Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disconnected Youth topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee refers ‘disconnected youth’ bill to Appropriations after debate over providers, data and regional approach
Summary
A bill to expand services and competitive grants for 'disconnected youth' was referred to Appropriations after lawmakers debated opening services to more providers, the role of regional councils of governments and data-sharing safeguards.
A joint favorable substitute for Senate Bill 1511, an act concerning disconnected youth, was moved and seconded and the Joint Finance Committee voted to refer the bill to the Appropriations Committee for further review.
The bill’s substitute language would broaden how mental health and workforce services are procured for disconnected youth by adding competitive request-for-proposal processes, clarifying that in-person mental-health services licensed by the Department of Public Health remain eligible, and allowing nonprofits to apply for workforce grants if they can demonstrate prior success working with disconnected youth.
During floor-level discussion, lawmakers and witnesses pressed several practical questions. Representative Zepkis asked whether councils of governments (COGs) should be part of the proposal; sponsors said COG involvement reflects a regional approach that could increase efficiency in a state with no county governments. Several members, including Representative Khan, pressed for clarity that school-based health centers would not be excluded and that in-state licensure and RFPs would preserve access for existing center providers.
Members also raised concerns about data collection and sharing. Sponsors said the bill leverages existing interagency data practices to identify effective programs and noted the Section 21 data requirements are preexisting law. Representative Khan and others asked for clearer limits on what data the state shares and with whom, especially with nonprofit partners and regarding youth privacy.
Supporters highlighted examples of nonprofits providing long-term, wraparound services — including an extended example of the nonprofit Domus — and argued the competitive grant approach would let school districts partner with trusted local providers. Skeptics warned about potential costs and urged Appropriations to weigh fiscal impacts before the bill advances.
The committee recorded the motion to refer the substitute language to Appropriations; a formal roll call followed and votes were held open per committee custom prior to final public release of vote totals.
The bill remains pending referral to Appropriations, where its fiscal implications and procurement mechanics will be considered.
