►
Description
House K-12 Subcommittee - March 2, 2021 - House Hearing Room 2
A
C
A
Thank
you.
We
do
have
quite
a
few
items
on
the
calendar
I
do
want
to
start
by
going
through
and
just
letting
the
committee
and
audience
know
what
has
been
put
off
notice
and
what's
been
rolled.
So
if,
if
you
want
item
number
nine
house
bill,
96
is
off
notice.
A
Let's
see
here
what
was
the
next
one
item?
12
96
house
bill
962
has
been
rolled
two
weeks.
A
A
Are
there
any
personal
orders
before
we
get
into
the
calendar?
Seeing
none
item
one
house
bill
770.
Do
we
have
a
motion?
Probably
motion,
representative
alexander?
You
are
recognized
on
your
bill.
D
D
It
also
encourages
the
use
of
positive
behavioral
interventions
and
support
methods
in
schools,
supports
that
reduce
dependence
on
isolation
and
physical
holding
restraint
practices
and
ensures
that
our
teachers
of
students
receiving
special
education
services
are
properly
trained
to
protect
the
student,
the
teacher
and
others
from
physical
harm.
If
isolation
or
physical
holding
restraint
is
necessary,
the
department
has
received
feedback
from
our
lease
that
emphasize
the
need
for
some
clarity
in
this
bill
that
originated
in
2008.
D
So
this
is
basically
a
cleanup
bill
and
the
department
of
education
is
here
if
they
haven't.
If
you
have
any
questions.
A
E
E
We
we
haven't,
we
have
an
issue
in
education
with
leader
lamberth
at
times
so
you're,
okay,
with
this
bill,
as
it
is
right
now.
Yes,.
D
F
A
A
That
brings
us
to
item
number
two
on
the
calendar
house
bill,
46,
representative
lamar.
You
were
recognized.
G
Good
evening
committee,
I'm
back
again
and
today
I
I
wanted
to
help
answer
some
of
your
questions
that
we
discussed
last
week
about
the
win
grant.
A
Do
we
have
a
motion
almost
a
second
sorry
where's
it
are.
You
recognized
my
apologies.
G
Mr
chairman,
and
so
I
know
we
have
some
representatives
from
the
department
of
conservation
and
the
department
of
health
who
would
like
to
testify,
and
if
it's
about
the
questions
regarding
the
win
grant,
am
I
correct,
and
I
wanted
to
ask
the
chairman
posit
permission
to
go
out
of
session,
so
you
can
hear
from
them.
So
they
can
answer
some
of
your
questions.
A
With
no
objection
we
will
go
out
of
session
and
any
representatives
from
t
deck,
we'll
start
with
t
deck
and
just
come
up
and
have
a
seat
and
just
make
sure
you
turn
the
mic
on
and
state
your
name.
Please.
A
Thank
you,
sir
members.
We
had
some
questions
from
the
last
committee
that
that
needed
to
be
directed
towards
t
deck
and
anybody
that
wants
to
have
a
chance
to
ask
some
of
those
questions.
Now,
please,
chairman.
H
Not
exactly
okay,
so
the
win
grant
is
a
voluntary
program.
It's
for
lead
testing,
only,
not
remediation
okay.
So
it
only
applies
to
the
to
the
cost
of
the
test.
Okay,
but
it
is
free
to
any
school
and
any
daycare
in
the
state
of
tennessee.
E
So
if
a
lea
I'm
just
going
to
use
murray
county,
let's
say
they
test
their
schools
in
murray
county
and
for
some
reason,
because
we
go
from
20
parts
per
billion
to
15
parts
per
billion.
There's
seven
schools
in
murray
county
that
need
remediation.
The
win
grant
will
help
them
pay
for
the
testing.
Will
the
wing
grant
help
them
to
for
the
remediation
of
the
schools
to
make
it
to
make
their
levels
where
it
should
be?
The.
E
A
Does
anyone
else
have
any
further
questions
chairman
reagan,
you're
recognized.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
sir,
do
you
have
any
idea
or
an
estimate
would
be
a
better
way
to
put
that
of
how
many
schools
would
be
affected
by
the
conditions
that
were
just
mentioned.
H
Well,
not
exactly
we.
We
do
know
that
we
have
about
1825
public
schools
now
how
many
of
those
were
constructed
prior
to
the
date
that's
applicable.
I
do
not
know.
I
A
Any
further
questions
representative
love.
J
J
H
H
The
current
action
level-
yes,
in
our
win
grant,
we
wrote
the
the
work
plan
to
set
an
action
level
of
15
parts
per
billion.
Okay,.
J
H
We've
only
started
the
program
in
october
and
so
we're
we're
starting
out
targeting
the
daycare
facilities
first
1500
of
those
every
month
we
send
out
an
additional
notice
of
about
250
notices
to
head,
starts
next
and
then
the
most
at-risk
schools.
This
will
continue
until
may
and
then
the
program
the
grant
runs
until
2023,
and
then
we
have
an
opportunity
to
extend
that
if
we
don't
spend
all
the
funds.
Our
initial
estimates
of
the
amount
of
testing
that
we
could
do
based
on
the
money
that
epa
is
providing
would
come
up
short.
H
J
H
H
The
not
for
the
public
schools,
there
are
some
many
grants
that
are
available
through
dhs
for
some
daycare
centers.
Okay,.
H
J
What
was
the
process?
Did
the
state
government
apply
for
that
grant.
H
The
governor
had
to
submit
a
letter
of
interest
to
epa
which
governor
haslam
did
that,
and
then
he
had
to
designate
an
agency
to
oversee
the
grant.
Okay,
that
was
initially
department
of
education,
and
then
it
was
determined
that
tdec
would
was
better
poised
to
assist
with
that
effort.
H
J
H
J
H
H
Because
the
bill
is
a
statutory
requirement
for
schools
and
day
cares
or
schools
to
test,
and
some
of
the
daycares
that
doe
provides
oversight
for
and.
I
Reagan,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
a
follow-up
question
here.
The
changing
the
standard,
we're
going
from
20
parts
to
15
parts
per
billion.
Is
that
correct?
I
That's
my
understanding!
Yes,
okay,
please
give
me
the
impact
that
that's
going
to
have
in
terms
of
any
improvement
in
health
standards
or
any
changes
in
disease
rates
or
anything
else
that
this
this
change.
In
other
words,
I'm
seeking
to
know
the
significance
of
five
parts
per
billion
change.
H
I
really
can't
speak
to
that.
That
would
be
a
better
department
of
health
question.
I
will
tell
you
this
that
there
is
no
the
15
of
the
20.
H
I
H
That's
so
when
the
initial
statute,
the
bill
came
through,
epa's
guidance
was
recommending
20
parts
per
billion
for
schools
after
after
the
first
statute
passed
the
bill
passed
and
it
became
law
epa
changed
their
guidance
to
to
specifies
nothing.
They
don't
have
any
recommendation.
Their
guidance
for
schools,
the
15
parts
per
billion
is
an
action
level
that
we
apply
to
our
public
water
systems
in
their
testing
requirements.
I
J
H
H
J
H
Well,
I
think
the
thing
to
remember
is
that
we're
talking
about
two
different
issues:
there's
your
bill
that
we're
talking
about
today,
which
is
a
state
requirement
for
schools
to
test
and
if
they
have
levels
above
a
certain
amount,
they're
required
to
take
those
spigots
or
taps
out
of
service,
so
you're,
basically
mitigating
the
lead
exposure
right
there
done
the
wind
grant
is
specifically
for
testing
period.
That's
all.
H
You
know
certainly
epa
congress
is
the
one
that
authorized
the
funds
they
wanted
states
to
have
money
to
test
identify
areas
of
where
children
are
being
exposed
to
lead.
So
it's
working.
H
L
Thank
you,
chairman,
okay,
so
I'm
I'm,
like
representative
love,
just
trying
to
really
get
a
full
feeling
on
this
and
if
we're
passing
something
that's
going
to
end
up
putting
a
mandate
on
our
local
school
systems,
as
representative
sapi
was
saying.
So
let
me
ask
this
so
during
the
covid
crisis
and
we
don't
really
know
how
much
longer
we'll
be
dealing
with
that.
L
But
I
from
what
I
understand
as
far
as
the
schools
I've
been
in
touch
with
and
all
is
that
you
know
water
fountains,
just
like
around
here
in
the
state
building
have
been,
you
know,
shut
off,
and
so
then
that
also
creates
a
problem
when
they've
been
shut
off
for
so
long
about
the
bacteria
and
the
things
that
can
to
get
in
there,
because
that's
already
been
talked
about
with
knox
county
schools
and
all
so
I
guess
my
big
question
is
so
it
doesn't
cost
anything
really
for
them
to
get
the
testing.
L
What
is
it
2023,
I
think,
and
if
they
don't
use
it,
then
they
have
to
send
it
back,
but
they
also
have
to
have
a
a
schedule
plan
as
to
how
they're
going
to
spend
that
money
to
let
us
know
so,
is
this
something
that
your
local
schools
and
all
could
use
that
money
for
to
to
take
care
of
this
issue
with
the
lead
and
all
if
they
find
in
their
schools.
H
H
We
provide
technical
assistance
as
part
of
the
the
win
grant
were
are
to
promote
epa's
three
t's
testing
program,
which
talks
about
flushing
remediation
mitigation
efforts.
We
provide
when
we
when
we
have
a
result
under
the
wind
grant.
When
we
have
a
result,
that's
high.
I
contact
them,
talk
to
them
about
retesting
and
actions.
They
can
take
to
reduce
the
lead
exposure.
M
H
About
one
percent
on
the
samples
about
a
one
percent-
that's
above
the
one
to
two
percent
yeah.
Well,
let
me
back
up
metro
schools
reported
one
percent
on
their
samples,
they're
they're
testing,
outside
of
what
we're
doing,
but
our
the
results
from
the
win
grant,
which
is
primarily
from
daycare
facilities
at
this
time,
is
about
two
percent.
A
M
A
Let
me
go
ahead
and
let
me
bring
up
alexa,
which
are
from
the
department
of
health.
I
should
have
done
that
earlier.
I
thought
that
they
were
gonna,
have
a
couple
people
so
go
ahead
and
state
your
name
and
who
you
represent.
Please
sure.
A
And
if
you
have
anything
that
you
want
to
start
off
with
or
I'll
just
we'll
keep
you
there
in
case.
Somebody
else
has
a
question,
but
if
I
think
there
was
a
question
earlier
that
maybe
they
said
it
would
have
been
better
for
the
department
of
health.
But
I
can
add.
N
A
couple
of
comments,
I
think
either
chairman
reagan
or
chairman
sipiki,
asked
about
the
essentially
the
safe
level
of
lead
or
why
20
parts
per
billion
was
selected
working
with
the
original
sponsor
of
the
bill.
I
guess
three
sessions
ago
was
representative
rick
staples
from
knoxville
a
former
member.
Now
he
was
very
interested
in
this
bill
just
to
get
some
historical
context.
I
know
there
are
several
new
members
on
the
committee
that
there
were
some
news
stories
specifically
in
knoxville
and
in
nashville
around
schools
that
had
identified
essentially
unsafe
levels
of
lead.
N
So
working
with
representative
staples,
it
was
department
of
health
tdac,
as
well
as
education
to
kind
of
develop
legislation.
We
worked
very
closely
with
representative
staples
on
essentially
kind
of
that
initial
program
and
the
initial
legislation
that
was
passed
at
least
the
sponsor's
intent
at
the
time
was
to
kind
of
get
the
arms
around
what
the
situation
was
with
blood
testing
in
schools,
because
at
that
time
there
was
not
any
sort
of
kind
of
state
program
or
state
requirement
for
testing.
N
There
were
some
districts
who
were
doing
that
based
on
the
epa
guidance,
but
there
was
certainly
no
kind
of
statewide
best
practice
or
requirement
so
the
legislation
that
was
put
into
place.
I
believe
this
was
either
the
2018
or
2019
session.
I
guess
it
was
2018
essentially
gave
notice
to
the
lease
to
go
ahead
and
be
developing
policies
that
by
january
1
2019
that
they
would
be
required
to
essentially
start
that
process.
N
There
were
a
number
of
conversations
around
the
fiscal
note
at
that
time.
Of
course,
the
sponsor
wanted
that
fiscal
note
to
be
as
minimal
as
possible
and
to
have
as
little
impact
on
the
leas
as
possible
just
in
terms
of
their
budgets,
so
I
think
just
to
answer
some
kind
of
historical
context
for
the
committee.
As
to
why
certain
language
was
in
there
or
why
the
plot
like
why
it
was
developed
the
way
it
was,
I
believe,
to
david's
point.
The
20
parts
was
based
on
the
existing
epa
guidance
at
the
time.
N
The
frequency
of
testing
was
essentially
at
that
point,
primarily
based
on
the
fiscal
note,
but
also
just
to
kind
of
get
the
arms
around
what
sort
of
problems
we're
looking
at
in
the
state
and
the
only
other
question
I
think
that's
been
raised
that
it
may
be
some
some
beneficial
context.
So
under
current
law
from
the
statute
that
was
passed
in
the
2018
session,
the
lead
results
are
required
to
be
reported
to
the
three
state
agencies
at
play,
which
is
education,
tdec
and
health.
N
Only
if
the
lead
level
in
that
test
exceeded
the
20
parts
per
billion.
There
are
districts
that
essentially
report
to
us
or
to
the
three
agencies,
any
results,
but
there
are
some
that
essentially,
essentially,
the
reporting
requirement
is
only
triggered
if
they
exceed
that
amount.
So
I
think
to
the
question
about:
do
we
know
exactly
how
how
prevalent
this
is?
We're
only
getting
it
if
it
exceeds
that
amount.
So
just
wanted
to
provide
some
context
for
the
committee
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
questions.
A
Thank
you
for
that
committee,
chairman
you're
recognized.
Thank.
N
E
In
this
bill,
we're
dropping
it
to
15
parts
per
billion,
which
means
that
window
there
logically
would
increase
the
amount
of
reporting
we're
seeing,
which
would
therefore
the
win
grant
would
pay
possibly
for
the
testing.
If,
if
we
don't
have
an
influx
of
enough
of
too
many
people
wanting
to
apply
for
this
win
grant
to
do
the
testing,
which
means,
if
you're
last
at
a
party
you
may
be
left
holding.
E
You
have
to
pay
for
this
yourself
and
then,
if
you
are
now
over
15
parts
per
billion,
you
would
have
to
disclose
that
to
the
department
of
health
and
I'm
sure
the
department
of
health
would
probably
ask
for
some
type
of
remediation
on
that
facility,
because
here
now,
you're
over
the
guidelines
of
15
parts
per
billion.
So
far
is
correct.
N
Yes,
then,
the
only
caveat
or
comment
that
I
would
make
to
that
is
the
remediation
that
we
would
seek
and
we
don't
have
any
specific
authority
over
schools
or
over
the
lead
testing
itself.
The
the
current
law
requires.
Essentially,
the
remediation
is
that
the
water
source
be
turned
off
in
some
circumstances.
That's
as
simple
as
it
was
a
drinking
water
fountain
that
can
be
removed
from
service
on.
You
know
the
third
floor
of
an
elementary
school.
In
some
cases
it
may
be
the
kitchen
faucet
and
that's
obviously
pretty
imperative
to
the
process
of
the
school.
N
E
E
Yeah,
chairman
speaking,
my
esteemed
colleague
from
knoxville
made
a
comment
about
the
the
esser
money
that
has
been
sent
down
to
the
to
the
leas
and,
as
a
member
of
the
education
committee,
we've
been
working
very
diligently
to
try
to
send
the
message
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
move
the
ball
in
education
with
these
escher
funds.
E
I
Chairman
reagan,
thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
to
whichever
one
of
our
witnesses
feels
they
can
tackle
this
one,
since
the
required
remediation
is
to
take
the
water
source
out
of
commission.
There
turn
it
off.
There
are
certain
architectural
standards
for
the
number
of
people
in
a
building
and
required
drinking
sources
and
so
forth,
and
so
on.
So
if
taking
this
faucet
or
drinking
fountain
or
whatever
it
is
out
of
service,
puts
that
below
the
required
architectural
standards
for
occupancy
of
that
building,
what
actions
can
the
lea
be
expected
to
take?
N
Chairman
I'll
start,
and
if
david
has
additional
comments,
he
may
absolutely
add
them.
I
believe
that
the
response
would
be,
of
course,
the
lea
would
still
need
to
be
in
compliance
with
any
other
state,
local
or
federal
requirements,
and
so,
if,
if
essentially,
they
were,
if
they
had
to
take
the
water
source
out
of
service,
and
that
then
changed
you
know
the
occupancy
or
some
sort
of
other
issue.
They
would
either
need
to
remedy
the
situation
or
replace
the
water
source.
N
So,
depending
on
what
that
may
be,
it
may
be
as
simple
as
okay.
If
it's
a
drinking
water
source,
they
could
replace
it
just
in
terms
of
it's.
If
it's
a
water
fountain
or
something
like
that,
and
if
it's
more
complicated
than
that,
then
I
believe
you're
correct
chairman
reagan.
They
would
need
to
address
that,
however
best
that
may
be
occupancy
or
that
may
be
that
they'd
have
to
pay
for
the
remediation
david.
Is
there
anything
you
want
to
add
to
that.
H
No,
I
think,
you're
spot
on
with
that
answer.
I
I
guess
you
know
if
it
was
a
water
fountain,
they
conceptually
could
could
bring
in
a
bottle.
You
know
a
big
large
bottle
water
distribution
system
there,
but
yeah
I'm
not
aware
of
any
architectural
requirements,
but
our
occupational
requirements,
but
there
may
be
some
and
it
could
be
conflicting.
I
guess.
A
A
G
No,
I
guess
I
will
say
for
the
most
part,
the
epa
updated
its
lead
and
copper
rule
on
december
22nd
2020
that
led
has
to
be
under
15
parts
per
billion.
As
you
heard,
that's
the
new
federal
standard
anyway,
it's
15.!
G
So
no
matter,
if
you're
doing
you
know,
I
technically
we're
out
of
compliance
as
a
state
with
the
federal
government,
because
if
we
are
setting
the
standard
at
20
parts
per
billion
and
the
federal
new
federal
standard
is
based
on
the
last
administration's
new
rule
on
december,
22nd
is
now
15
parts
per
billion.
We
now
as
a
state
are
out
of
compliance
with
what
is
supposed
to
be
in
line
with
lead
testing.
So
what
my
bill
does
is
catches
us
up
as
a
state
to
what
the
new
federal
standard
is.
G
Also
now
that
we're
out
of
compliance
with
the
new
federal
standard.
We
have
the
money
to
test,
but
can
we
truly
say
we're?
Okay,
with
leaving
water
sources
in
schools
that
are
above
15
parts
per
billion?
I
mean
these
are
children's
drinking
water?
Don't
we
think
they
are
worth
the
investment
or
worth
mitigating
these
issues
in
the
schools?
So
this
is
what
this
bill
does.
It
also
creates
a
unified
program
right
now.
Much
of
the
testing
is
is
on
the
backs
of
the
lead
and
like
they
testify.
We
cannot
keep
that
data.
G
F
Thank
you
chairman
and
president
lamar.
Let
me
well
the
bill
you're.
Bringing
for
us
is
a
good.
The
concept
is
really
really
good,
so
we're
I'm
trying
to
help
you
out
here,
but
I'm
in
agreement
with
the
comments
made
earlier.
F
It's
a
three-page
bill.
The
first
page
basically
says
that
the
department
education
department,
health,
shall
develop
a
program
for
the
testing
of
water
and
lead
contamination.
That's
good!
So
we
got
a
program
in
place
and
then
on
page
two.
If
the
result
of
a
lead
level
test
conducted
under
subsection
c
is
equal
to
or
exceeds
the
15
parts
per
billion.
F
F
F
F
Me
state
health,
but
still
we're
going
through
the
incorrect
me
from
if
an
error,
and
then
you
have
number
four
develop:
a
corrective
action
plan
within
five
days
of
notification,
lead
level
test
results
and
post
the
corrective
action
plan
to
the
public
schools,
public
charter,
schools
and
child
care
programs,
and
then
five
re-test,
the
lead
level
of
drinking
water
source
within
30
days,
where,
if
the
lea
doesn't
have
the
ten
thousand
dollars
or
the
million
dollars
to
fix
it,
where
in
the
bill,
do
we
other
than
keeping
the
water
cut
off?
Where
do
we?
F
G
Absolutely,
mr
chairman,
I
want
to
have
some
more
conversations
with
this
committee.
Let's
roll
this
two
weeks
and
I
can
answer
some
more
questions
for
the
committee
members.
The.
E
J
J
B
This
is
patrick
boggs,
research
analyst.
This
was
on
the
calendar
on
february,
9th
february,
16th
and
and
on
today,
and
according
to
the
rule,
any
according
to
house
rule
83
sub
2.
Any
bill
of
resolution
may
be
calendared
for
a
meeting
three
times
and
it
all
builds
a
resolution
that
have
been
calendared
for
three
meetings
of
committee
and
which
have
not
been
reported
out
of
such
committee
shall
be
set
by
the
chairman
for
a
hearing
on
a
special
calendar
to
be
published
with
such
committee's
final
calendar
of
any
legislative
session.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you,
we're
back
in
session.
We
have
made
it
all
the
way
through
one
bill
so
far,
so
we're
on
a
good
pace
today.
I
knew
that
this
would.
This
would
fall
in
my
committee,
this
whole
calendar
and
thing
so
I'm
gonna
recognize
chairman
reagan
and
then
we'll
get
we'll
get.
I
Back
into
it,
representative
lamar,
my
my
input
is
I'm
assuming
you're
bringing
us
back.
I
think
this
I
agree
with
chairman
white
has
got
a
good
concept
to
it.
I'm
going
to
request
that,
since
we
have
an
indefinite
stay
here,
whatever
length,
it's
going
to
be
that
you
ask
for
input
from
tsba
the
tennessee
state
school
board
association,
because
that's
got
that.
I
G
P
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
members.
I
will
endeavor
to
be
brief,
but
I
think
the
conversation
I've
heard
thus
far.
We
all
have
an
interest
in
lead
in
the
water
and
the
health
of
our
young
people,
so
that,
with
that
concern
in
mind
what
bill
861
does
is
basically
to
ask
that
we
test
twice
a
year.
P
What
we
have
right
now
is
that
lead
testing
is
done,
what's
called
periodically,
which
means
every
so
often
or
from
time
to
time,
and
if
we
don't
know
what
the
levels
are,
are
we
unnecessarily
putting
our
children
at
risk,
and
so
basically,
what
we're
asking
is
to
move
from
periodically
to
bi-annual
meaning
testing
twice
a
year
and
my
understanding,
I
believe
the
funding
comes
from
the
wynn
program,
and
so
that's
the
essence
of
the
bill,
and
I
will
strive
to
answer
questions.
Hopefully
in
a
previous
discussion.
Most
of
the
questions
already
been
answered.
A
I
P
P
If
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
put
some
wording
in
there,
that
says,
if
present
funding
is
not
available,
that
we,
you
know,
would
cut
that
off
it
that
would
be
up
to.
I
would
accept
what
committee
has
to
say
on
chairman.
A
I
Thank
you
and
I
definitely
think
that
we
have
an
unfunded
mandate
here.
If
you
don't
do
something
like
that.
Yes,
sir,
and
believe
me,
I
catch
enough
heat
from
my
locals
about
unfunded
mandates
for
other
issues.
I
would
prefer
not
to
catch
it
on
this
one,
so
if
we
can
find
a
way
to
limit
this
to
funding
available
by
the
federal
government
or
something
like
that
and
or
put
in
the
bill
a
limit
and
come
back
and
renew
it
at
some
point,
I'm
going
to
suggest
you
consider
that
sir.
A
Q
Thank
you
representative.
Thank
you
good
to
see
you.
It
was
my
seat
mate.
Last
last
year
we
constantly
wrestle
with
telling
locals
what
to
do
now
when
it
comes
to
when
they
operate
outside
of
the
bounds
that
constitutionally
we
allow
them.
I
have
no
problem
with
intervening,
but
it
seems
like
to
me
they're
elected
if
they
want
to
go
twice
a
year.
Should
it's
probably
not
an
answer
to
my
question
to
you
but
I'll
make
a
statement
to
us.
It
just
seems
like
to
me
they're
elected
they're,
accountable
to
the
voters.
F
F
Is
there
any
part
of
the
concept
of
your
bill
that
you
all
can
work
together
to
to
bring
us
one
that
we
could
possibly
because
of
the
concept
of
of
testing
lead
in
drinking
water
is
very
important
for
our
children?
Yes,
sir,
but
I
want
to
get
something
that
that
will
pass
and
that
would
that
will
do
the
job.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
concept
of
your
bill
and
herd
bill
that
we
combined
to
help
her
out
and
you
out.
F
A
We
might
look
into-
I
don't
know
if,
if
it's
going
to
be
close
enough
in
the
same
code
that
you
two
might
be
able
to
work
together
and
and
see
if,
because
since
she's
already
had
her
max
on
the
calendar,
that
might
be
one
way
for
her
to
get
back
in
the
room
and
and
to
work
with
this
bill.
Some
more
so
I
might
suggest
just
off
notice
for
now
and
see
it
and
see
if
we
can
maybe
work
something
out
with
her
and
you
working
together
on
a
bill.
I
A
With
that
we're
going
to
take
house
bill
861
off
notice,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
R
There
is
one
caveat:
that's
left
it's
both
public
schools
as
well
as
charter
schools,
there's
one
caveat
because,
unfortunately,
maybe
145
out
of
146
times
they
do
the
right
thing.
We've
kept
a
provision
in
there
to
retain
some
of
the
powers
that
the
governor
has
to
issue
an
executive
order
if
they
are
not
returning
to
the
classroom
which
he
already
has
today,
but
we're
leaving
that
in
there
other
than
that,
though,
it
places
the
sole
responsibility
for
opening
or
closing
schools
to
the
local,
lea.
Q
Thank
you
thank
you
chairman,
and
I
like
the
bill
and
I
went
voting
forward.
I
I
I
was
shocked.
I
had
a
conversation
with
one
of
my
elected
school
board
members,
and
so
let
me
share
with
you
what
he
said
and
that
maybe
you
can
help
me
with
with
a
response
his
he
didn't
like
the
bill
and
the
reason.
Q
Why
was
he
said
that
they
like
to
have
a
a
resource
or
a
source
where
they
can
back
up
their
decisions,
such
in
the
case
as
the
cdc
and,
of
course,
my
my
response,
but
I
would
love
to
hear
your
response
as
sponsored
and
bill
on
the
school
board
at
one
time
and
have
worked.
This
was
that
you're
elected
by
the
people.
You
are
a
higher
authority
than
a
bureaucracy
and
granted
you're,
not
scientists,
but
you
can
find
resources
to
help
you
determine
it
is
safe
to
open
your
schools
back
up.
A
Certainly
do
chairman
vaughn
for
one
one.
Second,
let's
get.
We
have
an
amendment
first,
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
we
go
through
properly
motion.
Its
amendment
make
sure
we
have
this
route
3709.
Is
that
what
we
have.
R
A
Thank
you.
You've
heard
the
explanation
of
the
amendment
any
questions
on
the
amendment.
Seeing
none
we'll
be
voting
on
amendment
number
3709,
all
those
in
favor,
please
indicate
by
saying
aye
I'll
suppose
say
no
all
right.
We
are
back
on
the
bill
as
amended
chairman
vaughn.
You
can
answer
that
question.
R
Sir
representative
casta,
I
look
at
it
as
that
this
does
not
preclude.
This
does
not
tell
the
school
board
to
make
this
or
their
designated
the
superintendent
to
make
this
decision
in
a
vacuum.
What
they
do
is,
I
would
expect
them
to
consult.
The
cdc
expect
them
to
consult
the
experts
much
the
way,
much
the
way
they
do
in
inclement
weather,
because,
right
now
the
local
lea
closes
schools
in
inclement
weather,
and
they
don't
do
that
in
a
vacuum.
R
They
don't
they
look.
They
talk
to
the
national
weather
service.
They
talk
to
the
local
people
in
charge
of
the
weather,
are
not
in
charge
of
the
weather
but
in
charge
of
reporting.
The
weather
there
to
find
out
their
expectations
for
that
time
period,
but
jim
cantore
doesn't
close
schools
down
for
snow
lisa
spencer,
doesn't
shout
out
graduate
from
university
of
memphis,
doesn't
close
down
schools
because
of
inclement
weather
incoming.
E
E
R
That
was
that
was
one
of
the
senate
amendments
that
was
placed
on
there,
but
I
will
say
this
is
that
the
school
board
actually
has
one
employee.
They
have
one
employee
and
that's
that
director
of
schools.
R
R
O
Sponsors
duly
noted,
but
you
know
when
this
made
its
way
through
the
senate
got
a
lot
of
press
a
lot
of
talk,
and
I
followed
closely
your
senate
sponsor's
language
and
his
seemed
to
be
coming
at
it
from
the
angle
of
we
want
the
state
to
be
able
to
tell
the
locals
what
to
do
and
you're
coming
at
it
from
locals,
wanting
to
decide
what
to
do
so.
R
The
real
intent
of
me
signing
on
to
carry
this.
Let
I'm
sorry,
mr
chairman,
I'm
the
real
intent
of
me.
Signing
on
and
agreeing
to
carry
this
legislation
is
to
bring
the
hand
the
the
authority
for
bringing
that
authority
to
the
elected
body
so
that
the
voters
and
parents
can
have
recourse
against
the
decisions
that
they
made.
R
The
part
that's
being
left
on
here,
as
opposed
to
taking
it
all
and
putting
it
there
quite
frankly,
is
a
portion
of
circumstance.
I
don't
like.
I
said
it
is
its
authority.
That's
already
there.
It's
just
not
being
taken
away,
because
we've
seen
in
some
instances,
even
against
the
advice
of
of
our
current
president
that
children
need
to
be
back
in
the
classroom,
sometimes
we're
holding
that
out
and
when
I
say
that
our
governor
has
had
plenty
of
opportunity
to
order
all
schools
back
in
session,
and
he
has
not
done
that.
R
O
R
I
don't
know
that
we're
removing
authority,
but
we're
clarifying
that
local
mayors
don't
close
school
buildings,
that
health
departments
do
not
close
school
buildings.
County
commissions
do
not
close
school
buildings
and
in
this
case
we're
saying
the
governor
doesn't
close
school
buildings.
That's
the
local
education
authority.
Okay,
thank.
B
B
I
We
have
state
laws
requiring
180
days
of
seat
time
for
schools
and
we
build
into
the
system
10
days
that
can
be
taken
off
for
weather
or
sickness
or
whatever
does
your
bill
in
any
way
change
that
requirement,
because
if
we
say
they
have
the
authority
to
do
this
and
they
exceed
that
number
of
days
which
has
been
done
in
the
pandemic
situation,
we're
in
right
now,
the
local
authority
does
not
have
the
local
education
authority
does
not
have
the
ability
or
the
authority
to
make
massive
changes
to
make
up
for
that.
R
Thank
you.
Well,
chairman
reagan,
it's
it's
a
situation
that,
frankly
I
I'm
I'm
I'm
struggling
with
giving
you
the
answer
on,
because
what
this
piece
of
legislation
does
just
says.
Who
has
the
authority
to
make
that
change
if
they
make
it
in
a
manner
to
which
it
should
it,
they
do
not
qualify
for
bep
funding,
then
there's
consequences
to
that.
I
would
expect
we
can't
this
doesn't
give
the
school
boards
autonomy
to
do
all
things.
R
All
it
says
is
if
a
child
is
going
to
be
on
their
campus
they're,
the
ones
that
determine
it,
except
in
the
one
instance
to
where
we're
retaining
that
authority
for
governor
to
say
they
need
to
be
back
in
school.
That's
that's
it,
and
so
I
don't
see
this
being
related
to
those
other
issues
you
mentioned,
because
what
we've
come
through
has
been
unprecedented,
we've
seen
all
kinds
of
things
and
we're
picking
up
the
pieces
from
that.
A
A
All
right,
I
needed
to
say
one
thing:
real,
quick
about
the
clerk's
office
wanted
a
little
bit
of
clarity
and
representative
lamar
was
notified
of
this
on
house
bill.
46,
it
was
moved.
It
will
be
on
a
special
calendar
to
be
published
with
the
final
calendar
all
right,
so
that
just
needed
to
be
put
in
the
record.
Thank
you.
That
brings
us
to
item
number
five
house
bill.
454.
Do
I
have
a
motion
motion
in
a
second
representative
hodges.
You
are
recognized.
A
S
You
so
if
you
look
at
part
b
of
this
bill,
that's
probably
the
most
important
part
of
this
bill,
which
says
the
department
shall
not
require
parent
of
a
child
immunized
in
another
state
to
present
a
child
for
medical
evaluation.
This
state,
in
order
for
the
child,
to
obtain
a
certificate
of
immunization.
S
So
what
the
issue
there
is
is,
especially
in
my
community.
That's
transient.
We
got
a
lot
of
military
if
somebody
comes
from
texas,
their
kids
now
can't
enroll
in
school,
yet
because
their
certificate
of
immunization
is
from
texas
and
what
we're
saying
is
allow
that
to
be
good
in
the
schools
instead
of
making
them
wait
to
go
to
school
by
seeing
a
doctor
here
that
gives
them
a
certificate
from
tennessee.
So
thank.
A
K
Q
K
Chairman
hawk,
thank
you,
mr
chairman
great
point,
representative
casada
and
where
we
are,
there
are
numerous
school
districts
across
the
state
who
already
fund
at
a
greater
ratio
and
I'll
use.
The
the
school
district,
where
my
younger
daughter
is
six
school
buildings,
roughly
3
000
students,
so
their
bep
funding
would
be
one
nurse
for
those
six
school
buildings,
3
000
students,
but
the
local
school
system
chooses
to
fund
the
additional
and
put
six
nurses
in
six
school
buildings.
K
So
what
that
will
do
and
get
back
to
the
to
the
point
that
I've
heard
in
the
last
hour
this
in
this
committee
that
will
allow
those
local
dollars
to
be
freed
up
to
be
spent
toward
classroom
opportunities,
as
opposed
to
currently
being
vested
loc
invested
locally
in
those
nursing
positions
in
the
other
extreme
you've
got.
There
are
numerous
school
districts
that
are
still
at
that
ratio
of
one
nurse
to
every
3
000
students.
This
is
going
to
get
nurses
into
their
facilities
that
they've
not
had
before.
K
L
Thank
you
chairman.
Yes,
I
had
one
question:
when
we
talk
about
putting
nurses
in
all
the
schools,
there's
all
different
levels
of
nursing
and
all
different
levels
of
education.
So
are
we
going
to
actually
put
in
there
we're
only
going
to
hire
rns
or
are
we
only
going
to
hire
lpns?
L
And
if
so
I
mean
there's
a
big
there's,
a
big
cost
difference
and
and
listen.
My
family
is
all
in
medicine,
and
I
I
110
support
our
nurses
and
and
certainly
the
best
thing
for
our
children.
So
it's
really
not
so
much
as
pandemic
we've.
I
mean
we've
needed
nurses
to
be
there,
but
there's
also
a
lot
that
they
they
are
not
allowed
to
do
without
children
without
family
or
parents,
permission
and
and
also
holding
the
schools
at
a
a
real
high
liability
rate.
K
Chairman
hawk
and
thank
you,
president
carricher
for
that
question.
Currently,
in
tennessee,
school
nurses
are
required
to
meet
the
education
and
licensure
requirement
determined
by
the
tennessee
board
of
nursing,
underneath
the
department
of
health
districts
may
employ
a
registered
nurse
or
a
licensed
practical
nurse
in
their
schools.
However,
if
there
is
an
lpn
in
a
position,
they
must
be
supervised
by
an
rn
somewhere
within
the
school
system.
So
so
we
have
the
option
of
both,
but
ultimately
in
rn,
we'll
be
giving
supervision
if
lpns
are
hired
within
the
same
structure.
We're
talking
about.
F
From
the
chairman,
no,
I
was
just
going
to
say
you're
right.
This
has
been
before
us
multiple
years
and
I
really
hope
it's
something
whose
time
has
come.
I
think
we'll
stand
behind
you
I'll
stand
behind
you
on
this.
I
know
it's
got
quite
a
big
fiscal
note,
but
I
think
it's
really
important
and
our
schools
have
been
asking
for
it
for
years
and
it'd
be
good
for
our
students.
So
let's
move
forward
any.
A
A
A
All
right
we
have
amendment
4094
before
us,
which
has
been
properly
motioned
chair,
lady
weaver.
You
would
like
to
explain
this.
You
said
it
makes
the
bill.
C
Yeah
I'll
just
give
you
a
little
history
on
where
we
are.
Last
year
we
passed
the
bill
prior
to
the
amendment
to
give
teachers
a
smooth
sailing
from
another
state
across
state
lines
to
come
into
our
classrooms.
As
you
know,
last
year
we
had
a
deficiency
of
teachers.
Your
district
is
struggling.
My
district
is
struggling
with
putting
professional
qualified
teachers
in
front
of
the
kids.
C
So
then,
of
course,
we
did
what
we
did.
We
passed
in
the
house
and
then
the
senate
did
their
thing.
So
here
we
are
today
and
because
of
the
scenario
with
the
covid,
it
we've
had
time
to
percolate
on
this
bill
and
actually
fix
it
and
make
it
better.
So
the
amendment
will
improve
the
idea
of
reciprocity
and
what
and
that
amendment
number
is
4094.
C
And
it
addresses
three
three
main
points:
one
teachers
who
did
not
receive
their
evaluation
score-
or
maybe
only
one
evaluation
score
in
the
last
two
years
now-
will
have
the
ability
to
one
either
take
the
most
recent
score
to
get
a
recommendation
from
the
school
director
on
their
effectiveness
and
also
it
changes
the
enactment
date
of
section
1
to
july
1
2021,
it's
time
sensitive,
and
this
is
very
important
because
we
have
teachers
now
in
a
bubble
who
want
to
come
and
teach.
They
are
professionals
in
georgia.
C
They
should
be
professionals
here
in
tennessee,
we
have
a
deficiency,
we
need
to
get
the
schools
open.
We
need
to
get
her
done
and
get
the
teachers
in
front
of
our
kids,
and
this
bill
will
do
that
and
it
will
be
a
breath
of
fresh
air
for
your
district.
So
we
get
good
qualified
teachers
in
place
and
that's
what
the
bill?
That's,
the
intent
and
the
spirit
of
the
bill
and
I'll.
I
welcome
any
questions.
A
All
right
we'll
get
to
them,
we'll
do
the
amendment
here
as
you've
heard
the
explanation
amendments
anybody
any
questions
about
the
amendment
before
we
put
it
on
seeing
none
we'll
be
voting
on
amendment
4094,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say:
aye,
all
those
opposed
say
no
eyes
have
it.
We
are
back
on
the
bill
as
amended.
I
think
you've
heard
the
explanation
of
the
bill
as
well.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions?
Chairman
reagan,
you
were
recognized.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair
and
cheerleader.
We
were
just
for
the
point
of
clarity
here
we
have
teachers
that
come
in
and
get
a
provisional
license
with
a
requirement
that
they
teach
for
a
certain
length
of
time
get
evaluated,
and
then
they
can
apply
for
a
professional
license.
This
bill
is
addressing
that.
Am
I
correct?
Yes,.
C
It
does,
and
it
will
also
honor
what
evaluation
and
testing
they
have
from
their
other
state.
In
other
words,
what's
what
is?
What
is
the
conundrum
is
a
teacher
comes
from
like
say,
georgia
and
they're
highly
evaluated,
they're
professionals
there
they
come
here
and
they
get
at
the
bottom
of
the
food
chain,
and
then
they
got
to
take
a
practice
test
and
two
to
three
years
waiting
and
it
just
it's.
C
E
A
E
Chairman
sapi,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
chairman.
We
were
bringing
this
to
us,
so
this
bill
is
going
to
make
it
easier
for
us.
We
are
tennessee.
E
We
are
probably
the
number
one
destination
in
the
country
for
people
moving
here.
This
will
give
more
flexibility
to
our
school
boards
and
our
lease
to
go
out
and
recruit
teachers
in
let's
say
colder
climates
that
may
have
had
enough
of
shoveling
snow
that
might
want
to
come
to
the
beautiful
place
of
tennessee,
so
this
bill
would
make
it
easier
for
that
to
happen
to
be
able
to
fill
our
teacher
shortages.
Is
that
correct.
A
A
B
I'm
privately
on
buses.
The
purpose
of
this
is
to
extend
the
contract
negotiating
period
from
four
years
to
six
years.
This
not
only
gives
them
more
time
to
negotiate,
but
it
also
helps
on
their
financing
of
the
buses.
I
have
received
also
it's
very
important
to
remember
something.
B
B
B
A
A
A
Properly
motioned
representative
clemens
you're
recognized.
O
Famous
chairman
and
fellow
committee
members,
this
legislation
seeks
to
address
the
impacts
of
this
pandemic
on
our
children.
It
specifically
focuses
on
children
grades
k
through
eight,
as
all
of
us
know,
and
all
of
us
have
a
sincere
goal
this
year
to
really
address
our
concerns
for
our
students,
who've
gone
through
a
very
difficult
year.
O
I
know
I've
got
three
public
school
students,
the
oldest
of
whom
just
returned
to
the
classroom.
Last
week
it's
been
a
roller
coaster
of
a
year
for
him
and
he
has
a
pretty
good
setting
at
home.
A
lot
of
children
suffer
from
aces
in
their
communities
in
their
homes,
and
they
have
only
been
exacerbated
by
this
pandemic
in
a
lot
of
cases,
and
they
had
a
lot
of
them
had
pre-existing
ones.
A
lot
of
our
children
are
facing
a
lot
of
challenges.
O
But
what
this
would
do
is
really
provide
us
with
an
opportunity
to
identify
the
students
who
have
suffered
from
this
pandemic,
whether
it's
behavioral
health
issues
or
mental
health
issues,
identify
those
students
and
then
make
sure
that
we
get
them
the
appropriate
training
resources
attention
treatment,
any
whatever
they
they
need,
because
we
can't
really
help
kids
until
we
can
identify
the
kids
that
need
the
help
the
most,
and
so
what
this
does
you'll
see
in
section
2
of
the
bill.
It
also
keeps
the
psychologist
ratio
the
same
it.
O
It
just
emphasizes
that
that
be
a
full-time
position
as
opposed
to
part-time
and
then
adds
the
words
or
so
requires
a
fund,
one
full-time
school
psychologist
for
each
two
thousand,
five
hundred
or
fewer,
that
or
viewers
added,
and
then
with
the
social
worker.
It's
one
full-time
school,
social
worker
position
for
each
2000
or
fewer,
and
then
I've
also
added
in
here
that
this
be
paid
for
to
the
extent
possible
by
any
cares
karzak
dollars,
we're
sitting
on
a
lot
of
cares,
act,
money
right
now.
O
O
I
think
this
is
one
important
way
for
us
to
come
together
as
a
body
in
a
bipartisan
manner
and
really
focus
on
helping
kids
because
to
help
them.
We
have
to
identify
them
and
know
what
they
need
before.
We
can
begin
this
healing
process.
So
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I'd
ask
for
the
committee's
support
and
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Oh,
I
have
representative
casta
you're
recognized.
Q
O
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
question.
This
isn't
really
dictating
anything
to
them.
It's
the
state
setting
guidelines
about
how
to
approach
a
real
issue.
We've
recently,
as
the
special
session
passed,
some
pretty
heavy-handed
requirements
and
and
things
on
the
school
boards,
and
this
this
isn't,
you
know,
saying
telling
them
how
to
do
their
job.
This
is
just
us
as
a
legislative
body
at
the
state
saying
we
all
recognize
this
as
a
priority,
and
hopefully
we're
going
to
fund
this.
This
isn't
going
to
cost
the
locals
any
more
money.
The
fiscal
note
even
points
out.
O
So
you
know
again
I
go
back
to
the
point
of
we
can't
as
a
state
begin
to
heal
and
help
our
children
until
unless
we
identify
what
really
they
need,
help
with
and
behavioral
health
and
mental
health
issues,
our
passions
of
mine
always
have
been
in
a
lot
of
years
as
well,
and
you
know
I
can't
if
I
wasn't
emphasized
enough,
we
everybody
in
this
room.
Q
Representative
casting
follow-up,
and
it's
just
a
statement
on
my
part,
but
but
again
unless
a
local
government's,
not
adhering
to
their
constitutional
mandates.
I
think
things
like
this
and
I'm
just
giving
my
personal
opinion.
Mr
chairman,
things
like
this
are,
should
be
left
to
the
local
school
board.
The
the
covet
has
affected
each
school
district,
much
differently
and
from
a
state
level
we
shouldn't
lay
down.
Q
One
situation
fits
all
problems,
and
so
again,
I
just
would
urge
us
not
to
not
to
pass
this
and
let
the
locals
be
in
charge
of
of
of
this,
not
not
coming
from
the
state.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I'm
going
to
share
some
of
the
same
concerns.
I
have
my
colleague
over
here.
You
know
you're,
potentially
looking
at
about
800
000
students
that
you're
gonna
have
to
do
these
mental
screenings
on
in
the
course
of
a
year,
and
that's
not
a
full
year.
It's
not
12
months.
That's
about
eight
and
a
half
months,
which
means
you're
going
to
really
tax
the
system,
trying
to
go
through
every
one
of
these
students
and
now
you're
going
to
disrupt
their
education
even
more.
E
I
think
that'd
be
that'd,
be
more
prudent
there,
where
it's
it's
less
intrusive
to
the
school
day
that
these
kids
are
gonna
have
to
get
back
into,
and
it's
unclear
I'm
trying
to
decipher
this
in
the
fiscal
note.
But
it
does
look
like
it's
got
recurring
money
in
here
because
it
says
subsequent
years.
E
That
might
be
under
the
impression
from
this
bill
that
these
are.
These
are
going
to
be
recurring
positions
which
would
therefore
eventually
lead
to
an
issue
with
the
locals,
an
unfunded
mandate
again
of
having
to
match
these
positions.
So
for
those
another
reason,
I'm
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
oppose
this
bill.
O
Yeah,
I
I'm
a
little
at
a
losses
to
the
extent
of
what
this
is.
You
know
forcing
the
locals
on
in
that
respect.
You
know
this
is
something
we're
currently
to
do
this.
The
testing
would
take
place
in
the
next
school
year.
You
know
was
not
putting
something
on
top
of
them
and
in
fact
the
law
already
requires
these
positions
to
be
filled
and
the
reality
is
these
children
aren't
a
lot
of
them,
don't
get
health
care
and
they're
sure
not
getting
any
behavioral
health
care
or
mental
health
care.
That's
just
a
reality.
O
O
Unless
someone
in
the
school,
where
they're
captured,
where
they
are
every
day,
are
there
to
identify
them
during
one
school
year
and
then
once
we
know
that
our
teachers
are
better
equipped,
they
know
what's
going
on,
they
know
this
child
needs
extra
assistance.
They
know
this
child
needs
to
see
a
psychologist.
You
know,
and
we
we
have
all
these
other
tangential
issues
that
come
into
play.
Here
I
mean
these
children
bring
everything
in
their
community
into
the
classroom.
O
No
extra
money
required
of
locals
and
the
state
puts
in
the
money
the
karezak
money
is
there
to
do
it
and
to
the
extent
these
children
will
require
any
further
treatment
down
the
road
at
least
now
we
know
it.
We
know
why
that
child
is
acting
out.
We
know
why
that
child
is
unable
to
learn.
So
you
know,
then
we
can
respond
as
a
body
accordingly
in
subsequent
years,
but
we're
really
looking
here
at
the
next
school
year.
That's
it
and
screening
kids
get
hearing
tests,
they
get
eyesight.
O
You
know
dental
cleanings,
mobile,
dentistry
in
schools.
This
isn't
going
to
take
them
out
of
the
clothes.
I
mean
this
isn't
creating
an
undue
burden
on
on
the
school
system
or
creating
some
loss
of
education.
We're
talking
about
a
a
mental
health,
behavioral
health
screening.
So
that's
that's
my
response.
Let's,
I
think
we
have
a
real
tremendous
opportunity
here
to
address
something.
We
talk
about
a
lot,
but
I
haven't
unfortunately
seen
too
much
action
on
recent
years.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
representative
clemens,
for
bringing
this
piece
of
legislation.
You
mentioned
aces
several
times
in
your
presentation.
I
think
that
we
talk
about
these
adverse
child
experiences
many
times
they
are
isolated
to
certain
regions
of
the
state
when
children
go
through
certain
things,
and
maybe
certain
parts
of
even
a
city
but
clearly
covert
19
has
affected
all
of
our
school
districts
and
every
school
district
has
experienced
a
disruption
to
the
school
day.
J
J
From
my
perspective,
this
lining
up
directly
with
what
the
state
already
does
with
aces
partnering
with
the
locals,
to
say,
let's
plan
on
how
we
will
identify
this
adverse
child
experience.
All
we're
saying
now
is
add
to
that
this
component
of
what
happened
in
coba
19..
So
I
appreciate
the
bill.
I
thank
you
for
it.
I'll
be
voting
for
the
bill.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
and
we're
I
very
much
agree
with
representative
clemens
on
this,
but
having
served
on
knox
county
commission,
I'm
very,
very
cautious
and
and
very
nervous
about
ever
passing
anything
that
would
be
a
mandate
on
our
local
lease
because
trust
me,
our
local
lease,
do
not
do
not
appreciate
any
state
mandates
that
get
pushed
down
to
them.
Now
I've
got
a
couple
questions
and
all
so.
L
L
Well,
that
is
completely
separate,
completely
separate
situation
in
terms
of
when
we're
talking
about
mental
health
issues
in
our
children,
because
any
when
you
got
pulled
out
to
go,
get
your
teeth,
checked
or
your
eyes
checked,
and
all
it's
like
hey
well,
everybody's
doing
that.
But
when
you
look
at
mental
health,
not
every
child
is
going
to
need
that,
and
so
it
kind
of
puts
this
child
that
may
need
that
mental
health
in
a
different
category
by
themselves
that
they
may
you
know,
bully
in
and
all
that
that
they
may
receive
from
that.
L
L
We
have
acknowledged
that
in
our
special
session,
and
so
if
it
in,
if
it
means
putting
a
state
mandate
on
our
local
lease,
I
can't
support
it
because
of
that,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
you
know,
do
we
as
a
state
really
need
to
put
a
mandate
like
this
on
our
local
lease,
when
we
just
found
out
that
they
are
getting
quite
a
bit
of
money
to
address
this
issue
and-
and
I
certainly
hope-
and
I
trust
our
local
school
boards
who
we
all
elect
and
our
superintendents-
that
they
will
use
the
money
in
the
correct
places
where
it
needs
to
go.
L
And
with
that
you
know,
I
I
just
appreciate
you
bringing
it
and
I
think
that's
a
passion
for
all
of
us.
What
you're
saying
so,
if
you
can
answer
why
we
just
why
the
bill
only
targets
k
through
eight
would
be
good.
Thank
you,
griffin,.
O
Yeah,
the
k-8
a
was
fiscal
concern
and
also
the
data
showing
that
children
that
young
k
through
eight
are
more
vulnerable
in
in
this
instance,
as
opposed
to
high
school
students
in
these
cases,
those
formative
years,
brain
development,
emotional
well-being,
those
types
of
things
that
that's
that's
why
it's
limited
to
k-8.
O
With
regard
to
the
mandate,
I
mean,
essentially,
everything
we
do
up
here
is
a
mandate
right,
we're
the
state
anything
we
do
mandates
something
on
local
governments
or
somebody.
So
you
know
I,
I
think
every
piece
of
legislation
we
look
at
is
a
mandate
the
benefit
of
this
one.
Is
it's
not
an
unfunded
mandate
on
locals?
O
The
fiscal
note,
like
I
said:
no
local
school
districts
will
need
to
increase
their
bp
local
match
contributions
as
a
result
of
the
proposed
legislation.
So
in
that
respect
we
kind
of
take
that
off
the
board.
Then
we
have
the
cares
act
issue.
The
money's
there
state
can
use
that
this
is
a
right
in
the
wheel
house
of
kerasak
money
for
the
state's
purposes.
O
Your
other
question,
I
think,
that's
it.
I
think
those
are
the
four
issues
you
touched
on.
I
I
Education
is
already
our
second
largest
budget
expenditure
in
our
state
and
you're,
adding
over
five
million
dollars
per
year
just
for
k
through
eight-
and
I
have
to
agree
with
my
colleagues
observation
that
while
you
may
be
correct,
they're
vulnerable
at
this
age,
I
submit
to
you
that
they
are
probably
more
vulnerable
in
the
early
stages
of
high
school
and
maybe
more
in
need
of
what
you're
proposing,
but
even
at
that
we
can't
afford
this.
This
particular
increase.
I
O
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and,
and
I
appreciate
the
concern
and
that
you
know
fiscal
nature
of
these
things
is
always
a
concern,
and
but
the
reality
is
is
we
do
have
the
money?
The
state
is
sitting
on
a
lot
of
money,
and
education
is
the
second
most
expensive
thing
to
the
state
of
tennessee,
and
it
should
be
one
of
the
top
two
things
we
spend
money
on
as
a
state.
O
We
are,
fortunately
in
a
good
fiscal
shape,
we're
putting
50
million
more
into
the
rainy
day
fund
this
year.
Tasser
says
we're
underfunding,
education,
the
bep.
Currently
by
the
you,
know
millions,
and
so
I
understand
your
point-
it's
well
taken
valid
concern,
but
we
have
the
money:
if
we're
not
going
to
spend
money,
identifying
children
who
need
help
in
our
schools
and
getting
them
the
assistance,
so
they
need.
O
A
All
those
in
favor,
please
indicate
by
saying
aye
all
those
opposed
say
no
no's
have
it.
The
bill
does
not
pass
represent.
Clemens,
I'm
going
to
take
up
representative
cheerleader,
littleton's
bill,
says
she's
been
waiting
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
years.
If
that's
okay,
yeah.
O
Chairman
reagan
and
I
are
late
to
a
roundtable
discussion,
but
I
I
certainly
don't
have
a
problem
with
that.
Oh.
A
That'll
bring
us
to
item
19..
Is
that
right,
adam
19
on
the
calendar.
B
This
bill
increases
from
10
000
to
25
000,
the
threshold
for
which
a
local
board,
or
of
the
education
or
government
body
of
a
public
charter
school
must
make
purchases
or
expenditures
by
competitive
bids.
If
the
lea
chooses
not
to
follow
the
local
government
bodies
purchasing
procedures,
it
established
that
counties
that
have
adopted
the
county
financial
management
system
of
1981,
the
county
purchasing
law
of
1957,
where
they
are
similarly
centralized
for
purchasing,
are
deemed
to
have
full-time
purchasing
agent
and
are
authorized
to
increase
the
competitive
bid
threshold
to
25
000
under
certain
conditions.
A
A
Nobody
all
right
all
right
item
number
eleven
house
bill.
212..
Do
we
have
a
motion
motion?
A
second
represent
clemens
you're
recognized.
I.
O
Think,
mr
chairman
committee,
I
missed
you
this
piece
of
legislation.
It
actually
passed
through
both
houses
last
year
it
the
pandemic,
like
a
lot
of
things,
ended
us
in
our
tracks
before
it
got
through
the
house
floor.
You're
familiar
with
this.
This
is
brought
to
me
by
the
american
college
of
surgeons,
vanderbilt
trauma
others
across
the
state
of
tennessee,
and
this
is
a
permissive
bill
that
allows
leas
to
adopt
a
stop
the
bleed
program
I'll
stop.
There.
You've
all
heard
the
the
speech
so
and
I
know
we're
tight
on
time.
A
Cleveland,
do
you
mind
I'm
for
this
bill,
we'll
vote
for
it?
Could
you
mind
taking
that
down?
I
think
we
have
some
business.
F
A
Oh
sorry,
question
has
been
called
that's.
That
was
my
fault.
I
got
distracted,
we'll
be
voting
on
house
bill
212.
Anyone
that
wants
to
vote
for
this,
please
indicate
by
saying
aye,
all
those
opposed
say
no
eyes
have
it
on
to
full
education.
Thank
you.
A
12
has
been
rolled,
13
has
been
rolled,
14
has
been
rolled,
we
are
on
item
15,
chairman
white.
Do
we
have
a
motion,
probably
motion
chairman
white?
You
were
recognized
on
house
bill,
475.
F
A
I
actually
need
to
have
the
amendment.
Do
you
have
property
motion
amendment
3742?
Is
that
what
you
have
correct
all
right?
Would
you
like
to
explain.
F
It,
yes,
members,
let
me
just
I'm
going
to
actually
read
my
comments.
It's
really
a
pretty
simple
bill,
but
it's
a
little
difficult
to
explain.
It
was
brought
to
me
by
the
tsba
tennessee
school
board
association
for
those
who
may
remember.
Last
year,
the
general
assembly
passed
a
bill
which
became
public
chapter
708,
which
updated
the
process
for
child
abuse,
reporting
and
investigations.
F
If
I
remember
correctly,
the
reason
we
we
went
down
this
path
is
that
when
you
have
a
child
that
me
in
school
and
suspected
or
or
has
found
out
that
there
may
be
some
abuse,
if
too
many
people
start
talking
to
the
child,
whether
it
may
be
multiple
teachers
or
principal
in
these
situations,
the
story
can
get
manipulated
very
very
easily
and
then
that
makes
the
professionals
job
that
much
more
harder.
F
So
that
was
the
premise
behind
the
bill
that
we
passed
last
year.
But
what
happened?
Last
august,
the
u.s
department
of
education
enacted
new
regulations
under
title
ix
of
the
civil
rights
act
of
1964,
which
prohibits
discrimination
on
the
basis
of
sex
in
an
educational
and
education
program
or
activity.
F
This
has
created
a
situation
where
some
of
the
federal
sexual
assault
offenses
have
the
potential
to
overlap
with
child
sexual
abuse
crimes
under
tennessee
law.
This
creates
a
conflict
regarding
parental
notification
because
in
certain
situations,
state
law
prohibits
school
districts
from
notifying
parents,
while
federal
regulations
require
it
and,
lastly,
house
bill
475.
A
All
right
we
are
on
amendment
37-42,
you've
heard
the
explanations.
Anybody
have
any
questions
for
the
sponsor,
seeing
none
we'll
be
voting
on
adding
amendment
3742
to
the
bill.
All
those
a
favor
please
indicate
by
saying
aye
aye,
those
opposed
say
no
eyes
have
it.
We
are
back
on
the
bill
as
amended
chairman
white.
I
think
that
you've
explained
your
bill.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
for
the
sponsor
on
the
bill?
A
M
This
bill
resolves
a
problem
we
have
in
some
of
our
schools
where
your
suspension,
your
alternative
school,
is
actually
on
the
same
campus
as
your
regular
school
and
in
the
situation
where
a
student
has
been
suspended
for
more
than
10
days,
for
either
a
violent
act
or
for
threatening
a
violent
act.
You
know,
instead
of
having
that
child,
basically
go
from
this
room
to
that
room
on
the
same
campus.
M
Now
that
we've
become
very
familiar
with
with
the
pandemic,
you
know
they
could
be
provided
with
remote
learning
at
home
as
an
alternative
to
again
having
this
child
that
has
committed
a
violent
act
or
threatened
a
violent
act.
Staying
there
on
the
campus.
So
that's
what
the
bill
does.
I
appreciate
your
support.
A
A
A
I
believe
we
do
have
a
couple
of
amendments
that
we
need
to
get
through.
A
Let's
see
here,
three:
seven:
seven:
five!
Is
it
just
one
amendment.
A
Property
motion
represent
hurt.
Would
you
care
to
explain
your
amendment.
M
Yes,
sir,
thank
you,
mr
trump.
This
this
amendment
just
adds
what
was
required
of
some
language
unless
the
student's
iap
provides
otherwise
just
adds
clarification
to
the
iep
in
the
language
of
the
bill.
A
All
right,
you've
heard
the
explanation
of
the
amendment
see
if
I
have
any
questions
on
this
amendment,
seeing
none
will
be
voting
on
amendment
3775,
all
those
in
favor
of
adopting,
please
say
aye,
all
those
opposed
say
no
eyes
have
it.
Amendment
is
adopted.
That
brings
us
to
an
untimely
filed
amendment.
Do
I
have
a
motion.
E
A
Properly
motioned,
we
will
be
voting
on
whether
or
not
to
hear
this
untimely
filed
amendment
all
those
in
favor,
please
indicate
by
saying
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
say.
No,
that's
exactly
two-thirds.
I
could
tell
all
right.
E
E
You
know
being
a
member
of
this
committee
for
a
couple
years.
This
bill
has
come
through
a
couple
times
and
one
of
the
things
we
just
wanted
to
make
clear
that
if
there's
a
facility
open
in
the
state
of
tennessee
that
we
would
that
that's
where
this
child
would
be
placed
first,
if
there
is
no
place
to
place
them
in
tennessee,
then
by
all
means
we
do
whatever
is
necessary
to
make
sure
that
the
child
gets
the
help
they
need.
So
what
the
bill
does
is
it
adds
section
b1.
There
are
no.
E
If
there
are
no
facilities
in
this
state
with
the
capacity
to
deliver
the
appropriate
mental
health
treatment
to
the
student.
At
the
time
the
student
is
admitted
to
the
out-of-state
residential
mental
health
facility.
That's
all
it
does
just
the
first
stop
is
tennessee.
If
there's
no
facility
available,
then
they
go
wherever
they
have
to
get
the
help.
That's
all,
mr
chairman,.
A
A
A
Without
objection,
we'll
roll
these
into
one
amendment,
seeing
none
of
that
okay,
do
I
hit
the
gap
a
little
bit?
Okay,
all
right!
Freshman
mistakes
coming
back
to
haunt
me
a
sophomore
all
right!
That
brings
us
back
to
house
bill
587
as
amended.
I'm
sorry
713,
as
amended
representative
hurt.
You
are
recognized.
M
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
As
mentioned
this,
it's
back
this
this
bill
house
bill
713
addresses
the
bep
funding
following
students
that,
because
of
the
students
treatment
plan
from
a
qualified
physician,
are
sent
to
an
out-of-state
facility.
It
allows
the
facility
to
receive
the
bep
funding
for
educational
services
provided
during
behavioral
health
treatment.
M
A
Thank
you
for
that
explanation.
Any
questions
for
the
sponsor
question
has
been
called.
Seeing.
No
objection
we'll
be
voting
on
house
bill
713,
all
all
those
in
favor,
please
indicate
by
saying
I
was
supposed
to
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it
on
to
full
education.
F
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
What
this
bill
does
is
school
systems
build
in
some
additional
days
that
they
can
use
towards
weather
events.
It
does
not,
however,
allow
them
to
use
it
without
requiring
the
permission
from
the
department
of
education
to
use
it
towards
any
kind
of
sick
days.
So
this
just
allows
the
local
education
agencies
to
have
the
ability
to
use
those
days
if
they
have
them
built
in
towards
sick
days,
without
having
to
require
permission
with
that,
I'll,
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
F
Okay,
members
with
that
explanation,
I'd
see
no
amendments
on
this
bill,
so
we're
on
the
bill.
587
any
comments.
Questions
of
the
sponsor
questions
been
called
for
any
objection
to
the
question
hearing.
None
all
those
in
favor
of
moving
house
bill,
587
out
to
full
committee.
Please
indicate
saying
aye
aye
opposed
the
eyes.
Have
it
moves
out.
The
full
committee.
E
I
know
we're
getting
ready
to
wrap
up
here,
mr
chairman,
but
these
first
few
committees
here
have
been
very
difficult.
I
think
you've
done
a
fantastic
job
of
seeing
us
through
them.
We'll
say
thank
you
for
that.
Thank
you.
Yeah.
F
And
I
want
to
add
representative
picky
pointed
out
while
ago
I
was
looking,
we
were
looking
at
this
committee.
This
is
a
great
committee,
the
depth
of
experience
and
background
and
knowledge.
I'm
just
looking
down
here
and
how
deliberative
everybody's
been
is
making
this
a
good
committee,
so
I'm
enjoying
it.