Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Cte Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Students, lawmakers press committee for Career‑Tech funding as CTE pilots get revisited

House Appropriations and Finance · January 30, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representative Pettigrew introduced SkillsUSA students and urged the committee to expand funding for Career and Technical Education; members raised concerns that prior year CTE funds remain unspent and asked for oversight and broader language so funds can be used for work‑based learning and non‑pilot expansions.

Students from SkillsUSA and other Career and Technical Student Organizations visited the Capitol and members reserved time to acknowledge their advocacy as the committee considered language and funding that affects CTE programs statewide.

"Today is SkillsUSA Day up here," Representative Pettigrew said as he introduced the student delegates and urged members to consider additional support for CTSOs and local school CTE programs. Pettigrew said pilots and innovation zone funding do not meet the needs of 89 school districts and charter schools and asked the committee to ensure funding is accessible statewide.

LFC staff noted the packet includes a $17 million pilot for evidence‑based CTE and $7 million for innovation zones and that language in lines 72 and 74 reads "including," not "limited to," which staff said is intended to make funding broader in scope. Pettigrew and other members asked that language not lock funds into only pilot or innovation zone uses and asked for follow‑up oversight during the interim to ensure PED distributes existing funds effectively.

Members also raised implementation issues: Pettigrew described individual school attempts to repurpose CTE funding that were denied by capital outlay or finance offices, and asked the committee to revisit whether statutory language or administrative practice is limiting local uses. Staff recommended monitoring distribution and raising issues with local school boards for allocation where appropriate.

The committee did not adopt separate, standalone new CTE appropriations beyond those reflected in the packet; members directed staff to capture concerns for summer interim review and oversight.