Bills: HB1937, HB2153, HB3674, HB2978, HB3885, HB3671, HB3261, HB3021, HB3029, HB4274, HB3701, HB3076

Keywords: HB1937, Oklahoma schools, student communications, electronic communication, digital communication, parent notification, legal guardian, school personnel, teachers, coaches, administrators, charter schools, public schools, administrative leave, corroborated report, investigation, employee file, discipline, termination, school board

Bills: SB1734, SB1630, SB1894, SB1975, SB1432, SB1437, SB1812, SB346, SB1250, SB710, SB1489, SB2045, SB1614

Keywords: artificial intelligence, AI, schools, public school districts, education technology, edtech, student privacy, FERPA, data privacy, data security, emerging technologies, machine learning, generative AI, classroom technology, instructional technology, teacher oversight, human-in-the-loop, student data, parental consent, opt-out

Transcript Highlights:

• so I think there of writing the IEP so I think there needs<01:36:09.440> to<01:36:09.880>
• The IEPs are written narrative. We're delivering services; we get an invoice.
• The IEPs are written narrative. We're delivering services; we get an invoice.
• <03:42:44.800> was that I think we set up if an IEP was that I think we set up if an IEP was
• Many students in a district were, um, had IEPs.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session focused on school funding formulas, adequacy aid, and special education aid, with the chair outlining a schedule for the next several Tuesdays and noting that the committee would likely need multiple executive sessions to narrow down the bills. Members discussed the FY 26 formula, including base cost, differentiated aid, extraordinary needs grants, hold harmless provisions, and the roughly $28 million in excess statewide education property tax (SWP) funds that are not currently returned to the state under the existing formula. The first bill discussed was HB 137, which would allow excess SWP funds to remain with the local municipality for school and municipal purposes. Representative Spilsbury argued the issue is fundamental and suggested the state should require excess funds to be remitted back to the state, while Representative Damon said the bill appears to codify current practice and may be unnecessary, especially given possible court action. The discussion then shifted to a related bill from Representative Fellas that would redefine SWP as local money rather than state money and keep the current adequacy aid numbers revenue-neutral for now. Representative Fellas explained that SWP was created in 1999 after the Claremont lawsuit as part of the state’s effort to show increased school aid, but that it effectively labeled part of the local property tax as state money without changing property tax bills. She argued the state should not be tapping local property tax revenue and said her bill would preserve the current distribution while removing the SWP tax label, with future work possible on a different measure of local capacity such as income, home values, or poverty rate. Members also referenced prior discussions of fiscal capacity aid, relief aid, and other formula changes as part of the broader effort to restructure school funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• A student went on an IEP due to a history of trauma and an emotional..." "...disability.
• And these problems should be planned out in the child's IEP, FBA, and behavioral intervention plans.
• They already can't, especially with a kid with an IEP.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on two bills: H.5171, an act relative to safer schools, and H.3895, an act expanding career and technical education opportunities for Lynn students. The hearing focused primarily on H.5171, which would limit school resource officers’ role to serious criminal or delinquent conduct, encourage de-escalation and anti-bias training, and create grants for alternative school safety approaches such as restorative justice. Witnesses from the Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee and the Committee for Public Counsel Services supported the bill, arguing that police involvement in routine school discipline can escalate situations, especially for students with disabilities, and contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline. They described examples of student encounters with SROs that led to fear, arrest, or other harmful outcomes. Committee members raised concerns about school safety, including gang activity and weapons in schools, and asked whether the bill would remove SROs entirely. Testimony clarified that the bill would not eliminate SROs or their role in responding to actual criminal activity, but would narrow their involvement in discipline and encourage better training. One witness, Joey Ford of Parent Data Force, was neutral on H.5171, saying problems often stem from broader district discipline practices, restraint and seclusion, and inconsistent DESE standards rather than SROs alone. For H.3895, Ford testified in strong support, saying career and technical education had been valuable in his own schooling and helped him develop useful skills and stay engaged in school. After testimony concluded and no additional witnesses remained, the committee closed testimony on both bills and adjourned without taking a vote on the legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So for a student who, you know, has special needs, presumably already has an IEP in the public school
• to district, when that student goes to the next district and they share, if they're coming with an IEP
• , then that district would sit with the IEP and sit with the family and make sure that they are able
• when families start to accept, then we start to collect the transcripts and we start to collect the IEPs
• were the same as my other schools, disability rates were the same as my other schools, the number of IEP

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a lengthy hearing on a large slate of bills focused primarily on charter school policy and vocational technical education. Committee members opened with ground rules for testimony, including a two-minute limit, written testimony acceptance, and a live-streamed format. The committee then heard testimony on bills to expand collective bargaining rights in Horace Mann and Innovation Schools, reform charter school funding and reimbursement, allow enrollment preferences for high-need students in charter lotteries, and require BESE to consider district impacts when approving new or expanded charters. Several witnesses, including union leaders, parents, educators, and legislators, argued that charter growth has strained district budgets and that funding formulas should be reworked to better protect public schools; charter advocates and alumni countered that charter schools serve high-need students well and should not be penalized for their success. A major portion of the hearing focused on vocational technical education bills, including proposals to expand access and capacity, create a large grant program, and increase MSBA reimbursement rates for vocational school construction. Supporters described long waitlists, strong labor-market demand, and the higher cost of building and maintaining vocational schools, while municipal officials emphasized the tax burden on local communities. The committee also heard testimony on charter school reimbursement bills that would extend the state’s reimbursement schedule, with witnesses from districts such as Boston, Worcester, Fall River, and New Bedford describing large net losses to charter tuition and arguing for longer reimbursement periods and structural reform. The committee took no final votes during the hearing. In one instance, the chair said a bill would be held open until a missing senator could testify. Members asked several detailed questions about charter admissions lotteries, special education placements, funding formulas, and the practical effects of proposed charter caps and reimbursement changes. The hearing remained informational, with witnesses and committee members presenting sharply different views on whether the bills would improve equity and opportunity or harm existing public school systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• are effective, and you especially in your special ed classes as they're writing their 504 plans or IEPs
• their<00:31:43.200> 504<00:31:44.320> plans<00:31:44.640> or<00:31:44.880> IEPs
• <00:31:45.519> if<00:31:45.760> they're their 504 plans or IEPs if they're their 504
• plans or IEPs if they're needing<00:31:46.320> to<00:31:47.679> put<00:31:48.000> in
• IEPs will govern those processes. IEPs will govern those processes.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that means every IEP had to be reassessed.
• So we have to bring all that under the umbrella for IEP-related services and needs.
• go through what you call the full RTI or MTSS process to determine whether or not they should get an IEP
• and starting to convene those services or convening that process for developing an IEP with the families
• to work with our students and create that continuity to assess which other youth may benefit from an IEP

Summary: The committee met to hear an overview of the Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice budget area and then received performance-measure presentations from the Department of Corrections, the Commission on Offender Review, and the Department of Juvenile Justice. Staff reviewed the roughly $7.4 billion criminal justice and judiciary budget, noting major funding areas such as corrections, law enforcement, victim services, courts, and due process, along with recent investments in prison health care, security equipment, fentanyl enforcement, court staffing, and juvenile justice salaries and education programs. Secretary Dixon of the Department of Corrections described staffing and population pressures, including growth in inmate population, overtime-driven deficits, and the opening of additional housing units. He emphasized the department’s use of performance measures and highlighted reforms such as incentivized prisons, administrative management units, reentry planning, faith-based programs, and expanded education and vocational training. Members asked about teacher hiring, public defender pay parity, fentanyl funding, staffing capacity, and the role of the National Guard; Dixon said teacher vacancies had improved, public defenders had received comparable pay increases, fentanyl funding would be addressed further by FDLE, and the Guard had helped stabilize staffing. The Commission on Offender Review reported on parole, conditional release, addiction recovery supervision, and revocations, saying its recidivism/success rates had improved over a three-year measurement period. Senator Rouson pressed the commission on clemency and pardons, saying that work was omitted from the presentation and asking for backlog and case data; the commission said it did not have those figures on hand and would follow up. The committee also discussed a conditional medical release pilot study, and members questioned the report’s conclusion that no suitable elderly inmate population could be identified, asking what criteria were used and whether stakeholders were consulted. Secretary Hall of the Department of Juvenile Justice outlined the agency’s prevention-to-residential continuum and its emphasis on education, data-driven decision-making, and evidence-based programming. He said salary increases had reduced vacancies, juvenile arrests and residential commitments had fallen sharply over time, and tools such as civil citations, risk assessments, and quality-improvement reviews were being used to guide placements and services. Hall also described the department’s use of dashboards, monthly data check-ins, and the dispositional matrix to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism.

Transcript Highlights:

• by IEP and understanding how to cost build in an IEP. up on that so that we're having a fluid up on
• looking at IEP by IEP and understanding looking at IEP by IEP and understanding how<01:06:18.720
• are getting built. ...each IEP and have districts look at each of their IEPs so that we can get a handle
• They do not go to IEP meetings.
• say that we should ensure that IEP say that we should ensure that IEP services<01:30:52.880>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard from the Personnel Appeals Board, which explained that it became an independent state agency after Senate Bill 487 and was presenting its first standalone operating budget. The board described its quasi-judicial role in hearing appeals from classified state employees over disciplinary actions such as warnings, suspensions, and terminations, and said it handles about 25 to 35 cases a year, with some cases lasting longer because of their complexity. Members also outlined the need for a chair and vice chair who are attorneys, the board’s current staffing and space needs, and its plan to move away from reliance on Administrative Services for office support and website functions. The board requested about $353,500 for fiscal year 2026, including startup costs, routine operating expenses, and two new part-time positions: a program director and a paralegal. Members said the budget reflects the new independent status, includes funding for only four board members rather than the authorized five, and is designed to avoid full-time staffing costs and benefits. Legislators asked about the cost per case, the board’s relationship to DAS, whether appeals must go through the board before court, and how often cases are appealed further. The board said appeals must first go through it, that court appeals are infrequent but have increased recently, and that the board’s process is intended to resolve disputes more quickly and less expensively than court litigation. Committee members also asked about the board’s caseload, outcomes, and staffing. The board said that in the prior year there were 22 cases, with four decisions overturned in favor of employees, nine dismissals, and nine settlements, and that many disputes are resolved before reaching the board through a multi-step internal process. A member noted the governor and council had recently approved a new board member and were expected to approve a fifth soon. The discussion ended with questions about the board’s website and records access, which members said would need to be moved from Administrative Services as part of the agency’s transition. The committee then moved to the New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities. The executive director explained that the council is 100 percent federally funded under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act and develops a five-year plan to address the needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. She said the council works with state agencies and advocacy organizations on quality-of-life issues, accessibility, voter rights training, and plain-language or easy-to-read materials, and that 60 percent of its membership must be individuals with disabilities or family members/guardians. She also described the council’s funding structure, including reimbursement to the state for operating costs, and noted that it currently has three full-time and three part-time positions, with no new positions requested but one full-time position being eliminated and replaced after a pandemic-era staffing change did not work out as planned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Garcia asked, if the school decided to do all paper, whether a student with an IEP needing
• Chair, whether current law would allow that access if it is according to the student's IEP.
• She said if the concern is that kids with IEPs may face problems with the legislation if enacted into
• So, just listening to questions and comments and the aspect of the IEP requirements and not having a
• high concerns with this not being the possibility of this not being effective for our kids that have IEP

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2266, which would change school district and charter governing board policy from permissive to mandatory for excusing students for religious instruction during the school day. The sponsor and supporters framed it as a parental-choice and religious-liberty measure that preserves release-time programs, while opponents argued it would reduce local control, take students out of core instruction, create peer pressure and bullying, and raise constitutional concerns. After testimony from Secular AZ, a LifeWise Academy board member, and a school board president, the committee voted 7-5 to give HB 2266 a do pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 2193, a cleanup measure related to student directory information and parent organizations such as PTOs/PTAs/APTs. Supporters said the bill would restore parent-to-parent communication that had been unintentionally limited by prior privacy legislation, while some members raised concerns about how the information could be used and suggested narrowing the language to prevent political or lobbying uses. The bill advanced on a 10-1 vote, with members generally supporting school-community communication but asking for possible amendments. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2075, which requires public school districts to submit superintendent and other top administrator contracts or attestations to ADE and have the information posted in a searchable database. The sponsor and Goldwater Institute supporters said the bill is a transparency measure because base salary reports do not show total compensation, benefits, or allowances; opponents from school administrator groups and rural districts argued the bill singles out districts while ignoring charters and other publicly funded education providers, and they said superintendent pay is already publicly available in other forms. Discussion also touched on whether the bill should be expanded to charters and private schools. The sponsor closed by emphasizing transparency and the committee continued discussion of the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and they compared New Hampshire IEPs, and they compared New Hampshire with<00:28:52.640> other
• Those are something IEPs or 504 plans.
• They only count students with IEPs, not students with 504 plans.
• with IEPs, not students with 504<01:58:47.760> plans.
• the IEP. the IEP. $2,000<02:16:16.880> does<02:16:17.119> not<02:16:17.360> buy

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not evaluate that part of it, but we do look to see if the services are in the student's IEP.
• So we go and look at the student's IEP.
• If the services are in the IEP, then they can submit invoices on behalf of that.
• So the way it works is we have a base amount that’s in adequacy that every single kid that has an IEP
• But we have 30,000 kids in the state of New Hampshire that have an IEP, and we’re talking about less

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of Wellness and Nutrition presented an overview of the school meal and child nutrition programs it administers, including the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, Summer Food Service Program, and Special Milk Program. Staff explained which programs are federally funded through USDA, which have state matching funds, and how reimbursement rates are set for different programs and fiscal years. They also walked the committee through a packet showing reimbursement tables, state and federal funding totals, and eligibility data. Members focused much of their questioning on how state and federal reimbursements work for lunch and breakfast, why lunch is shown as a state match while breakfast has meal-based breakdowns, and how the department allocates funds in the budget. The department explained that lunch uses a set state match tied to federal requirements, while breakfast reimbursement is based on meals served. They also reviewed FY 22-24 funding trends, noting higher federal spending during COVID-era waivers and lower amounts as those waivers ended. A committee member asked for the data in Excel and the department agreed to provide it. The discussion also covered summer meal programs and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-run benefit program that provides funds to families; the two programs coordinate through data sharing but are not the same. Members also discussed CEP, with staff explaining that New Hampshire currently has three schools participating, that the qualifying threshold was reduced from 40% to 25% identified students, and that districts must cover the non-federal share with non-federal funds. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, Representative Baca, so the four student groups—Native Americans, students with IEPs, English
• example, if you're a level D student in one district compared with another and you have a fairly similar IEP
• been working hard to partner with us already on getting us some information to understand how those IEPs
• We have kids with IEPs that need their phone or their tablet. I don't know, I just...
• And then I have to definitely mark out that for... and because some of these students in IEPs, to be

Transcript Highlights:

• We're running into some special ed and IEP due processing.
• <00:59:16.000> Um, special ed and IEP due processing.
• Um, special ed and IEP due processing.
• <01:38:52.000> coordinator vacation maybe the IEP coordinator vacation maybe the IEP coordinator
• , which is Nessus, that an IEP, which is Nessus, that an IEP, educational<02:08:33.280> placement

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're not giving the IEP to substitutes.
• At Harmony Public Schools, they're not giving the IEP to substitutes.
• I don't know what that process is like, but it is problematic because the IEP is not given.
• I think it's an assumption that the IEP is being complied with, but unfortunately it's not.
• And I think if it's explicit, then there'll be no room for the IEP not to be given.

Summary: The committee continued hearing testimony on Senate Bill 2252, which would expand early literacy and numeracy screening, parent notification, intervention supports, and teacher training, including math academies and early childhood supports. Supporters from Texas 2036, Good Reason Houston, Texas Business Leadership Council, and several parents argued that early identification of skill gaps, clearer data for families, and stronger teacher preparation would improve student outcomes, workforce readiness, and long-term earnings. They cited low math proficiency statewide, the importance of early intervention, and examples of districts using screeners and data dashboards to guide instruction and resource allocation. One witness also highlighted home visiting as a family-support model, while another urged more funding for pre-K partnerships and stronger support for parents with reading materials and guidance. A district special education administrator testified neutrally, saying the bill reflects practices already used in her district but expressing concern that it could reduce local control and teacher discretion by standardizing screening and tying it to funding. A Texas Classroom Teachers Association representative supported the intent but warned that mandatory math academies and intervention academies could burden teachers if implemented like prior reading academies, and a substitute teacher/teacher-of-the-year witness asked for clearer protections around special education information and pay for alternative certification candidates. After public testimony closed, SB 2252 was left pending. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2253, as substituted, which would phase out routine hiring of uncertified teachers over time, require parent notification when a teacher is uncertified, and expand high-quality preparation pathways such as university programs, residencies, improved alternative certification, and grow-your-own programs. Senator Creighton said the bill responds to the rise in uncertified teachers and aims to strengthen the teacher pipeline with more structured preparation, mentorship, and oversight by SBEC. Invited testimony strongly supported the measure: a Texas Tech researcher said uncertified teachers and fast-track programs are associated with significant learning losses, while year-long residencies and mentored pathways produce stronger outcomes and higher earnings for students. Leaders from Dallas College and Sam Houston State University described successful residency and grow-your-own models, high completion and retention rates, and the need for paid residencies and stipends so candidates can afford to enter the profession. Committee members asked about the difference between mentorship and residency, the cost-effectiveness of paid residencies, retention incentives, and how to scale the model statewide. The committee also adopted the substitute for SB 2253 and later paused to vote out several other bills, including SB 1191, SB 1786, SB 226, SB 326, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1401, and SB 1067, all of which were reported favorably, many with unanimous votes and some placed on the local and uncontested calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• targeted support even before an IEP targeted support even before an IEP meeting<01:16:37.040>
• is given or is agreed upon and an IEP is given or is agreed upon and sign<01:17:03.600> so<01
• determined that that wasn't IEP determined that that wasn't necessarily<01:17:14.639> the<01:
• <01:17:21.080> is<01:17:21.239> signed<01:17:21.920> that that after the IEP
• is signed that that after the IEP is signed that parents<01:17:22.600> consent<01:17:23.080><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the ESE update, 53 students with disabilities may graduation requirements over 1000 IEP or 5 of 14
• meetings convened as a parent with a child to have an IEP.
• And 21 for ESE update for our second year again, July. 1st to January, 5th, 568 students with an IEP

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to know, first off, are any of the students that you see student growth in under IEPs?
• how are those children and students distinguished from your other third graders that are not under an IEP
• And those IEP students, a lot of them grew, every one of them grew.
• They either have an IEP, they have a 504, they've had extra intervention.
• Was that an IEP? That was an IEP at the beginning of the year. Yes, ma'am.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• of the students that you see student, Are any of the students that you see student growth in under IEPs
• how are those children and students distinguished from your other third graders that are not under an IEP
• And those IEP students, a lot of them grew; every one of them grew.
• Was that an IEP? That was an IEP at the beginning of the year. Yes, ma'am. Okay.
• special education and related services that are required in their individualized education plan, or IEP

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

Transcript Highlights:

• There are exemptions if a student's K through 5 or has an IEP.
• There are exemptions if a student's K through 5 or has an IEP.
• There are exemptions if a student's K through 5 or has an IEP.
• to the IEP, they'd be exempted.
• IEPs.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I saw this as well when I was a math teacher, an IEP math teacher, at the Department of Youth Services
• I saw this as well when I was a math teacher, an IEP math teacher, at the Department of Youth Services
• and they are 30 students and ...four or five plans and IEPs, and they are 30 students, and sometimes
• Now he has an IEP, but I had to become a school committee so he can really fight for him to get what
• I'll add one thing briefly as a parent also of a student with an IEP who's four and a half years old:

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education opened a hybrid public hearing on a large slate of bills related to school buildings, school finance, technology, data privacy, safety, and related education issues. Chairs Jason Lewis and Ken Gordon outlined procedures for the hearing, including two-minute testimony limits and the plan to group similar bills together. Several bills drew no testimony and were closed without further discussion, while others drew extensive testimony from legislators, school officials, parents, advocates, and educators. A major theme was school safety and student well-being. Lori Al-Hadeth testified in support of bills on alert systems in public schools, describing the loss of her daughter in the Parkland shooting and urging adoption of Alyssa’s Law-style panic alert technology. Representative Gallagher and disability advocates also supported a bill authorizing, but not requiring, airway clearance devices in schools, arguing they could save lives in choking emergencies and provide an option for people who cannot use the Heimlich maneuver. Another bill on reducing cafeteria waste drew support from a legislator and a Lexington sustainability official, who said installing dishwashers during construction would reduce waste and long-term costs. Much of the hearing focused on Chapter 70 school funding and the inflation cap. Senator Pavel Payano, Senator Sal DiDomenico, Representative Senna, and multiple local officials and school committee members from Bridgewater, Chelsea, Groton-Dunstable, and other districts argued that the 4.5% cap on inflation adjustments has left schools underfunded during years of high inflation, forcing layoffs, larger class sizes, and cuts to programs and student supports. They urged bills to eliminate the cap, restore lost funding, increase the Commonwealth’s share of the foundation budget, or create commissions to study reforms. Testimony also highlighted the impact on special education, English learners, and low-income students, with Chelsea witnesses saying the cap has cost their district about $7 million annually. School construction and MSBA reform were the other major topic. AIA Massachusetts, Boston Public Schools, Lynn officials, and AFT Massachusetts described aging facilities, overcrowding, deferred maintenance, and the difficulty of financing new schools under current reimbursement rules. Boston officials said the district has many pre-World War II buildings and has only built a handful of new schools in decades, while Lynn leaders said reimbursement rates have fallen well below the statutory 80% because of caps and ineligible costs. Witnesses urged modernization of the MSBA program, higher reimbursement rates, and more resources for school construction. The committee also heard support for a bill to study the adequacy and equity of the school building program, and chairs indicated some bills would be closed after no one signed up to testify.