Portland Public Schools committee adopts four legislative priorities, directs use of bill tracker

The Portland Public Schools Public and Legislative Affairs Committee unanimously approved four legislative priorities for the 2025 session — curriculum, human rights/child protections, school funding and school construction — during a July 20 virtual meeting and directed members to begin using the district bill tracker to review and tag bills.

Chair Sarah opened the meeting by saying the committee would focus on “deciding what our legislative priorities are” and on reviewing the bill tracker so members could “start learning about the bills” before the next meeting. She later summarized the committee’s selection and moved the motion: “I’d be putting forward a motion to have our priorities for this session that they are curriculum, human rights, school funding, and school construction.” Board member Sautel seconded the motion, the chair called for a raise-of-hands vote, and “that is unanimous,” the chair said.

Why it matters: the committee’s priorities will guide which legislative proposals Portland Public Schools monitors and how the district allocates staff time and community engagement resources during the legislative session. Members emphasized that clear priorities will help the committee decide whether to support, oppose, or take no action on bills and whether to mobilize written or in-person testimony.

What the committee approved and how members will act - Priorities approved: curriculum; human rights/child protections; school funding; school construction. The committee framed these as categories, not an exhaustive list of bills. - Next steps: staff and board members were asked to use the district bill tracker, tag bills to the four priority buckets, research two to three LDs each, and return next week prepared to record committee positions (support/oppose/no position) and select actions (written testimony, in-person testimony, continued tracking or no action).

How to use the tracker: the chair walked members through the tracker and the legislature’s bill pages. Members were shown how to open an LD PDF, review line numbers and language, read the summary at the bottom of the PDF, examine sponsor lists and county/party affiliations, and review submitted testimony to map supporters and opponents.

Placeholder and emergency bills: committee discussion noted many entries are placeholder “an act regarding …” concept drafts with no language yet. A staff speaker explained that legislators may file concept bills without full language to preserve filing priority; such placeholder bills (including emergency bills) can later receive language in committee work sessions. Emergency bills require approval by the Speaker of the House to be added during the session.

LD 1971 and ICE cooperation: committee members discussed LD 1971, described in the meeting as a bill involving local law‑enforcement cooperation with ICE. A committee member said the bill is currently on the governor’s desk and relayed what an ACLU contact described as the governor’s options, including automatic enactment if unsigned within the statutory window. Committee members said they would continue to track that LD closely.

Community engagement: Superintendent Gallant and Dr. Valenzuela reminded members of two public listening sessions this week — Wednesday at United Way of Southern Maine (in-person) and Thursday (virtual), both at 6 p.m. — and asked members to attend when possible. The chair also requested that Dr. Valenzuela propose a process for engaging the community on specific bills at a future meeting.

Timing and triage: the committee agreed to code bills in the tracker by which priority they relate to and to treat priority‑tagged bills first at the next meeting. Members acknowledged the process will be iterative and that the tracker will be refined as the session evolves.

What the committee did not decide: the committee did not adopt positions on individual bills at this meeting. Several LDs were noted as lacking language or fiscal notes and were marked for continued tracking.

Next meeting: members were asked to review assigned LDs in the tracker, note testimony and sponsors, and be prepared to recommend committee positions and actions at the next committee meeting.