Advisory council flags bill to shift Section 504 oversight to State Department of Education

Members of the Connecticut State Advisory Council for Special Education’s executive committee raised questions on March 11 about Raised Bill 424, which they said would expand state oversight of plans under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by directing the Department of Education and the Bureau of Special Education to adapt the special education data system and require reporting by local and regional boards.

The concern was raised by committee member Jeff Spar, who reviewed language in the bill and flagged substantive reporting and oversight changes. “It’s increasing the interplay between the Bureau of Special Education and local board of education regarding 5 0 4 plans,” Spar said, noting the bill includes a timeline “not later than July 2027” for changes and would require annual reporting by districts on students with 504 plans to the Department of Education.

Why it matters: members said the proposal could broaden the bureau’s role and affect local district procedures for handling 504 plans, with potential implications for data collection, evaluation, and local reporting. One committee member read an email from a legislative representative that asserted a “virtual abandonment of our legislative office of dyslexia and reading disabilities by the CSDE,” a claim an agency official disputed during the meeting. The agency official said, “there isn’t an abandonment of ODRD, from the CSDE perspective,” and noted the bureau has presented information on ODRD accomplishments in recent meetings.

Details discussed: committee members parsed specific provisions that would require the Department of Education to adapt student demographic and evaluation data in its systems to include 504 plan information, and to provide increased coordination between the bureau and local boards. The transcript records the concern that some program responsibilities historically aligned with special education had shifted to general education over time, prompting members to question how the bill would change oversight and the bureau’s jurisdiction.

Responses and next steps: council members did not take a formal vote but agreed to "keep an eye on the bill" and to monitor both its substance and its likely impact on students who move between IEPs and 504 plans. No formal action was taken at the executive committee meeting beyond assigning follow-up tasks to staff to circulate legislative materials; the council will consider this bill further at upcoming meetings.

The committee’s next full council meeting is set for March 25; members said they will raise the bill during legislative committee conversations and coordinate any formal comment through established processes.