[{"_1":2,"_105":-5,"_106":-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",[32,75,85,95],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_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":73},"mediaId",6575323,"mediaKeyId","3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a","parentId",3115095,"title","Votes at a glance: Appropriations Committee advances dozens of bills, many to consent; several debated items move to the floor","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",14400000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a&start=14400&end=14400","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a/thumbnail_14400000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6575323/Connecticut/Votes-at-a-glance-Appropriations-Committee-advances-dozens-of-bills-many-to-consent-several-debated-items-move-to-the-floor","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6575323-8e058fad0168fc25b4d42ae19bf93228/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138109&Signature=Nj7HPr3CXFFkr8ys-VMKO3JmJ8zSs6ZmP1UO3VmNnpN834uNj~JTrU4gQtAu~kLP1oeueGW9LpV0yHqpb-gqMw2NTTwnqsdqDW4RHBNP7sc8oyWcDmb1xMFtTKW~K-FvrmT2FzFkLyfGyINp6~HTqhWGIM8DoAPllPVwq5cVevlBHWhgMsNUR48S8QpGtiDNByiDAvB~RsrPFLX-RBtUkFk2kx0J44rYYoczWgU9hqBYtN9v9BpNgElO9cwdC-sNblUC1RX1IaJjbw2YmGw8FB0LfYFdXe0pldfv1RqXJpUW7hq0LKj10WBbiEECMQhcobrVP6Xj4Nbp6hfif8-mKw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Connecticut State Legislature","date","2025-04-24T22:07:29.223Z","article","The Appropriations Committee considered and advanced a wide set of measures during its April 24 meeting. Many items were placed on a consent calendar and reported en bloc; several bills received extended discussion and roll-call votes. This roundup lists the major actions and committee outcomes recorded in the public hearing.

What the committee moved to the consent calendar (examples)
- Senate Bill 858 (Mashantucket, Pequot, and Mohican Fund) — moved to consent.
- Senate Bill 1525 (Teachers' Retirement board recommendations) — moved to consent.
- Senate Bill 1527 (Nonlapsing accounts / auditors’ recommendation) — moved to consent.
- Senate Bill 1551 (DECD arts, humanities and activities spending) — moved to consent.
- HB 7232 (streamline state contracting) — moved and amended; placed on consent as amended.
- HB 7233 (Parkinson’s disease research account) — moved to consent.
- HB 7254 (DSS Medicaid rate-study implementation) — moved to consent.
- SB 1550/SB1537 and multiple other bills were either put on consent or reported after brief discussion; the committee clerk called the consent calendar and members approved the set.

Bills taken up with debate and committee action
- SB 15-26, health insurance benefits for state marshals — advanced to the floor after debate about whether marshals are state employees and ERISA issues; staff reported a fiscal estimate of approximately $1.7 million.
- HB 7216 (CTE/Technical Education substitute) — committee debated language removing “private career schools” from cooperative-arrangement language and adding nonprofit training institutions; an amendment to restore private career schools failed 21–25; the substitute was reported to the floor.
- SB 12-44 (investments in in-district special education) — added to the agenda and advanced; members requested DOE rate-study deliverables before final floor action and noted several competing special-education measures.

Other procedural outcomes and notes
- The committee repeatedly conducted roll-call votes and left some votes open while other matters continued; staff distributed or agreed to distribute background documents, including a cited Attorney General opinion and fiscal notes where available.
- A number of bills were moved “JF to the floor” (reported to the House/Senate floor) or placed on the consent calendar for expedited consideration.

Members, staff, next steps
- Several members asked for further briefings and documents (Attorney General opinion, rate-study outputs, ERISA guidance) before final floor action. Committee staff said they would circulate those materials.
- Bills reported to the floor will appear on their respective chamber calendars for further debate and final votes.

This roundup does not list every consent item; the committee’s consent calendar was read into the record and approved by voice/roll call as recorded in the meeting transcript.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Appropriations Committee Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","At its April 24 session the Appropriations Committee ran through a long agenda, advancing many bills to a consent calendar and reporting several debated proposals to the floor. Several votes were roll-call; consent items were reported en bloc.","taxTitle","Appropriations, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, Connecticut","taxId",15021,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":42,"_43":78,"_45":78,"_46":79,"_48":80,"_50":81,"_52":82,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6575328,"Appropriations committee approves technical education bill but rejects amendment to restore private career-school participation",11820000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a&start=11820&end=11820","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a/thumbnail_11820000.jpg","/articles/6575328/Connecticut/Appropriations-committee-approves-technical-education-bill-but-rejects-amendment-to-restore-private-career-school-participation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6575328-63a6eab98c603e344b19e0e5a4344cbc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138109&Signature=hGifblWBmDbdqHW~EB26UXHaJtWfDfhmJdbSHA5v8Mawe7JpVLqsGIu4vyqz2qFB7son6dGf6d4ExdNV7z0GU08eMex5KPxyTjUI7iBib47mmbkxZN-ZDOMdMegXqOTJBNCMaSrUiezCvuKFBQJtvzH6bCnXslXhABZUxBR4ueK-V6nXIq1GBEmEDAr4uUAkGm7GHMNJZAKlvTgXmrOfkD6~kxPPWGNBMBPhvndTuzKCLkCdx6enyCdnC-dNAVlWXi5-Mh55iw10QpYXtXzdAJijhufXdmARXoVpmG6bZv4j4QlysgI7Zi5CPP0zToJSAU5EmuECQz9fsJyOXzuGkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Appropriations Committee considered a substitute for House Bill 7216, a measure implementing recommendations for the Technical Education and Career System (CTE/CTECS). Members debated a change that removed “private career schools” from a list of entities that the executive director may enter into cooperative arrangements with and replaced that phrase with “a nonprofit training institute in the state that provides training in the building trades to underserved populations.”

Representative Eckert and others raised concerns the deletion could limit opportunities for private providers who offer certifications, apprenticeships, or employer connections for CTE students. Eckert said private career schools sometimes provide certification pathways and apprenticeship hours that can lead directly to employment; she opposed the substitution as written.

Representative Ackert moved an amendment to remove brackets so that private career schools would remain included alongside nonprofit training institutes. That amendment was debated and put to a roll-call vote. The committee recorded the outcome of the amendment vote as 21 in favor, 25 opposed; the amendment failed. Several speakers, including Senator Berthel, noted the substitute language had not been heard in a public hearing prior to the committee’s change and supported restoring the private providers’ language.

After the amendment failed, the substitute bill as drafted (including the deletion of private career schools and addition of nonprofit training institute language) was reported to the floor.

What happens next: the substitute moves to the full chamber. Members and advocates who raised concerns said they would seek to address training-provider access and apprenticeship oversight during floor consideration or in follow-up technical fixes.

","Lawmakers debated language in a Technical Education and Career System bill that removed private career schools from cooperative arrangements and added nonprofit training institutes. An amendment to reinstate private career schools failed 21–25; the base bill was advanced.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":42,"_43":88,"_45":88,"_46":89,"_48":90,"_50":91,"_52":92,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":93,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":94,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6575333,"Committee adds and advances governor’s in-district special education investment bill amid concern about competing measures",15140000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a&start=15140&end=15140","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a/thumbnail_15140000.jpg","/articles/6575333/Connecticut/Committee-adds-and-advances-governors-in-district-special-education-investment-bill-amid-concern-about-competing-measures","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6575333-b5bb5bf7c933eae892342a335fc41191/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138109&Signature=SzVloKH47MKh7tq~0GXDi-hH7d9lZum4xDlNPQnNPGOCgno8rrl8Yh1uLCld-onJGrWcZE9NwcC7C~npI6-njXcTFGsdi9pwfvxddzqFwxk95M7vdvt7Qyijao6HhyCVfzGKS5xNzAZTCQdab8XDkvS8zaDwdKBiqUyMtc1-15eJk65yRyYWZMdHb5TTpAg20-AcUkf4FEHOK6QuYGyyvlyJp7Ct6rYMx11dWDfSUuoPV3se2~~8gEWCGwlAXFJVvhmpXTUC89lqneijcGRgSQnHOB3W8x6AeNbI2lDhd1xWHTVhHYSZHc~mf9uEE5Zzw2r4QE1xac-ZAQ4AbXqUOw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Appropriations Committee voted to add Senate Bill 12-44 — described in the hearing as a governor’s proposal to increase in-district special education investments — to the agenda and then advanced the measure to the floor after discussion.

Multiple members warned that the special education funding landscape is fragmented across competing committee bills and the budget. Representative Nuccio and others urged staff and the Department of Education to finish a pending rate-setting study before the Legislature adopts broad policy changes. Nuccio said the department has been “tasked with the function” but the committee has “not gotten that yet,” and that passing large funding or limit changes without that information risks producing unintended results.

Committee members also discussed related measures already before the committee, including bills on in-district funding mechanics and rate setting. Some members expressed support for moving the bill forward to allow floor-level and further negotiations to reconcile competing pieces. Others said they would vote against the bill until the department’s rate study and consistent fiscal language are available.

The committee reported the bill to the floor. Staff indicated they would try to reconcile the pieces of competing special education legislation and circulate outstanding rate-study materials to members prior to floor action.

","Members added the governor’s bill on in-district special education investments to the agenda and advanced it, while several members warned that multiple overlapping bills and incomplete rate studies make it hard to legislate without clearer fiscal and programmatic detail.",{"_33":96,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":97,"_41":42,"_43":98,"_45":98,"_46":99,"_48":100,"_50":101,"_52":102,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":103,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":104,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6575337,"Appropriations panel advances bill to extend state employee health benefit parity to state marshals amid legal questions",12016000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a&start=12016&end=12016","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3115095-645a8274181ad71e8d84329cc51f3a7a/thumbnail_12016000.jpg","/articles/6575337/Connecticut/Appropriations-panel-advances-bill-to-extend-state-employee-health-benefit-parity-to-state-marshals-amid-legal-questions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6575337-46946dcaf5b0c8a418580afc464b8085/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138109&Signature=n6X4qbFL5doJn1~9ZLW3GGXi~P9LZFAIDTsozkOdQ3iG6NfR6ry8-elC~FcSW0gIdx9yk0E7JEAY4tZS67ki8kPJjyFeTH~6GvzsA0-J34BF5qWg~nTIEHZHolQrPGQjkeeB5hutxc7C0Z5f5lFjcL4utubm0nIbZRy5n2pmoDG9GXu7xbqiFOo967D8ffRwmUD2yeI2kmvAl57n3xqk4bxjsB5crfGobojQUko~n2FkZKg3gmv-7lUU3EEPcmUmo8WvPgu3R4HHBHpzLjoB1RFaHLfRRuPu0A9let2geIkqZjGmtL1WXPknAbtgxX11WQrLCJo5gp00GDVHz56B1Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Appropriations Committee voted to move forward with a bill to extend parity in state employee health insurance to state marshals. The committee advanced Senate Bill 15-26, described in committee as “an act concerning health insurance benefits for state marshals,” to the floor after debate about legal and fiscal implications.

Committee members, including Representative Nuccio, said they were not yet persuaded that the state marshals covered by the bill are state employees for purposes of federal ERISA and state benefit law. Nuccio said she lacked “total confirmation” on whether marshals are considered state employees and therefore would vote no unless those questions were resolved. Another member asked for the date of the Attorney General opinion cited in committee; staff said the opinion was from February 2009.

Supporters pointed to a long-standing practice under which many state marshals have obtained state group coverage at their own expense and said the bill would change the employer share so marshals would pay the same portion as other state employees. Representative Walker moved the bill to the floor; Representative Nolan seconded the motion. Committee staff reported a fiscal estimate for the benefits change of about $1,700,000 for the current budget window.

Representative Gonzales clarified a frequently cited distinction: court marshals (who are state employees and receive benefits) versus the independent state marshals who serve papers and carry out other statutorily mandated process-service functions and historically have not been treated as state employees. Committee members discussed that distinction when weighing whether the bill would create new employer obligations across multiple categories of marshals.

The committee voted on the measure by roll call and advanced the bill to the next stage. Several members requested additional legal and ERISA analysis be circulated; staff said the Attorney General opinion and related materials would be distributed to members.

What happens next: the bill was reported out of committee and will proceed to the floor for further action and possible consideration with the budget. Committee discussion made clear at least some members expect more documentation (legal opinions and ERISA analysis) before final passage.

","The Appropriations Committee voted to advance legislation to give state marshals parity with state employee health benefits, but members flagged uncertainties about whether marshals are legally state employees and whether ERISA issues apply. A fiscal note put the cost at about $1.7 million.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Appropriations Committee advances dozens of bills, many to consent; several debated items move to the floor

Appropriations committee approves technical education bill but rejects amendment to restore private career-school participation

Committee adds and advances governor’s in-district special education investment bill amid concern about competing measures

Appropriations panel advances bill to extend state employee health benefit parity to state marshals amid legal questions