Senate hearing on SB 1241 can be found here. ATPE testimony is at 14 minutes 20 seconds.
House hearing on SB 1241 can be found here at 2 hours 34 minutes 20 seconds. ATPE testimony is at 3 hours 10 minutes 50 seconds.
ATPE’s formal written comments on the Commissioner’s proposed rules on HB 1842 can be found here.
Excerpts from Summary of Public Comments and Agency Responses Related to Proposed New 19 TAC Chapter 102, Educational Programs, Subchapter JJ, Innovation District
Comment. ATPE suggested adding "as described by these rules" at the end of §102.1305(c) to indicate that the plan must meet the requirements in rule as well as statute.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified §102.1305(d) to specify that the plan must meet the requirements in rule.
Comment. ATPE commented that a district needs to specifically identify TEC sections from which it is exempting itself and that the rules should specify that a district developing an innovation plan is required to affirmatively list the sections of TEC from which it intends to exempt itself and state how compliance with those provisions would inhibit the goals of its plan. ATPE also stated that the check-off list in Figure: 19 TAC §102.1307(d) is inadequate to meet the requirement of TEC, Chapter 12A; provide due notice of the district's plan; or promote thoughtful consideration of the district's actions. ATPE further commented that the commissioner should maintain an exhaustive list of TEC provisions from which a district may exempt itself.
Agency Response. The agency provides the following clarification. The requirement that the plan identify the requirements of the TEC that inhibit the goals of the plan and from which the district should be exempted is already included under §102.1305(b)(2), which states that the local innovation plan shall be developed in accordance with TEC, §12A.003. Additionally, the checklist in the figure is a reporting function for the agency as required in TEC, §12A.004(b)(1), and not intended to be a substitute for the district innovation plan. Lastly, the agency disagrees that the commissioner should maintain an exhaustive list of TEC provisions from which a district may exempt itself and has determined that the current list provides a practical reporting mechanism for ease of meeting the statutory requirements for the districts and agency.
Comment. ATPE recommended that the rules clearly state that the civil immunity protections and procedures of TEC, Chapter 22, Subchapter B, apply to districts of innovation in order to deter plaintiffs' lawsuits without the need for costly litigation to determine the definition of "requirement" as it applies to districts of innovation and civil immunity from protections and procedures.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has added the TEC, Chapter 22, Subchapter B, to the prohibited exemptions list in §102.1309(a)(1).