Transcript Highlights:

• We changed up the language a little bit to include one port that's in my district, which is Babatri,

Bills: HB247, HB317, HB318, HB253, HB271, HB135, HB247, HB317, HB318, HB253, HB271, HB135

Keywords: Gulf of America, name change, state compliance, educational materials, local resources, historical reference, age verification, parental consent, consumer protection, app store regulations, data privacy, Internet filters, digital safety, minors protection, civil liability, device manufacturers, obscenity, aircraft tax, aviation tax, sales tax exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• We focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students.
• The first table lists the requirements related to English language learners.
• language support.
• language learners, homeless students, and special education students.
• We also saw special education students outperform their statewide peers by 3% in English language arts

Summary: The committee meeting began with a brief explanation of the renamed Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee subcommittee, now called the Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits, and a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current biennium performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of potential audits and highlighted several ongoing or planned audits, including the Liquor and Cannabis Board, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the Quality Home Care Initiative, Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs, the Housing Commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment patterns, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and the Washington State ferry system. Members asked about coordination with JLARC to avoid duplication, and the auditor said the offices exchange work plans, monthly updates, and quarterly coordination meetings. The committee then heard the State Auditor’s performance audit on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four charter schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed, with only one area where two schools partially met a language-access requirement. The schools also used several promising practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, and multi-tiered systems of support, though the auditors recommended better documentation of procedures to improve consistency. Families interviewed generally reported positive experiences, while noting resource constraints. Committee members asked about how the four schools were selected, whether the audit compared charter populations to home districts, and how MTSS requirements applied to the schools reviewed. The State Auditor’s Office said the sample was chosen for geographic diversity, student population characteristics, and representation from both authorizers, and that K-2 MTSS requirements were not evaluated because they applied to only one school. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, emphasizing technical assistance, collaboration, and sharing best practices across schools. Two public testifiers also supported the report and said it highlighted effective practices that could be expanded across charter and traditional public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• That language also bans single-use, gender-neutral, family-style restrooms.
• skills, and kids come to kindergarten lacking literacy skills, and a lot of that is based on the language
• That is based on the language, literacy, and access to reading they get at home, so certainly something
• She's a 30-year veteran public school teacher, reading specialist, and English language teacher.
• She's a 30-year veteran public school teacher, reading specialist, and English language teacher.

Bills: HB2020, HB2032, HB2033, HB2249, HB2313, HB2318, HB2378, HCR2003

Keywords: interference, disruption, educational institutions, public order, conduct rules, statewide assessment, student testing, academic standards, third grade reading, reading retention, promotion and retention, school accountability, assessment window, testing window, test scores, school report cards, nontest data, graduation rates, dropout rates, education data privacy

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 18 and March 4, 2026, then took up HCR 2003, the Protect Girls in Sports in Arizona Act. Supporters, including Superintendent Tom Horne and several athletes and coaches, argued the measure would protect fairness, safety, and privacy in girls’ sports and locker rooms by requiring sports to be designated male, female, or co-ed and by limiting access to certain private spaces. Opponents, including the ACLU and Arizona Education Association, argued the resolution was discriminatory, would function as a bathroom ban, and could create enforcement and privacy problems. The committee passed HCR 2003 on a 4-3 vote, giving it a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2020, which would make certain threats or disruptions at educational institutions by minors a class 1 misdemeanor instead of a class 6 felony, and passed it 4-3. HB 2032, which shifts the statewide testing window later in the school year and changes related score deadlines, drew support from school leaders who said it would better reflect full-year learning; it passed 6-1. HB 2033, allowing school districts and charter schools to choose paper-and-pencil statewide testing by governing board vote, also passed 6-0 with one member not voting. HB 2318, establishing term limits for school district governing board members, was amended to clarify the limit applies only after two consecutive four-year terms beginning after a specified date; it passed 4-3 despite opposition from the Arizona School Board Association over impacts on rural districts. The committee next approved HB 2378, which changes eligibility rules for School Facilities Oversight Board members so certain architect and engineer members may not have school-construction business interests, passing 4-3. HB 2313, which prohibits teacher strikes or organized work stoppages and reduces school funding if a strike occurs, passed 4-3 after testimony from educators who said it was punitive and could worsen staffing shortages. Finally, the committee considered HB 2249, which expands the Parents’ Bill of Rights to require written parental consent and notification regarding school facilitation of social transitioning and creates significant civil penalties for violations. Opponents warned it was vague, punitive, and likely to chill ordinary school interactions, while supporters said it was needed to stop schools from hiding information from parents. After adopting a six-page amendment, the committee passed HB 2249 on a 4-3 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Wait a second, this money was intended for at-risk English learners and special education. and you weren't
• language learners.
• To put that in perspective, we consistently outperform the local district in math and English language
• English language supports are effective. Our students are showing remarkable gains.
• In addition, our ELL students, we re-designate our English language learners at an average of 12.4 per

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > reduction English learner cross subsidy reduction English learner cross subsidy reduction aid<00
• district's unreimbured costs for English district's unreimbured costs for English learners<00:05
• Uh English learner cross subsidy aids.
• language learners.
• language learners.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a follow-up question: what percentage do you think is enrolled for English as a second language
• and second language learners.
• or or English and second language<00:15:08.360> Learners<00:15:09.199> so<00:15:09.480
• > in<00:15:09.639> addition<00:15:09.880> to language Learners so in addition to
• language Learners so in addition to supports<00:15:10.560> there<00:15:10.880> if<00:15

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we have English learner, or EL, funds, and these are used to overcome language barriers that impede
• English learner students generate $366 per student, or $16 million in 2025.
• learner, that's slide 43, English learner students.
• , and that would be English learner.
• be English learner.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the Excel Center network. Witnesses described the state’s adult diploma gap, arguing that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED and that the Excel Center provides a supported, diploma-based alternative with child care, transportation help, tutoring, and career services. Goodwill officials said the Arkansas campuses are the state’s only public adult charter high schools, are not state-funded, and have produced strong enrollment growth and graduation outcomes. A University of Notre Dame researcher testified that a study of Excel Center graduates found higher employment and earnings, more credential and college-credit attainment, and lower criminal justice involvement, with a high estimated return on public investment. Some members questioned the framing of Arkansas’s adult education challenges and whether the state was being portrayed too negatively, while others asked about wraparound services and the role of nonprofit providers. The committee ultimately adopted the interim study proposal, though there was some procedural confusion and debate about whether questions should have come before the vote. The committee then received a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas K-12 education funding as part of the adequacy study. Staff reviewed national funding principles and Arkansas’s funding structure, including state, local, and other revenues; the Public School Fund; Department of Education operations; and the Facilities Partnership Program. They explained that 2025 K-12 state and local revenues totaled about $6.6 billion, with foundation funding, categorical funding, supplemental funding, and additional funding distributed to districts and charters. The presentation covered the matrix used to calculate foundation funding, the role of the uniform rate of tax, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and how charter schools are funded differently from traditional districts. Staff also discussed categorical programs such as alternative learning environments, English learner funding, enhanced student achievement, and professional development, as well as supplemental categories including transportation, special education high-cost occurrences, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked numerous questions about the funding formulas, the meaning of specific staffing categories, how categorical funds are used, and the number of districts receiving teacher salary equalization or ALE funding. One member noted that the Excel Center’s funding appeared in the broader state-local totals and asked for clarification. Staff said some of the more detailed spending questions would be addressed in the next day’s presentation and offered to provide follow-up information, including district lists and historical changes. The meeting ended after the chair noted that the department was present mainly to answer questions, not to deliver a separate update, and no further business was taken up before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we have English learner, or EL, funds, and these are used to overcome language barriers that impede
• English learner students generate $366 per student, or $16 million in 25.
• learner, that's slide 43, English learner students.
• And then I know that it is spelled out in the categorical funds for English learner, under categorical
• , and that would be English learner.

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education and the Excel Center model, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities. Witnesses argued that about 300,000 Arkansas adults lack a high school diploma or GED and described the Excel Center as a diploma-granting public charter option for adults 19 and older, with wraparound supports such as child care, transportation, tutoring, life coaching, and career services. They said the Arkansas campuses are not state-funded, highlighted growth in enrollment and graduation outcomes, and cited research showing improved employment, earnings, and reduced criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members discussed the role of Goodwill’s nonprofit mission, the need for multiple adult education pathways, and the relationship between adult education challenges and broader state efforts such as LEARNS and ACCESS. The committee then debated the interim study proposal procedure, including whether questions should have been taken before the vote. The motion to adopt the ISP passed, and members noted that the study would broadly examine adult education, GED testing, high school diplomas, charter schools, in-person adult education, and funding allocation. Several members asked for follow-up information on current adult education funding, the availability of Excel Centers, and the criminal justice study results. After that, staff from the Bureau of Legislative Research gave a detailed adequacy funding overview for Arkansas K-12 education. They reviewed national funding principles and then explained Arkansas’s revenue streams and distribution system, including general revenue, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, local property-tax revenues, and facilities partnership funding. They also walked through the state’s foundation formula, categorical aid, supplemental aid, and additional funding, including the per-student matrix amount of $7,771 for 2025 and how funds are allocated to districts and charters. Members asked about student support staff, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the Excel Center’s treatment in funding totals; staff said some of those questions would be addressed in a later spending presentation. The meeting ended after the committee was told the department was present mainly to answer questions and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• language learners throughout the K-12 system.
• Along with the English Language Arts, English Language Development, or ELE, ELD framework.
• language English language learner lead agencies.
• or English learner specialist county office of education.
• language learners.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Teachers need to understand that gifted learners deserve to have their unique needs met.
• Those bills built a framework for advanced learners.
• an English language learner is in their class.
• Gifted and advanced learners are no different.
• Thank you for your time and your commitment to all learners. All right.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held its 13th hearing, chaired by Senator Jason Lewis and Representative Gordon, and heard testimony on a large slate of bills covering personnel and miscellaneous education issues. The first major topic was House Bill 711 and Senate Bill 327, the “So All Students Thrive” proposal, which would change reduction-in-force rules so districts could consider teacher effectiveness, student impact, staffing needs, and diversity-related factors alongside seniority. Supporters from Educators for Excellence, including teachers and a former school committee chair, argued that current seniority-based layoff rules can push out effective early-career educators and harm efforts to build a more diverse workforce. Committee members raised questions about tenure, union involvement, and how the bill would interact with the Educator Diversity Act and local contract negotiations; members generally said they shared the goal of diversifying the educator workforce and encouraged continued collaboration and feedback. The committee then heard testimony on House Bill 658, which would require educator training on gifted and advanced learners. Parents, teachers, researchers, and advocates said Massachusetts lacks required preservice or professional development on gifted education, leaving many advanced students unchallenged and underserved. Witnesses described students who are bored, under-identified, or even discouraged in school, and argued that training would help teachers recognize and support gifted students, including students of color, multilingual learners, low-income students, and students with disabilities. Testimony also supported related prior bills on advanced learners and emphasized that the state should act on a 2019 DESE report recommending such training. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 736 and Senate Bill 435, which would establish de-escalation training for school transportation. The Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council said the measure would improve safety for students and bus operators, fill a gap in current school bus driver certification requirements, and better support students with disabilities. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 4720, concerning the Athol-Royalston Regional School District’s state bailout-related reserve requirements; the superintendent said the district has long maintained fiscal stability but is still forced to leave over half a million dollars unspent each year, limiting resources for a high-poverty student population. After testimony concluded, the chairs read the full list of bills on the agenda, thanked the committee and staff, and the hearing was adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Learner Roadmap Policy, which is due to expire this year and is the most effective toolkit that we have
• for ensuring anyone working with English learners understands the best practices.
• We also support rejecting the definition for students at risk of becoming long-term English learners
• Item 11, various appropriations, and Item 40, the adult learner program in higher ed.
• Item 11, various appropriations and 40, the adult learner program in higher ed.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education held its close-out hearing for the 2026 budget process, with the chair saying the Senate plan fully funds Proposition 98 and continues investments in universal school meals, career education, immigrant and LGBTQ+ student supports, UC/CSU compacts, and community college stability. Public commenters largely supported those priorities, including funding for CalNEW, Dream resource centers, teacher workforce programs, community schools, special education, paid pregnancy leave, and higher education aid, while some urged rejection of proposals they viewed as underfunding Prop 98 or adding non-LEA preschool costs into the guarantee. Others raised concerns about the middle class scholarship cut, CalFresh support for college students, and the need for clearer instructional windows and English learner supports. During member comments, Senator Chao Bogh said many items were supportable but criticized placeholder language, lack of final details, accountability concerns, and some borrowing or mandate structures, including the middle class scholarship, adult learner program, Calbright common cloud platform, paid pregnancy leave, and apprenticeship backfill. The chair responded that the budget reflects major investments in K-12 and higher education, including full Prop 98 funding, elimination of the settle-up amount, middle class scholarship funding, and Dreamers resource centers, and emphasized the importance of supporting students regardless of documentation status. The committee then moved to the vote-only calendar and adopted multiple staff recommendation packages. Part A issues 2-15, 24, 26-42, 44-71, 74-90, and 92-117 were approved unanimously; Part A issue 1 passed with Senator Chao Bogh voting no; and Part A sections 16-23, 25, 43, 72, 73, and 91 were noted as agreed to. In Part B, issues 1-10, 12-24, 25A, 26-27, 29-30, 32-34, 36-44, 48-49, 51-67, and 69 were approved, as were issues 11, 40, and 68, and issues 25B, 28, 31, 35, 45-47, and 50. The hearing then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have more adult learners coming into our system, and adult learners need a very different style
• as their first language. doesn't work for them.
• our<00:12:43.839> system<00:12:44.480> and learners coming into our system and learners
• their first not have English as their first language.<00:12:57.519> So<00:12:57.920> it
• So it really is important that language.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• learners.
• language learners, and a lack of instructional rigor and positive classroom environments.
• learners, ALPACs.
• learners, ALPACs.
• learners and other categories of students facing obstacles in their life.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on several bills centered on school accountability, receivership, graduation requirements, charter school access, community schools, school libraries, and student voting rights. Much of the discussion focused on the Thrive Act, S. 374, which would end state receivership and change the state’s accountability approach. Supporters, including educators, parents, advocacy groups, and students, argued that receivership has not improved outcomes in districts such as Lawrence, Holyoke, Southbridge, Boston, and the Dever, and that local communities should have more control, with greater emphasis on community schools, wraparound services, and broader measures of school quality. They also supported related bills on community schools and school library standards, and several witnesses backed a bill to expand student representative voting rights on school committees. Opponents of S. 374, especially charter school leaders, parents, students, and some education advocates, focused on Section 4 of the bill, which would change the charter school net school spending cap in the lowest-performing districts. They argued that the provision would reduce access to charter seats in communities where families are seeking more options, and that schools such as Roxbury Prep, Excel Academy, Brook, Veritas Prep, and Libertas Academy have produced strong results for students, including students of color, low-income students, and students with special needs. Several witnesses said the section would force schools to shrink or close and would remove opportunities for families in districts with long waitlists. Committee members questioned witnesses on both the effectiveness of receivership and the charter school cap language. Chair Lewis and Chair Gordon emphasized the need for a better accountability system and noted concerns about whether current measures, including MCAS-based designations, accurately reflect school quality. Some witnesses said they had discussed the possibility of removing Section 4 from the Thrive Act and suggested it might be addressed in separate charter reform legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing; testimony was received and the committee later closed testimony on S. 374 and several related bills before moving on to the student voting rights bill, S. 367.

Transcript Highlights:

• language arts, English language development instructional material supplemental guidance, individualized
• language arts, English language development instructional material supplemental guidance, individualized
• language arts, English language development instructional material supplemental guidance, individualized
• language arts and English language development, or ELD, framework.
• English learner development student groups.

Summary: The committee heard the May Revision presentation for the Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, with public comment focused heavily on K-12 priorities such as universal school meals, kitchen infrastructure, food service and custodial support, youth leadership grants, Special Olympics funding, English learner support, universal pre-K, literacy investments, and concerns about community college funding shifts. Speakers also urged support for expanded learning, teacher recruitment and training, and maintaining or increasing funding for community colleges and student support programs. Finance and the LAO then reviewed the Proposition 98 outlook. Finance said the May Revision lowers the 2025-26 Prop. 98 guarantee to $114.6 billion, about $4.3 billion below January, due mainly to lower revenue estimates, with smaller effects from attendance and property tax changes. The administration also described rebenching for universal transitional kindergarten and a one-time rebench tied to Los Angeles fire-related property tax losses, along with changes to the Public School System Stabilization Account, deferrals, and updated COLA assumptions. The LAO said the budget relies too much on deferrals and one-time funds, creates a structural shortfall, and should instead align ongoing spending with the guarantee and preserve a reserve buffer. Members questioned the TK rebench and the shift of funding from community colleges to K-12, asking why it was being applied retroactively and how colleges would be held harmless. Finance said the changes align funding with where TK costs are being incurred and that reappropriation funding and other adjustments would offset impacts on community colleges. The LAO argued the historical split formula is outdated and should be abandoned in favor of budgeting around current priorities rather than fixed percentages. Members also raised concerns about draining the rainy day reserve and using deferrals, while the LAO said preserving reserves would better protect against future volatility. The committee then moved to specific K-12 and education proposals. Finance outlined May Revision changes including state operations adjustments for the Department of Education, technical trailer bill changes, a $100 million student teacher stipend program administered by Kern County, and updates to the charter school facility grant program. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposed increases for expanded learning, literacy coaches, and the student teacher stipend as currently structured, while supporting the minimum grant increase for expanded learning. Members expressed support for teacher recruitment efforts but questioned whether one-time funding can sustain ongoing programs and whether the student teacher stipend should be targeted to shortage areas or low-income communities.

Transcript Highlights:

• As an English language learner, I know the struggle of... ...also on the list. Senator R.
• As an English language learner, I know the struggle of... ...English speakers as an English language
• learner.
• Most early math-type things are simple in all languages. It's learning to count.
• And those are in every language.

Bills: SB29, SB64

Keywords: SB29, math requirements for teaching license, teacher licensure, teacher endorsement, mathematics methods, elementary education, secondary education, special education, early childhood education, reciprocity, Public Education Department, Mathematics and Science Education Act, mathematics instructional leadership framework, professional learning plan, K-3 screening, mathematics screening assessment, mathematics difficulty, support plan, multilevel support, intervention

Transcript Highlights:

• Martinez is the English language learner coordinator and English language arts teacher at Konowana High
• Martinez is the English<00:40:06.160> language<00:40:06.560> learner<00:40:07.079> coordinator
• <00:40:08.079> and English language learner coordinator and English language learner coordinator
• and English<00:40:08.720> language<00:40:09.200> arts<00:40:09.599> teacher<00:
• 40:10.000> at English language arts teacher at English language arts teacher at Konowana<00:40

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The vast majority of children in this community are black and Latino and English learners.
• language arts and English language development.
• I spent over 20 years teaching in special education and English learner education.
• Half of our kids, 47%, are English language learners. 7% are newcomers. 20% of my, less than 20% of my
• language learners or our English language newcomers and it's not working for charter schools and here's

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Twenty percent are proficient, combining math and English language arts.
• Learning disabilities, that could be math, English, or writing. It could even be speech-language.
• So those are English language learners.
• Like hopefully we can with a language learner.
• So. move them through the different levels, like hopefully we can with a language learner.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 4, 2026 minutes, and received a lengthy Department of Public Instruction presentation from Stanley Schauer Jr. on North Dakota student performance data in math and ELA, with comparisons between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Schauer explained the assessment systems used, the 1% alternate assessment cap for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the absence of 2019-20 data due to the pandemic, and how state standards are set by North Dakota educators. Members asked about cohort trends, the role of alternate assessments, grade-level patterns, and whether the state should focus more on reducing the novice category than on moving students from approaching to proficient. Schauer also discussed the new NDA Plus assessment, the state’s planned growth model, and the possibility of future breakdowns by disability category or by schools using science-of-math approaches. Special education educators testified that students with disabilities continued to receive services during COVID because of FAPE obligations, which likely helped limit learning loss, and emphasized that IEP teams focus on individual growth rather than only proficiency buckets. Committee members then shifted to special education funding and possible funding models. Brandon Bombach of Grand Forks Public Schools presented on the state aid formula, focusing on the special education weighting factor and arguing that the current formula does not adequately respond to growing student needs because it counts enrollment but does not adjust when the number of students with IEPs rises. He used examples to show that a district can have the same enrollment and receive the same weighting even if the number of students needing services increases. Members discussed whether the formula should be tied more closely to actual need and accountability, and the chair indicated that the committee would continue gathering data and ideas for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then, where there was specific budget language in House Bill 2, we also put that language here so that
• , essentially for English learners. through professional development, family engagement, and instructional
• Language Acquisition has been mostly hollowed out at the U.S.
• learners. and how we navigate a potential post-Title III scenario.
• learners, not only them, but also students who have exited EL.

Transcript Highlights:

• 20% are proficient, combining math and English language arts.
• Learning disabilities, that could be math, English, or writing. It could be even speech language.
• Whether you have an IEP, special education, or any other weighting factor like English language learning
• So those are English language learners.
• And we aren't paying the same amount for a person that has improved their English language skills to

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.