB 2532, SB 2925, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 2203, SB 457, SB 2357, HJR 4, HB 135, HB 1109, HCR 35, HCR 64, SB 2721, SB 243, SB 1285, SB 2568, SB 1959, SB 1442, SB 1454, SB 2520, SB 2541, SB 1708, SB 1237, SB 1844, SB 1586, SB 1, SB 260, SB 31, SB 467, SB 482, SB 647, SB 732, SB 816, SB 1055, SB 1137, SB 1169, SB 2004, SB 2253, SB 2268, SB 2314, SB 2351, SB 2371, SB 2623, SB 2722, SB 2779, SB 2920, HJR 4, SB 407, SB 1395, SB 1433, SB 1718, SB 2322, SB 2877, SB 619, SB 646, SB 1026, SB 2742, SB 2880, SR 443, SR 449, SR 456, SR 460, SR 465, SCR 46, SB 260, SB 3062, HJR 8, HJR 31, HJR 72, HJR 99, HJR 133, HB 29, HB 33, HB 50, HB 107, HB 116, HB 125, HB 140, HB 141, HB 155, HB 171, HB 227, HB 255, HB 363, HB 368, HB 491, HB 609, HB 630, HB 745, HB 767, HB 913, HB 917, HB 1135, HB 1188, HB 1238, HB 1242, HB 1261, HB 1318, HB 1404, HB 1495, HB 1507, HB 1606, HB 1708, HB 1748, HB 1851, HB 1922, HB 2002, HB 2003, HB 2198, HB 2355, HB 2358, HB 2415, HB 2457, HB 2495, HB 2546, HB 2637, HB 2763, HB 2765, HB 2798, HB 2818, HB 3228, HB 3307, HB 4116, HCR 29, SB 1410, SB 3062, HJR 8, HJR 31, HJR 72, HJR 99, HJR 133, HB 29, HB 33, HB 50, HB 107, HB 116, HB 125, HB 140, HB 141, HB 155, HB 171, HB 227, HB 255, HB 363, HB 368, HB 491, HB 609, HB 630, HB 745, HB 767, HB 913, HB 917, HB 1135, HB 1188, HB 1238, HB 1242, HB 1261, HB 1318, HB 1404, HB 1495, HB 1507, HB 1606, HB 1708, HB 1748, HB 1851, HB 1922, HB 2002, HB 2003, HB 2198, HB 2355, HB 2358, HB 2415, HB 2457, HB 2495, HB 2546, HB 2637, HB 2763, HB 2765, HB 2798, HB 2818, HB 3228, HB 3307, HB 4116, HCR 29, SB 1410

Keywords: education funding, Texas State Technical College System, capital projects, infrastructure, higher education, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature, Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment

Transcript Highlights:

• college programs, you might be comfortable with that.
• programs possible.
• programs possible.
• The classroom, it makes those programs possible.
• I also experienced homelessness during my K-12 education.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held its first hearing of the year on Proposition 98, focusing on the Governor’s budget estimates for the three-year budget window, the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSA), and repayment of education deferrals. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee would rise by about $21.7 billion over the 2025 Budget Act, with increases in each year, full repayment of the existing settle-up obligation in 2024-25, a new $5.6 billion settle-up obligation proposed for 2025-26, and a higher guarantee in 2026-27. Finance also noted revised downward estimates for transitional kindergarten attendance and Los Angeles County property tax reimbursements, and said community colleges would be funded above the split because of enrollment growth. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized fiscal risk and volatility, warning that recent revenue gains are tied heavily to the stock market and tech sector and could reverse quickly. The LAO argued the Governor’s proposed $5.6 billion delay shifts risk into future years and recommended instead fully funding the current estimate, making a larger reserve deposit, considering advance payments or pension-related uses, and finding additional non-Prop 98 solutions to reduce the state’s structural deficit. On the reserve and deferral items, Finance described revised PSSA deposits and withdrawals that would leave about $4.1 billion in the reserve by 2026-27, and both Finance and the LAO supported paying off the remaining LCFF and SCFF deferrals as good fiscal practice. Committee members questioned the size of the settle-up amount, the degree of revenue volatility, the use of the reserve, and the ongoing K-12/community college split. Finance said the proposal is meant to avoid overappropriation if revenues fall, while the LAO said a buffer of roughly $3.5 billion would address typical forecasting risk. Public commenters, including school boards, county offices of education, teachers, and advocacy groups, largely opposed the $5.6 billion withholding or settle-up delay, calling it a manipulation of Prop. 98 and urging full funding and more stable revenue solutions. Several speakers also urged dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness. The hearing ended with no vote, and the chair announced that broader program discussions would occur in later hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• professionals in these programs.
• Laurel Baer, educational consultant with the Los Angeles County Office of Education. Thank you.
• And then it would require that the IT systems that run the programs would effectuate this program with
• There's an incredible program that already exists, the CalWORKs recipient education program.
• Every year the CalWORKs recipient education program, or REP as it's known, directly and indirectly assists

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Human Services heard a long agenda of bills focused largely on child welfare, foster care, child care, CalWORKs, mandated reporting, and public benefits. Early items included AB 890, which would ease county transfer rules for nonminor dependents in extended foster care; AB 461, which would replace punitive truancy-related penalties with supportive services for families; and AB 753, which would create an interim associate teacher pathway to help address the child care workforce shortage. Testimony on these bills emphasized barriers faced by foster youth, low-income families, and child care providers, and members expressed support for the general policy direction. The committee also heard AB 926 on foster care visitation, AB 563 on early childhood planning and reporting, AB 601 on standardized mandated reporter training, AB 1074 on CalWORKs reunification aid, AB 822 extending the Commission on the State of Hate, AB 970 creating a Los Angeles County mandated reporter pilot, AB 1161 protecting public benefits during disasters, AB 1172 allowing trained staff to administer emergency seizure medication in community care settings, and AB 363 expanding CalWORKs student supports and work-study. Witnesses generally supported these measures as ways to reduce trauma, improve reunification, modernize reporting and training, and expand access to services. County welfare and child welfare groups, advocacy organizations, and providers largely testified in support, while some bills drew concerns from county representatives about implementation or needed amendments. Several bills were voted out of committee, often unanimously and sometimes as amended, including AB 926, AB 563, AB 601, AB 1074, AB 822, AB 970, AB 1161, and AB 1172; AB 1172 was reported on call. The committee also took up consent items and later voted on subcommittee-held bills AB 461, AB 753, and AB 890, leaving them on call. At the end of the hearing, the committee heard AB 1211, which would protect CalFresh benefits from federal cuts and require a feasibility study on increasing benefits and eligibility; testimony stressed rising food insecurity and the economic importance of food assistance, but the transcript ends before a final vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Not all of them go through the re-education program or get a degree... ...a degree, etc., a trade, whatever
• We also, like I said, evaluated correctional education and highlighted the need for changes to that program
• 12 education.
• We need to prepare and bring back the drop program specifically for educators.
• How best do we improve this program or this aspect, or this component of this program?

Bills: SB197, HB140, SB214, HB214, HB147, HB270, SB73

Keywords: business regulation, nonprofit entities, electronic filing, merger agreements, limited liability companies, partnerships, property transfer, termination fees, HB140, private sewer systems, wastewater utilities, Public Service Commission, PSC jurisdiction, utility regulation, rate setting, rate consolidation, affiliated systems, common ownership, private utilities, sewer rates

Transcript Highlights:

• I grew up with an IEP and a 504 plan, so I understand how beneficial these special education programs
• I understand how beneficial these special education programs can be without the additional support of
• Representative Burton Quick, is it true that most teacher training programs do include special education
• Representative Burton Quick, is it true that most teacher training programs do include special education
• <04:21:01.080> programming<04:21:02.080> this impacts on education programming this

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on HB 563, which would revise the education funding formula for pupils receiving special education services by replacing the current single special education amount with three differentiated categories. Representative Rick Ladd, the prime sponsor, said the bill largely tracks a House-passed version from the prior session with minor figure adjustments, and explained that the proposal uses projected FY26 amounts for three categories based on time in general education versus more intensive placements. He also noted that the bill does not address catastrophic aid directly, but that special education aid, CAT aid, and proration all remain issues for later work sessions. Ladd and supporters argued that weighted categories better reflect actual costs and are more sustainable than treating all IEPs the same. Representative Margaret Drye said the approach was one of the best ideas from the education funding subcommittee and urged the committee to support differentiated aid. Representative Ames asked how the category amounts were derived, and Ladd said Category A follows the FY26 base, Category B is a higher weight, and Category C is a still higher weight for more intensive services, though he acknowledged the exact multipliers were developed earlier and could be revisited. He also said the committee would continue discussing whether the weights are appropriate and how they interact with CAT aid. Testimony from Bonnie Dunham strongly opposed the bill. She argued that funding based on placement rather than actual service need would create incentives to move students into more restrictive settings, could stigmatize children with labels such as "Category C," and would undermine the least restrictive environment requirements under federal special education law. She described her son’s experience in inclusive settings as beneficial and said the bill would have penalized the district for serving him there. In response to questions, she said schools and parents should base funding on the child’s actual needs and costs, not on placement, and urged the committee to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate.

Transcript Highlights:

• by Secretary of Education, Dr.
• In Indiana, this means a program where the median earnings of graduates In Indiana, this means a program
• , excuse me, outcome program under the Higher Education Act, 20 USC 1087D.
• And yet here in Senate Bill 199, we are expecting each educational institution degree program that is
• program is, we are showing the value in that program.

Keywords: 964, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or education program like what is in place, but also some education as to what the court system or the
• or education program like what is in place, but also some education as to what the court system or the
• Mulder's suggestion to change family transition program to parenting education course.
• So it would read participation in a parent education program throughout. Okay.
• Yeah, parenting education course replaces the words "family transition program."

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met to approve prior minutes and then worked through draft legislation related to a possible family court study committee. The group discussed the proposed 15-member committee’s makeup in detail, including whether to add parent representation, judges, family law section members, child support, clerks of court, domestic violence advocates, and other stakeholders. The task force ultimately agreed to keep the committee at 15 members, reduce the legislative membership from eight to six, add two judges from different districts, add two family law section members with rural and urban representation, include one parent subject to a custody order, and replace the mental health professional with a clerk of court representative appointed through the trial court administrator’s office. The draft was also revised to keep domestic violence advocacy representation and to clarify that the study could consider juvenile court issues as part of the family court umbrella. The committee voted to approve the revised draft and recommend it to Legislative Management, with one recorded “no” vote from Judge Hovey after the meeting resumed. The task force then turned to a second draft dealing with requiring participation in a family transition program, which was renamed in discussion to a parenting education course. Members debated whether the bill should simply refer to an existing program like Parents Forever or instead specify broader education about the court process, parental rights, co-parenting, and related issues. Some members supported the requirement as a way to reduce conflict and improve understanding of the system, while others raised concerns about vague language, cost to parents, lack of exemptions, and whether the bill was too open-ended or potentially duplicative of other legislation. The discussion became lengthy and unresolved, with the drafter noting that more specific direction would be needed to revise the bill. The transcript cuts off before a final vote or action on this second draft is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• administer grant programs to support state and local educational agencies in providing special education
• administer grant programs to support state and local educational agencies in providing special education
• with the individualized education program.
• This is a theme we heard consistently from public education programs across the state.
• This is a theme we heard consistently from public education programs across the state.

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will explain how school meal programs work and how the program mechanisms work, highlight the various
• Education agencies, in this case, the Public Education Department (PED), distribute funds to districts
• This program not only literally feeds our children, but will also increase educational outcomes for students
• The whole program is a wonderful program.
• programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Allison Frenzel, who's the education program specialist at the California Department of Education. who's
• the education program specialist at the California Department of Education, and then Michael Weoff,
• These types of programs are programs we should look at statewide.
• The LA Music Center has an educational program that pairs professional artists with schools.
• We have a legal referral service, and we have educational programs for lawyers and artists.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Arts held an informational hearing on California’s first sector-specific creative economy strategic plan, “California’s Future: Creative Strategies for Cultural Resilience, Economic Growth, and Global Leadership.” Chair Allen opened by framing the creative economy as a major state asset and urged support for arts funding in the May Revision, including California Humanities, museums, public media, cultural districts, LA28 arts programming, and AB 2319, which would create a $100 million post-production incentive. He also emphasized the need for next-step funding to implement the strategic plan and noted concerns about federal headwinds and declining creative-sector jobs. California Arts Council Director Danielle Brazel, Institute for the Future’s Rachel Hatch, CDE’s Allison Frenzel, and Workforce Development Board representative Michael Weoff described how the plan was developed through AB 127 and related legislation, a 30-plus-member work group, and an interagency process. They outlined the plan’s phased approach and six priority areas, including preparing the workforce, stabilizing businesses, increasing revenue through cultural tourism, leveraging state incentives, defining and tracking ROI, and building state capacity. Testimony highlighted workforce pipelines, apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, digital badging, and cross-agency coordination, with speakers stressing that the sector is shaped by AI, climate change, affordability, capital access, and social cohesion. A second panel of artists and advocates described on-the-ground implementation and the need for better data and support. Ricarlo Handy discussed the Handy Foundation’s apprenticeship pipeline into film and TV jobs and the difficulty of capturing freelance and 1099 creative work in state data. Joanna Reynolds described Arts for LA’s Creative Jobs Collective, which aims to create 10,000 living-wage creative jobs in Los Angeles County by 2030. Alejandro Gutierrez Chavez urged the state to embed artists in health, aging, behavioral health, and climate resilience systems, and Roxanne Messina Kaptur spoke about the need to treat arts careers as viable professions and expand residency and school-based artist programs. Senator Rubio, who joined the hearing later, shared her own background in teaching and the arts, supported arts education and small theaters, and raised concerns about AI, asking how schools and educators can adapt. In the final panel, Rebecca Ratzkin reported on 26 town halls across eight regions, where more than 1,100 people attended and generally affirmed the plan while asking for better access to information, new financial models, clearer definitions and data, and stronger networks. Julie Baker of California for the Arts and California Arts Advocates argued the plan is an urgent blueprint for a sector that generates $288 billion and more than 820,000 jobs, but remains below pre-pandemic employment levels and is losing market share. She and others called for funding, statewide definitions, better data collection, and cross-agency implementation, while committee members and witnesses repeatedly emphasized that the plan will require political will and resources to move from strategy to action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Article 1, Section 9, beginning on line 8.4, pertains to our adult basic education programs.
• <00:10:18.600> programs<00:10:19.279> currently<00:10:19.839> those basic education
• programs currently those basic education programs currently those programs<00:10:20.399> are<
• is that program states that program program program participants<01:23:39.520> uh<01:23:39.760
• educ education when students shape our educ education when students are<01:38:55.119> given<01

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's also responsible for Career Technical Education and higher education legislation as well.
• and higher education Technical education and higher education uh<00:09:18.800> legislation<00
• of Education.
• of Education.
• for higher education.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting was the first session of a newly created House Education Funding Committee, which also handles career technical education and higher education legislation. The chair explained that the committee was split off from the larger education committee because of the high volume of bills in the prior biennium, and said its focus would be on education funding policy and related fiscal issues. He noted that the committee had already reviewed major topics with the Department of Education, including the foundation formula, building aid, career technical education, special education aid, catastrophic aid, and higher education funding, and that chancellors from the university and community college systems were scheduled to appear later that morning. The bulk of the meeting was an orientation on committee procedures and decorum. The chair reviewed attendance and replacement rules, hearing procedures, time limits for testimony, and how the committee would handle crowded hearings, early bills, and fiscal notes. He emphasized that hearings are not debates, that sponsors and co-sponsors may present but should not use their position to dominate questioning, and that the chair controls whether additional technical questions are asked of witnesses. He also stressed neutrality, saying members should not display buttons or placards or engage in running debates with testifiers, and that the committee should treat all testimony respectfully regardless of party or viewpoint. Additional housekeeping guidance covered security procedures, use of cell phones and computers during hearings, breaks and hydration in the dry hearing rooms, and courtesy toward the clerk and other staff. The chair also asked members to notify leadership in advance of absences and explained that some bills may require larger rooms or overflow arrangements. No votes were taken and no bills were acted on during this portion of the meeting.