We need laws to ensure the safety of the students of the commonwealth. And it starts with accountability. That’s why I support this bill.

I watched this bill die in committee last year. I watched organizations like that School Board Association and Superintendent Association speak against it. It was then that I understood that they are organizations that put the business of running a school before the task if educating children. They cited scheduling and staffing issues. As a veteran teacher of 22 years, I started when it was already hard in Virginia. Older colleagues blamed the onslaught of testing due to NCLB and lack of autonomy, they retired during the Great Recession. I carried on. Threats of a looming teacher shortage began. I carried on. Pay still didn't increase much for a decade, save a bonus or 1-2% here or there, eaten by rising health care, housing, or child care costs. I carried on. The pandemic hit and there is still a wake of effects. I carry on. Now, I don't just have larger class sizes...we have students that are severely behind, parental involvement that swings from non-existent to snowplowing through curriculum and classroom libraries, and adults in classrooms that though caring, are utterly unqualified adults leading classrooms, pressuring licensed or tenured teachers in the role of uncompensated on-the -ob trainer, and so much more! This bill should be viewed as a teacher retention bill. Personally, I already only have 25 mins in my schedule for lunch. After, supervising behavior in line and making my way to an adult bathroom and grab my lunch it's really 15 min, before I have to be back to pick up my class. And, truthfully, it is too short for students. Some are still carrying food items back with them that they didn't finish. I give an additional 5 mins of talk time after returning because they haven't met that social need. Please consider this bill. It is important for staff and student mental health. It is important for retention- it is important to feel treated like a professional that can go to the bathroom, heat a 4 min frozen meal, and enjoy it with colleagues.

HB583 addresses concerns that many of our members who are Elementary teachers have brought to our attention over several years. Therefore, we strongly support HB583.

Fairfax County Special Education PTA supports this bill. One of the major factors in special education teacher attrition is the lack of planning and lunchtime - especially for teachers teaching in self-contained settings where there are often multiple grade levels being taught at the same time. For example, in elementary school teachers often get their planning time while their classes are at their "specials" classes (music/art/pe,etc) - and they eat lunch at the same time as their students. For self-contained teachers teaching multiple grade levels, especially those who have K-6 all in one classroom, when one grade level is at specials and/or lunch, they still have another grade level to teach in their classroom. There's never a time when they don't have students in their room for academics. School divisions must be required to identify this need and plan accordingly to ensure that these teachers have the same lunch and planning time as their general education counterparts. This is an important part of special education teacher retention and recruitment, in light of the nationwide staffing crisis. Thank you.

Support. Addressing the teacher shortage is going to take more than just a salary increase. A 30-minute lunch break is expected in any other employment and should be provided for our teachers as well. However, this also means that our schools need to be adequately staffed so that providing a basic work break doesn’t create a need for daily “volunteer-staffing”.

Good afternoon, my name is Krista Arnold and I am the Executive Director of the Virginia Association of Elementary Principals. We currently have 1000 members. In theory, we wholeheartedly agree with the concept of a 30 minute duty free lunch for all elementary teachers. Unfortunately, in practice, a 30 minute unencumbered lunch is not feasible due to the lack of staffing in many of our schools.

The Virginia Coalition for Fine Arts Education supports HB 583 bill in its intent but would recommend the following additions: ‘Elementary teachers’ are defined to include art, music, and physical education teachers. ‘Thirty minutes planning time’ is defined as a contiguous duty-free period.

If the true intent of this bill is to "ensure that students coming from those facilities and enrolling or re-enrolling in public schools receive the educational supports they need" then this bill should include a requirement that with the informed consent of the parent a full IDEA evaluation or reevaluation of the student be conducted by the receiving school for any student being released from a residential treatment facility to determine if the student is eligible for services pursuant to IDEA or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, or in the case of students already identified as eligible under IDEA, what additional special education or related services the child needs to address the unique needs of the child and ensure access of the child to the general curriculum. 8 VAC 20-81-10. While it may seem obvious that these evaluations/reevaluations would be automatically triggered when a child returns from a residential treatment facility as part of a school district's "Child Find" obligation under IDEA and Section 504, the reality is that schools are not always choosing to do them in these situations. To make an IDEA evaluation or reevaluation pursuant to 8 VAC 20-81-60 & 20-81-70 (including the required informed parental consent) a requirement in this bill will ensure that these children are not falling through the cracks when they return to school.

This is an important bill to assist school divisions in working with residential facilities to ensure that students coming from those facilities and enrolling or re-enrolling in public schools receive the educational supports they need while the school division's mental health professionals are also alerted to any threat to safety the student's return may pose. When a similar bill was introduced in the Senate Health and Education subcommittee, some youth advocacy groups and mental health groups voiced concerns about the language. These groups and I met and we agreed to changes that narrowed the scope to include information related only to a student's required education supports and any threat to safety. Also, the new language states that the information will be provided to a mental health professional in the school division, not to the superintendent and safety officer. I would recommend the same edits to this bill.

Speaking against because of unintended consequences for students with disabilities

Please vote no on this bill. It would violate a patient’s HIPPA rights. As a former teacher, I am aware of the fact that student records are not always kept as confidential as we would all hope. This information could easily fall into the wrong hands, and cause the student and their family more hardship. Thank you!

I am adamantly opposed to this bill. There is no reason why a school district should be allowed access to a minor’s health records without parental consent. This is complete violation of the privacy expected around health-related issues and opens the student family up for exposure of personal and private information that schools have no business knowing unless explicitly shared by the parents and legal guardians. If students records are to shared in this manner, why aren’t teacher or administrators records shared ?

Vote no on HB1017 which is a breach of HIPPA. Please protect patient privacy.

VOTE NO on HB1017 I am very concerned with the systemic breach of patient confidentiality this would enable. Parents should control what sensitive medical information about their child is released and to whom. I can think of several scenarios where it would not be in the student's best interest to automatically give a copy of discharge paperwork to the school. Our school divisions have not been the best guardians of this information. See https://www.the74million.org/article/exclusive-virginias-fairfax-schools-expose-thousands-of-sensitive-student-records/ (Fairfax has had several breaches of sensitive student information.) https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/education/fairfax-county-public-schools-student-teacher-data-hacked-on-dark-web-ransomware-attack/65-6e6d455b-a652-440f-beb3-aac6abf80465 Additionally, this bill would strip students with disabilities of the protection of their sensitive medical information that nondisabled students are provided by Federal law. VOTE NO on HB1017

Please vote against this Bill! I have concerns for the privacy for our children! This Bill seems to violate HIPPA. It should be up to the parents/guardians what information they choose to disclose to the school.

Vote no on HB1017. This is an aggregious violation of HIPAA for students with disabilities. The decision on what to disclose to a school about an inpatient psychiatric hospitalization should be left up to the student, their parents, and their doctors--not a government-sponsored services board. Individuals with mental health conditions are far more likely to be the victims of violence than to perpretate it themselves. HB1017 is an invasion of privacy that will stigmatize students with disabilities while doing absolutely nothing for public safety.

My name is Melissa Waugh and I am a special education attorney representing Virginia families of children with disabilities. I have been practicing special education law in VA for 14 years. I have reviewed the text of HB1017 and I am very concerned with the systemic breach of patient confidentiality this would enable. Parents should control what sensitive medical information about their child is released and to whom. I can think of several scenarios where it would not be in the student's best interest to give a copy of that discharge paperwork to the school automatically (e.g., it could include sensitive information about sexual abuse or a rape the school has no business knowing, statements about past behavior the school would use as an excuse to keep the kid out of school, etc.). I'm also concerned that it's going to the Superintendent and division safety official . . . so how many other people will they be forwarding this sensitive information to within the school? Sensitive reports that can impact a child's future should be subject to the strictest privacy protections. While FERPA is supposed to protect a student's educational records, our school divisions have not been the best guardians of this information. See https://www.the74million.org/article/exclusive-virginias-fairfax-schools-expose-thousands-of-sensitive-student-records/ . This bill would strip students with disabilities of the protection of their sensitive medical information that nondisabled students are provided by Federal law. While I realize the language of the bill does not specify students with disabilities, if a student must be hospitalized for inpatient treatment, then by definition a major life activity has been impacted qualifying the individual for protection under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This raises the question of whether this bill discriminates on the basis of disability, or at a minimum, would have a disparate impact on students with disabilities. In addition, the Federal HIPAA Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity (health care providers) and the Rule calls this information "protected health information" (PHI). 45 C.F.R. § 160.103. Releasing this type of PHI to a school without the patient's (or minor patient's parental) authorization is not one of the permitted uses of PHI discussed in the HIPAA Privacy Rule. 45 C.F.R. § 164.502(a)(1). While there is a general exception for releases of PHI required by law, what is the justification for passing a law that narrows the rights of our most vulnerable children by automatically disclosing information that could hurt them in the future? If the concern is that a potentially dangerous student would be returned to the school community, HIPAA already provides an exception for this. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(j) (Covered entities may disclose PHI that they believe is necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to a person or the public, when such disclosure is made to someone they believe can prevent or lessen the threat (including the target of the threat)). We need to let medical professionals do their jobs and disclose PHI when it is necessary, not on a perfunctory basis. It is for these reasons that I respectfully ask committee members to vote against HB1017. Thank you.

The VCFAE, which represents over 6,000 VA arts educators plus their students, is concerned about several aspects of HB 1081 and SB 434 and recommends against passage. To begin there are problems with the language which allows students “...to personalize the pace of learning and accelerate their learning based on the mastery of course content by demonstrating at least 80 percent of the competencies required by course standards, regardless of time, place, or pace”. While personalized learning is critical in all arts courses, and accelerated learning encouraged, as important, particularly in performing arts classes, is group practice, critiquing, and performance/exhibitions all of which require students to be in attendance. It is important in these disciplines for students to practice and explore individually, but working together as a group to, perform a piece of music, is also critical and included in the VA Music SOLs. If a student masters a flute part at 100% proficiency, and can demonstrate it, this bill could allow a student to stay home, earn credit, and never actually perform with the band. “Mastery" in fine arts courses has been measured in group performance settings and requires that students be in attendance. Mastery is based solely on individual “course” standards, not necessarily SOLs and district curricula, leading to possible uneven implementation across districts and the state based on such factors as principal preferences/knowledge and teacher competency, interests, work ethic, and artistic expertise. The following questions also need to be considered: • There are no course restrictions here. What is the relationship between SOL testing and these models? • Do students have to complete assignments, or can they meet course standards independently? This raises grading issues - as would individual pacing. Does this bill allow registration and earning credit in name only? In other words, could homeschooled students not attend class nor turn in any assignments and yet earn credit for classes if they achieve 80% mastery? • What assessments will be sufficient for measuring 80% mastery? • Is there any consideration for how administrative tasks and increased teacher workload are going to be handled? • How are these models going to be evaluated programmatically? • Are there any thoughts about how to ensure that student gaps that exist across other areas are not exacerbated and that in schools/districts of innovation all students have sufficient support to access these new opportunities? The bills acknowledge that there are co-curricular aspects of courses that tie to curricular courses, such as marching band, after-school performances, and concerts, in the arts, that are course requirements. In the bill, each school division board is given the right to "adopt policy regulating student participation in curricular and co-curricular programs" if they are no more restrictive for part-time students than the regular full-time student body. This caveat could mean that part-time students could be required to be in attendance for all group practice and performance aspects of courses, but it means that each school system would need to designate, where, when, and how to apply the policy. Again, we would ask the committees reviewing HB 1081 and SB 434 take these concerns into consideration and vote against them.

Students should be able to take assessments in an environment that is comfortable for them and allows them to best demonstrate their learning and growth. Virginia PTA supports virtual assessment options for all students who need them.

Please support this bill. There are children with severe medical conditions for whom testing in person is difficult and/or dangerous. Thank you.

I write in support of H.B. 1221. As a law professor and advocate,[1] the elimination of menstruation-related barriers to education and the impact of a lack of menstrual literacy on other societal structures are primary foci of my work. [2] Based on my scholarly and applied research and analysis, I can attest that this bill would help normalize menstruation, reduce the harassment and internalized shame of people who experience it, and advance public health and safety. As my co-authors and I previously noted, “All students must have information, support, and a positive school environment that will allow them both to manage their own menstruation or related condition (if relevant), and to understand the menstruation-related needs of others.” [3] Without comprehensive and inclusive menstrual education for all,[4] some students will inevitability not understand what is happening to their bodies (especially during menarche), know when to seek guidance from trusted and informed adults, or understand how the cycle (and its cessation) may impact people differently, for example, based on one's gender, identity, race, disability, and/or class. Nor will they understand how it may change over one's life course from menstrual hormone fluctuations to perimenopause and menopause. Absent instruction, some students also may not learn that periods can be a positive experience, that menstrual concealment is a choice, that media messages and consumer targeting influence feelings and product preferences, or that menstruation and related conditions are not dirty or unsanitary. And others may continue contributing to the stigma by joking and harassing people who experience it, without necessarily understanding the consequences of doing so. For these and other reasons, this bill is necessary to support the health, dignity, and bodily autonomy of our students. It also benefits our workplaces and broader community. I hope you support it. 1] For informational purposes, I am the Jack and Lovell Olender Professor of Law at UDC Law. I direct the Legislation/Civil Rights Clinic and teach Gender and Disability Law. In 2023, I was the Fulbright-Scotland Distinguished Scholar at the University of Edinburgh, where I analyzed “Menstrual Justice at Work and School: Public Policy Lessons from Scotland’s Period Products Law and the UK’s Equality Act.” I have worked on new menstrual literacy standards in DC and on other DC, VA, and global policies to advance menstrual justice. This comment is submitted in my personal capacity. 2] See, e.g., Margaret Johnson & Marcy Karin, Now More Than Ever, It’s Time for Universal Menstrual Education for Gender Equality, MS. (June 10, 2022), https://msmagazine.com/2022/06/10/universal-menstrual-education-period-productsinformation; Marcy Karin, Addressing Periods at Work, 16 Harv. L. & Pol'y Rev. 459 (2022), bit.ly/periodsatwork. 3] Marcy Karin, Naomi Cahn, Elizabeth Cooper, Bridget Crawford, Margaret Johnson & Emily Gold Waldman, Title IX and “Menstruation or Related Conditions,” 30 Mich. J. of Gen. & L. 25, 59 (2023), bit.ly/TIX-Menstruation-LawProfComment 4] See Chella Quint, A Period Positive National Curriculum for England, https://periodpositive.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/a-period-positive-national-curriculum-chella-quint-20-july-2022.pdf; MHM in Schools Advocacy, https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/gate/articles##US. 5] BRAWS, PERIODS, POVERTY, AND THE NEED FOR POLICY 7 (2018), bit.ly/BRAWS-BriefingReport.

I am in support of menstrual education for all students in upper elementary and middle school. As a health educator, understanding of the menstrual cycle is essential for health and wellness. Individuals who menstruate should understand the process, what they will experience, and what is normal and what is not. Individuals who do not menstruate should also have this knowledge and understanding as it is important for supporting a partner or in the prevention of pregnancy. Students have told me they believe when all students have this knowledge it builds empathy and respect among peers and family members. I request consideration is given to the instruction only being part of Family Life Education (FLE). Instruction on sexual health falls within FLE and not general health education. Placing this instruction in general health education would also not allow parents/caregivers the option to opt their child out of the instruction as they currently have in FLE. I also suggest giving schools flexibility to begin instruction in grade 4 or 5 to align with the current model for FLE in their school(s).

Dear Chair Simmonds and Members of the Subcommittee: Although federal law (since 2019) requires public schools nationwide to make their Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) programs available to home school students, many Virginia school divisions are unaware of it. As a result, we have seen well-qualified applicants for the program erroneously turned away. I recently represented a well-qualified home instruction student in Chesapeake who had been turned away. Even after I quoted the federal law to officials, they still would not budge. Only when one of my colleagues suggested to them that we would file a lawsuit against the division on behalf of our client did those involved agree to process the student's application. 18 months after the federal law was enacted, Loudoun County was still rejecting homeschoolers' requests to participate in JROTC. I had to go through multiple levels of officials to eventually get it straightened out. Here is the federal law verbatim: -- SEC. 520B. INCLUSION OF HOMESCHOOLED STUDENTS IN JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICER'S TRAINING CORPS UNITS. Section 2031 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: “(g) (1) Each public secondary educational institution that maintains a unit under this section shall permit membership in the unit to homeschooled students residing in the area served by the institution who are qualified for membership in the unit (but for lack of enrollment in the institution). “(2) A student who is a member of a unit pursuant to this subsection shall count toward the satisfaction by the institution concerned of the requirement in subsection (b)(1) relating to the minimum number of student members in the unit necessary for the continuing maintenance of the unit.”. -- Bringing the federal law into the Virginia Code will make it more accessible to school divisions and decrease the likelihood of errors and lawsuits. It will also provide the General Assembly with a ready way to respond to any potential Virginia-specific follow-up issues that are not addressed in the federal law. In addition to access for home instruction students, HB 1231 would open JROTC programs to private school students. This is desirable since it will result in a greater number of young people having the opportunity to participate in JROTC and benefit from its citizenship training and career exploration features. No public school is required to host a JROTC program. But if it does, it must conform to federal law which requires access for home school students. Bringing the requirement into state law will be tremendously helpful in preventing the kinds of errors by officials that could negatively impact young people at a formative time of their lives. Respectfully submitted, Scott A. Woodruff, Director of Legal and Legislative Advocacy, Home School Legal Defense Association

While the VCFAE, which represents over 6,000 VA arts educators plus their students, prefers HB 1477 to HB 1081, we are still concerned about some of the language contained within. To begin with, there are problems with the language which allows students “...to personalize the pace of learning and accelerate their learning based on the mastery of course content by demonstrating at least 80 percent of the competencies required by course standards, regardless of time, place, or pace”. While personalized learning is critical in all arts courses, and accelerated learning encouraged, as important, particularly in performing arts classes, is group practice, critiquing, and performance/exhibitions all of which require students to be in attendance. It is important in these disciplines for students to practice and explore individually, but working together as a group to, perform a piece of music, is also critical and included in the VA Music SOLs. If a student masters a flute part at 100% proficiency, and can demonstrate it, this bill could allow a student to stay home, earn credit, and never actually perform with the band. “Mastery" in fine arts courses has been measured in group performance settings and requires that students be in attendance. Mastery is based solely on individual “course” standards, not necessarily SOLs and district curricula, leading to possible uneven implementation across districts and the state based on such factors as principal preferences/knowledge and teacher competency, interests, work ethic, and artistic expertise. If the bill passes, the following questions also need to be considered when developing implementation: Do students have to complete assignments, or can they meet course standards independently? This raises grading issues - as would individual pacing. Does this bill allow registration and earning credit in name only? In other words, could students not attend class nor turn in any assignments and yet earn credit for classes if they achieve 80% mastery? What assessments will be sufficient for measuring 80% competency? Are there any thoughts about how to ensure that student gaps that exist across other areas are not exacerbated and that in schools/districts of innovation all students have sufficient support to access these new opportunities?

PLEASE GO TO HENRICO SCHOOL BOARD MEETING MARCH 14, 2024 LINK BELOW. READ THE LAST COMMENT ON PAGE 9 AND THE THIRD COMMENT ON PAGE 27. THIS IS WHY MARIJUANA SHOULD NOT BE LEGAL https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/henrico/Board.nsf/files/D3CJHX4D404E/$file/Written%20Comments%203-14-24.pdf

HB958 - A minor who can't act for themselves doesn't belong on a school board. SB positions should be positions of honor not putting up a minors who's brains haven't matured yet (by medical science). HB1528 - Unless you think forced relations are ok, this is needed. Stat occurs when someone having relations is under a certain age. HB571 - Move to report.