[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6622373,"mediaKeyId","2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832","parentId",2784920,"title","Senate committee debates wide-ranging amendments to education deregulation bill; several amendments fail, bill advanced","audioSeconds",2912,"startMs",508000,"endMs",3420000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832&start=508&end=3420","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832/thumbnail_508000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6622373/Indiana/Senate-committee-debates-wide-ranging-amendments-to-education-deregulation-bill-several-amendments-fail-bill-advanced","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622373-a26717b9fabf33009424bd51ad11af1b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771140799&Signature=SnWZb~HP3pkHapj9FvUad10Ed5P8x7bw~OvbfG5WNp7is107knX8qmckA-qo0Teur~hiZ-xUssCanBkJLLEL-4Fo1WyGmIum74MYxAYp-5Pn19AL9P6c-3itgpi7WZn3IN0haNY8CpkN-K6mKzteGHPvlbNA1CIbWzkH~IQ0bi8xW9U4dtWhxI5Su2~jkpl3MngoG2uLpJu4nzJOHlCTlashBCEIf3pJxfX3x4ev3uyZPVQ3oTUFxkBiZKRYiYwq7bU2y1Qhq~2aSFJh8EN-iVhLIYMjGM723kcXQriPRjpRRNfrJD39IjxX-QR0YYzVJHDsVyvgv6j83kkmmWevQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Indiana General Assembly","date","2025-03-26T00:00:00Z","article","The Senate Education, Career and Development Committee spent much of its March 26 meeting debating amendments to House Bill 1002, a broad Title 20 education deregulation measure that the committee will recommit to the Appropriations Committee after passing on an 8-4 vote.

The bill’s sponsor in committee presented the measure as a cleanup and deregulation package covering dozens of code sections. Senators offered and debated more than a dozen amendments addressing topics including school facility planning, automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at practices and events, charter authorizer location, charter-board transparency, fees for non-curricular supplies, and removal of social-emotional learning (SEL) and trauma-informed-care (TIC) language.

The most prominent early amendment was offered by Senator Fadi Cadora. Amendment 20 would have required the Department of Education to conduct needs assessments on school buildings, asking the agency to collect and publish counts of students, charter, private and traditional public schools within districts before new buildings were approved. Cadora said the measure was intended to inform fiscal decisions and avoid duplicative building that raises overhead for school operations. The committee called the roll and the amendment failed (4 yes, outcome: failed). Senator Cadora spoke in favor; the bill sponsor opposed the amendment on cost grounds.

Senator Linda Rogers secured an amendment (No. 30) to require operational AEDs and site-specific action plans at athletic practices and events; the committee accepted that amendment by consent. Rogers said the change reset language from a prior 2023 Senate bill and moved a “may” to a “shall” so all schools would keep AEDs on site and maintain plans for student medical emergencies.

Senator Cadora also proposed an amendment (No. 21) to require that a charter-school authorizer be located in the same county or geographic area as the proposed school. He said local authorizers would strengthen community relationships; the sponsor of HB1002 argued against a county-residency requirement for authorizers. The amendment failed on a roll call (4 yes, 9 no).

Cadora later offered Amendment 22 to require charter schools to report board composition and selection practices; he described it as a first step toward making charter boards elected in the future. The committee defeated that amendment after debate and a roll call vote.

Senator Rogers later proposed Amendment 29 to allow school corporations or charter organizers to assess a reasonable fee for supplies and materials that are not defined as curricular materials in statute. Rogers said the change would clarify ambiguity for school districts about what they may charge families. Several colleagues voiced concern that the amendment’s “reasonable fee” language was vague and could reintroduce cost burdens for families; opponents asked for clearer definitions or examples. The committee approved Amendment 29 by roll call (9 yes, 4 no).

Senator Burn offered Amendment 32 to repeal codified social-emotional learning (SEL) and trauma-informed-care (TIC) requirements from the code, arguing teachers are not trained therapists and those mandates distract from core academics. Senators JD Ford, Andrea Hundley and others spoke against removing SEL/TIC, citing evidence they can improve academic and mental-health outcomes. The committee adopted Amendment 32 (8 yes, 4 no).

Other amendments were offered across the hearing: Senator Goode proposed language tied to local oversight of county funds for school facilities (accepted by consent); Senator Ford sought several amendments addressing secretary-of-education qualifications and residency (Amendments 25 and 26), both of which failed by roll call; and Senator Rotz placed a multi-part amendment (No. 34) that restored several provisions removed by the House and adjusted transfer and governance language; the committee accepted that motion and then moved the bill as amended.

After the amendment process, senators voted to move HB1002 as amended and recommit it to the Appropriations Committee. On the final recorded roll call the bill passed committee, 8 to 4. Senators who repeatedly voted in favor during roll calls included Ford, Kidora, Yoder and Hundley in some tallies; several amendments passed or failed along similar partisan splits during the lengthy hearing.

Why it matters: HB1002 touches many routine and consequential policy areas in K–12 and charter governance, from equipment and emergency readiness at school events to the role and oversight of charter authorizers and boards. Committee action means the bill will next be considered with appropriation implications; senators repeatedly flagged potential fiscal impacts for the Department of Education and local school corporations.

Discussion vs. decision: Much of the committee’s work was amendment-level debate. The committee distinguished discussion-only remarks (policy rationales, local concerns and requests for more study) from formal outcomes: several amendments were adopted (including AED and reasonable-fee language) while others were defeated. The final committee decision advanced the bill to the budget committee with an 8-4 vote.

Quotes from the hearing (selected):
\"All what this amendment does, ask the DOE ... to evaluate the number of students in each district so that they can tell us how many charter schools, how many private schools, how many public schools are in that district,\" said Senator Fadi Cadora during debate on Amendment 20.
\"There is absolutely no intent to take away any funding for curricular materials,\" said Senator Linda Rogers while explaining Amendment 29.
\"It improves academic performance. It enhances their mental health. It builds stronger relationships,\" said Senator JD Ford in opposition to removing SEL and TIC.

Next steps: HB1002 as amended will be recommitted to the Appropriations Committee for consideration of fiscal impacts and possible inclusion in the budget process.

Sources: Committee debate and roll-call votes recorded in the March 26 committee transcript.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Education and Career Development Meetings Wednesday, Mar. 26 - 1:30pm","oneSentenceSummary","The Senate Education, Career and Development Committee spent its March 26 meeting considering numerous amendments to House Bill 1002, a broad Title 20 education deregulation bill; the committee adopted several amendments and advanced the bill to Appropriations, voting 8–4 to recommit it.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature IN, Indiana","taxId",77679,"location","Indiana","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6622368,"Panel hears bill to fund scholarships for law students who commit to public defender or deputy prosecutor service",2927,4397000,7324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832&start=4397&end=7324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832/thumbnail_4397000.jpg","/articles/6622368/Indiana/Panel-hears-bill-to-fund-scholarships-for-law-students-who-commit-to-public-defender-or-deputy-prosecutor-service","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622368-68a93416eb59430a976b71bbe792cfa2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771140799&Signature=J-wV7x530RfYEITKy8huoIvTRX4v8d4XNgoiCUyI030MCgGnTF8onk-AnT5QB4dGGjTE5Z0wnSoIlWic4ei5kUTYZPA-7mC1bH0CgE5nCTK7~txTkThN4RRUDuGIQseXuQ~X78~HzR6XEFe8bGSa-nArE0IV33LpC5zLjOLkOEqIx1iA3n1gHFCV4rvqSmR2SvYss1CVBGshD0uMjLp7vWF7SmJ~DzCvW8tq2kf-588pWyz0m8wlvxpoY6kaoWD~eDmZB04Nvd83s6N~n7sCcNRh7Uj-IN0JrEKxkbKPfu1-L8Mx4-WG5iYmWQMPBuowewBjVKTMEGOoMllnpaZiaA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1049, heard March 26 before the Senate Education, Career and Development Committee, would create a scholarship program to recruit law students into public-service legal work as deputy prosecutors or public defenders. The bill requires recipients to pledge five years of full‑time service in the designated roles and tasks the Commission for Higher Education with administering the scholarship fund.

Representative Stuart Wald, the bill’s author, described the proposal as a targeted, state-level approach to address geographically uneven attorney supply and shortages in criminal-justice positions. Under the program described in committee testimony, a full‑time eligible law student would receive $20,000 per year; a part‑time student would receive $15,000 per year. The sponsor said those awards are intended to cover roughly 70% of typical in‑state law school tuition over the course of the program and that the 5‑year service commitment would trigger repayment if a recipient does not fulfill the agreement.

Justin Foraker, chief administrative officer of the Indiana Supreme Court and co‑chair of the Supreme Court’s Commission on Indiana’s Legal Future, said Indiana ranks in the bottom 10 nationally for attorneys per capita (about 2.3 attorneys per 1,000 people) and that more than half of Indiana counties qualify as a \"legal desert\" under a one‑attorney‑per‑1,000 threshold. Foraker said the shortage is both geographic and field‑specific, and that targeted scholarships are one tool to steer newly minted lawyers into high‑need public‑service roles.

Representatives of the Indiana Public Defender Council, the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council and the Indiana State Bar Association supported the bill at the hearing. Michael Moore of the Public Defender Council described high student‑loan balances and lower pay in public service positions as impediments to recruiting and retaining defenders. Courtney Curtis of the Prosecuting Attorneys Council said government must provide certain core services — including public safety — and that many graduates opt for higher‑paying private practice instead of public prosecution work.

Angela Smith Jones from Indiana University testified the university supports the bill, has collaborated with the bill author on curriculum design, and would align course work — including Indiana‑focused training in evidence, procedure and constitutional law — to prepare graduates who accept these scholarships. The sponsor said the Commission on Higher Education will set application and repayment protocols; committee members were told the budget includes a proposed $1 million appropriation to start the program.

Why it matters: Prosecutors and public defenders are essential to court operations. Committee members heard testimony that shortages slow case processing, limit access to counsel, and strain local legal systems in both rural and urban counties. The bill is a targeted, workforce-development approach that ties financial aid to public commitments of service.

Questions and concerns: Senators asked whether the scholarship would duplicate federal loan‑forgiveness programs and whether state dollars would mainly subsidize students who would have practiced in Indiana anyway. Witnesses said federal programs (including Public Service Loan Forgiveness) exist but are unstable or limited and that a state program could focus incentives to fields and places with the most acute shortages. Committee members also raised long‑term pipeline issues — including law‑school capacity — and discussed complementary approaches such as regional legal education sites or licensing alternatives.

Next steps: HB1049 received testimony and is positioned for further committee consideration. Lawmakers requested implementation details, including administrative rules from the Commission on Higher Education and clearer estimates of how many scholarships the $1 million appropriation would fund.","A bill to create scholarships for law students who commit to five years of public‑service work as deputy prosecutors or public defenders drew support from state court officials, prosecutors and public‑defender representatives in a March 26 Senate committee hearing.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6622363,"Bill to require cash option at school athletic gates, remove old IHSA transfer language draws mixed reactions",1180,7380000,8560000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832&start=7380&end=8560","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2784920-c677ec3d1fc94da0d696677520da3832/thumbnail_7380000.jpg","/articles/6622363/Indiana/Bill-to-require-cash-option-at-school-athletic-gates-remove-old-IHSA-transfer-language-draws-mixed-reactions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622363-faf8df613d9f9864f8b09a9118321c61/orig.mp4?Expires=1771140799&Signature=Z0y4t7o3ZJy67h4vNNwajCe7wvo7nvr2POiE2~JO4l0FCsPycIR0Y2vZ2h3Jqc1pi6SzAhBtl6acJPqzyF41lJ4dPXD6MUQTRxNa5OlbfAuwLfh-TiRRSgLHNlabY~VNEv~M-0iwtAb-wenog5LHR2oX77IDfpQo0H8XzOc7TdcAzp1Pw7sR0XKoqcXHkERME-R7m9KwFnZtMTwhLt60pEYOkKEpjMgX7zT1RXODO5ZL6x-zlLuzGe69lGuxtOgauskWvAdcoXrROV6pXMeH8AbgQw0YqDDHvfiN0NjB4sTebOVZ9gvT3J4dI~7armMggUyt2i6qKYdFiDKEDBakbQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1064, presented March 26 in the Senate Education, Career and Development Committee, would require schools that offer extracurricular athletic events to provide a cash‑payment option at ticket gates and would remove an older statutory provision tied to interscholastic transfer language.

Representative Corey Criswell said the cash‑option provision responds to accessibility concerns: many attendees, including elderly relatives or families without electronic payment methods, rely on cash. Criswell noted a 90% compliance rate among schools based on an IHSA survey and framed the measure as filling a gap for the remaining schools.

Paul Naughty, commissioner of the Indiana High School Athletic Association (IHSAA), told the committee the association already requires host schools to accommodate cash buyers at state tournament sites. Naughty explained why some schools and athletic departments prefer not to accept cash at every event: cash handling adds staffing and reconciliation burdens, raises security and accounting concerns, and can expose student workers to cash management duties administrators sometimes avoid. He said the association tries to make accommodations and that most tickets at state tournaments are sold as cash. The IHSAA supported the idea that a person with cash should not be turned away, but Naughty also described practical reasons some schools limit cash handling.

On the transfer language, the proposed statutory cleanup would strike an older, seldom‑invoked provision from the code that dated to an earlier era of school‑funding and transfer rules. Naughty said the language was “archaic” and not routinely used in IHSA governance; the association and the bill sponsor worked on the strike language to align statute with current association practice and board‑approved bylaws. The association described its internal transfer-review process, appeals to its board of directors, and a state-level case review panel that provides oversight in contested transfer decisions.

Committee discussion ranged from support for accessibility to concerns about state mandates on local school operations. Several senators said decisions about ticketing and revenue collection are ordinarily made at the local school‑corporation level and urged caution about prescribing specific payment methods in statute. Senator Hundley and others said making events free would better address access concerns, while Senator Buchanan asked whether the requirement would obligate schools to accept every payment method.

Why it matters: Gate receipts fund many athletic‑department costs — transportation, officials, uniforms and event staffing — and local districts set policies to balance accessibility, safety and bookkeeping. The bill would add a statewide, statutory requirement for a cash option while also removing dated language related to transfers.

Outcome and next steps: The committee took testimony; no committee vote was recorded during the hearing. Senator Rotz said further conversations would follow; Representative Criswell and IHSA representatives indicated willingness to work with lawmakers on implementation details.

Quotes from the hearing:
\"If somebody walks in the door with a $20 bill, we should have an accommodation to make sure that we can accept that person into that contest,\" Paul Naughty, IHSAA commissioner, said.
\"I didn't want to walk a half mile back to my car in the rain,\" Representative Corey Criswell said when explaining an impetus for the cash‑option amendment.

Sources: Testimony from Representative Criswell and IHSAA Commissioner Paul Naughty. The committee recorded questions and discussion but did not adopt an amendment or move the bill during the hearing.","Representative Corey Criswell presented House Bill 1064 to require schools to accept cash at athletic event gates and to strike an outdated statutory transfer clause related to interscholastic athletics. The Indiana High School Athletic Association supported a cash-accommodation requirement but described administrative and security reasons some","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee debates wide-ranging amendments to education deregulation bill; several amendments fail, bill advanced

Panel hears bill to fund scholarships for law students who commit to public defender or deputy prosecutor service

Bill to require cash option at school athletic gates, remove old IHSA transfer language draws mixed reactions