> > This week on the Wheelhouse keeping kids what it'll take to get the job done from Connecticut's new child Advocate.

♪ > > for > > Connecticut Public on Frankie Graziano.

This is the Wheelhouse, the show that brings the politics of the people.

We've got your weekly dose of politics in Connecticut and beyond right here.

Home schooling was on the minds of lawmakers as the 2026 session came to a close this month.

Lawmakers pass legislation marking what advocates are calling Connecticut's first meaningful rules around homeschooling ever.

Supporters say the rules will keep better tabs on kids not enrolled in Connecticut schools following the recent deaths of some children.

But opponents say the rules are an overreach and that the state should stay out of private family business.

This hour, we hear about home schooling and what the new rules mean for child advocacy.

Joining us right now is the state's newly confirmed state child Advocate, Christina thank you so much for coming on the program this morning.

> > Good morning.

Thank you for having me.

So thankful for you to come on this morning.

> > And folks, if you home school your kids or you want to have a comment either way on the new rules, hit us up.

Comment on our YouTube live stream or just call 8, 8, 7, to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, 80 7 to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, Christine, you are officially confirmed as child advocate earlier this month.

But you've been in the role as acting in an acting capacity for 18 months now.

So what does the child advocate do?

Help us with that.

> > So the U.S.

is the child advocate is an independence.

Non-partisan state agency > > and our rule on the skews me in a nutshell is oversight.

> > Frosty funded services for children sorry about that.

And so what we do in large part is investigate our systems and our services to children.

We try to identify where the gaps are and make recommendations for improvement.

We also house the state's child fatality review panel.

> > And in that role, we review all unexplained an unexpected deaths of children.

> > And very we will look more in depth that children who receive state services in particular.

Those are very frequently with services from the Department of Children and Families.

And we may issue reports where we find systemic issues that require some remediation.

> > Is there like a personal mission you have as you start in this new role here or at least no longer being in an acting capacity.

Yeah.

> > Well, you know, in some ways there's not big change between acting child advocate in the child advocate right?

We really focused on the of the office when our a former child advocate left admirer of our Sari, Sari gun, good friend of mine as well.

And, you know, we really had to my role is to maintain the ship, right?

Keep it moving forward to getting the work done and during that time, we issued several reports on a variety of topics.

Autism use Kim's conditions of confinement, education and DCF.

And so now is as as a sort of formally enter the role, what will be focusing you know, we still have our conditions of confinement work that we are required to do under statute.

We'll continue doing that.

We're going to focus heavily on the quality of care and treatment and the quality of the case work at DCF and we really want to focus on our facility work, which which means looking at the quality of care and treatment in the state's facilities that house children.

> > He talked a bit about your background where you associate child advocate beforehand is just help me to understand how you got to this point.

You are.

> > So I became the associate child advocate in 20 to yeah.

And so I was in that role when our child advocate left and the statute provides that when there is a vacancy for the child advocate, the associate riled advocate feels that position until a new child advocate is selected in that process is done by and independent advisory committee that is important to appointed by members of the legislature and then they provide a list of 3 candidates to the governor and the governor nominates one of those 3.

> > And then before that kind of what led you to want to advocate for children like this?

> > Oh, well, I've been I've an attorney for be 30 years this year and I went to law school because I wanted to represent children in foster care.

And so this is what I've done my entire my entire career.

I internships law school where focused on learning the system that serves kids juvenile justice, child welfare.

And that's really what I've done throughout my career.

I've I've always represented children represented children in juvenile justice cases, special education case, disability discrimination, child welfare and mental health and so it's really that.

Very personal to me to do that work and to make sure that every child has a voice and every child has what they need to grow and thrive.

> > Reporters get to know you all from these reports that come out.

You mentioned your Eddie did one on autism.

You did one on conditions of confinement and we're going to talk about some of this DCF, a quality control assessment that you did.

We'll talk about that a little bit later.

So that initiate reporters to you all and there are these real professional reports.

So some folks can imagine that you'd be working in this huge office building in Hartford.

And you have this.

> > Big staff.

How big is the office?

So at that moment we have 9 staff members and what they can see because as as I've moved up from associate child advocate, the child advocate, we've we've we've got that position open, which actually posting open right now.

And and during the we just brought 2 people > > I was going or that, you know, while we were doing those, you know, 7 reports I mentioned we had 7 staff members and and we are, you know, we're very fortunate.

We have an amazing team of people in our office with a diverse set of skills and lenses through which they > > And it really helps take a look.

critical look at the systems that we're working on.

> > Which is why I want to ask you about next.

Because they're going to replace you at some point as the associate child advocate and then you did bring in the 2 additional staff that expansion.

How does that help you sort of expand your role here?

Yeah.

Expand what you all do.

Sorry.

> > Yeah.

Well, what it's really going to help us to is that facility work that I mentioned earlier.

So we have a responsibility to periodically review all facilities in which children are housed right?

And and we also have a specific statute.

Tory requirement that was added in, I believe 2020 18, 2019 to look at the conditions of confinement for youth who are incarcerated set includes our kids there in juvenile detention youth who are housed as adults at Manson Youth Institution.

It also are are the Delta Silage because that goes to 21.

And so with that responsibility when that was added, are we have one person who does our facility work.

And so she was really dedicated for the last 5 or 6 years to that work on conditions of confinement.

And we really weren't able to get out to the other facility.

So with this new position, the 2 new positions we're able to do that and we think that's critically important Children in our mental health facilities and other facilities where there's a need to look at the care and quality of that quality of care and treatment.

But they receive.

> > So huge job for 9 or 10 people.

So break it down for us.

What do you look at as like major buckets or priorities?

For how your office can work to ensure kids safety right?

> > So I think the largest bucket of our work is really a review of the Department of Children and families and the work that they do and that work in particular in relation to child fatalities.

That's sort of the largest chunk of the work we do and it is the second largest chunk really is the facility work and looking at how we provide services to kids.

We also do quite a lot of work in the education area in particular, special education looking at restraint, seclusion and children with disabilities and how their needs are met.

> > With DCF we're talking about reforms are changes.

I've certainly had this conversation with Sari gun before as well when she was in the role.

But now in this moment, what are the sort of systemic changes that could be made sort of in the in the short term, I guess.

Yeah.

> > So I think there are a number of changes that can be immediately by the DCF executive leadership right in that really.

It speaks to their or those changes would really be around being very, very clear about how they are measuring success.

And and and making those measurements.

Really founded in the case work.

Are they doing?

You know, the visits with children and families consistent with their policies.

Are they contacting what we call collateral contacts.

The school, the doctors, the mental health provider for the parents to substance abuse provider for the parents.

Are they doing that consistent with with their policy and his supervision happening consistent with policies.

So we want them to use those as measures of success and we want them to tie approvals of telework to those criteria to ensure that the job is getting done.

> > You're not sort of coming from the peanut gallery.

There's some work that you did to address this and be able to have that kind of a conclusion.

But I don't want to get there yet because I want to talk about that in the next segment.

The other bucket.

What can be another bucket that you guys look at?

You talked about special education work.

You talked about reviewing DCF.

Do you all get involved in homeschooling policy?

> > So we do.

We look at all stall policies related to children certainly our state policies related to homeschooling impact children right.

And every child has a right to an education.

Every child has a right to be free from abuse and neglect and the state has the constitutionally protected interest in making sure that its citizens are educated and so we have looked at those policies and procedures to try to understand what the states put in place to ensure that every child does, in fact, receive an education.

> > We have a comment from YouTube.

Somebody asking about the rules about home schooling in Connecticut.

That's right.

There was just new legislation put here into law in Connecticut hasn't been signed into law get the second.

But state lawmakers recently passed homeschooling regulations.

Can you explain what this does in a nutshell?

> > Sure.

So what that new law, Rick?

> > Choirs is in essence, every parents to enroll their children in school or file a notice of a filing notice.

Basically every parent files the same notice and they'd tell the school weather there enrolling in public school, enrolling in private school or are going to parent guided learning and believe that's how use the term they're using for home here in Atlanta, Tehran.

And it's something I need and that's the title.

The law's well or bill that was passed.

> > I think that's the title that was settled.

And at the legislature.

So everyone files, that's paperwork every year to say how you're educating your child.

> > and then beyond that, the all the > > most significant change is that if a parent is withdrawing a child from the public school system.

To move that child to be home schooled that at that point, there would be essentially a DCF background check to determine one.

If there's a pit active investigation that's open or if there is if a caregiver or an adult in the home is on what's called the DCF Central registry and just so people understand the DCF central registry.

And maintained by the department people get put on that list under very limited circumstances.

So that would be you've been substantiated as a perpetrator of child abuse.

And the department has made a finding based on the KRON, a city and severity of those substantiation Ys that the person poses a safety risk to children.

And so what this law does, essentially, it says, if you or one of those people that's been on that list and then you will not be able to withdraw your child to homeschool.

> > 8, 8, 7, to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, is the number to call if you'd like to talk to me on the Wheelhouse.

88 7 to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, You can also e-mail Wheelhouse at CT Public Dot Org.

If you don't get your comment and now you can also go to YouTube as well.

Your office, how are you all involved in the bill?

I know you made some policy recommendations, at least in the past.

> > We have made policy recommendation that justified.

I testified in support of the bill and I made some suggestions for additions.

They did not all get included.

But that's OK.

That's how the process works, right?

Our office mates recommendations the Legislature decides what the policies ultimately are.

And so we have been involved in this are office to an investigation in 2018 and issued recommendations at that time.

And then we conducted a second investigation in 2025. and made recommendations based on that investigation and what we looked at in that investigation was first we want to understand the how many children there were and we wanted to understand their intersection with chronic absenteeism and also the Department of Children and Families.

And so we asked the State Department of Education for data and and children who were withdrawn and we really narrowed in on a small group, 7 to 11 year-old children.

And we looked at those 7 to 11 year-old children and and what we found is that when you looked at just 7 to 11 year-old children, 31% were chronically absent prior to being withdrawn for home schooling.

And that's really important because chronic absenteeism at that age in particular isn't indicator of some concern.

And once the parent right when when a child is chronically absent, school districts have a host of requirements, that of things they're supposed to be doing to re-engage that child in school and get that child back to school and the moment that that notice of withdrawal is filed and the child is being withdrawn for the stated purpose of homeschooling.

All of that follow-up CSIS and there is no further check on whether or not that child is receiving education.

So we looked at that.

And then we also looked at the DCF sort of intersection with DCF and what we found was that about 8 to 9% of the children who is withdrawn.

We're in a home where there was at least one substantiated allegation of abuse or neglect and a little under 4% had a caregiver on the Child Abuse Registry that I mentioned earlier.

> > And in the new bill, if somebody is on that registry or there's that issue with chronic app.

And you guys go ahead and looking find somebody on the registry you'd be able to say not so fast and be able to make sure that that child would be pulled out of school.

> > Well, not quite, but so yes.

So if it's in and just to be clear, the check would be the school district would be doing that check through DCF.

Very similar to the way they do background checks for school employees.

> > And they would just be a kickback of essentially a yes or no.

Yeah.

yes, they can withdraw.

No, they can't.

And that would only be again, if that if a caregiver or an adult in the home is on that child abuse registry or there's an open active investigation happening.

If the child is chronically absent, that's not going to prohibit that child from being withdrawn.

And and I think that's where, you know, while this legislation is very important and it's the first meaningful legislation.

It also does not go far enough to ensure that children are receiving education and to ensure that they're safe.

> > As governor signed a bill yet.

> > The last I checked, it had not been signed yet.

It looked like it had recently been transmitted to the governor.

So we are very much hoping that that will be > > But when I talked to the signed.

governor staff a couple of days ago, it hadn't been transmitted yet.

So must have just got in there.

So we'll look forward to whether or not that happens soon.

Whether or not the bill is signed, but it sounds like there isn't any indication that it wouldn't be signed?

> > Not not that I'm aware of.

Home-school advocates say the DCF check is basically a false accusation that the home school communities filled with.

> > Abusers right recent op-ed, James R Mason.

I think it was in the Hartford Current.

The president of a group advocating on behalf of families with children learned at home rather than a public school.

He says that the new legislation is inconsistent with Connecticut's civil Liberties tradition.

What's your reaction to that?

> > Well, Pete, you know, I I think that it's really important to step back and think about the kids who don't have people advocating for them right.

And so, yes, there are a lot of parents who home school and do a really great job, right?

Who have children going to the college and having amazing careers so that it is an issue of an assumption about homeschoolers and in the background check is not an assumption about Homeschoolers.

It's a system to ensure that children are protected.

Very similar to the way we background check every teacher in school employee.

We don't do that because we assume they're bad people.

We do that because we know we need a system to protect kids and from from my perspective and the perspective of the office of the Child Advocate, that's what we're doing here.

And and and we've had right.

We have these high profile cases that we have not yet completed.

Our investigations on issued reports on, but we do have other examples.

Pace is that we have done reports on of children whose parents we're on the child Abuse Registry when they withdrew their children from school and their children were harmed.

And that's not something that we can ignore.

end.

> > System > > we have in place and certainly the legislation that passed doesn't interfere with the ability of people to homeschool their children.

It just puts a check.

and some protection in for kids.

> > Christine is going to stick with us after a quick break.

I want to follow up on this.

We're going to continue to talk about this and get even further into the Department of Children and families questions for her or any reaction.

What you've heard thus far, give us a call.

8, 8, 7, to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7.

You can also leave a comment on our YouTube channel.

You're listening.

The Wheelhouse on Connecticut Public, Frankie Graziano.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ This is the Wheelhouse from Connecticut Public.

I'm Frankie Graziano.

We're joined this hour by Connecticut's Newly-confirmed State Child Advocate.

We just talked about homeschooling policy regulation and now let's talk about another way the state can serve children and their families.

Christina Guy owes the child advocate for the state of Connecticut.

I want to pivot now to the Department of Children and Families.

2 weeks ago you released the letter of findings related to DCF and how the department was handling cases involving child safety.

What did you find in this assessment?

> > So what we found it's sort of in summary is that the current quality of case practice both investigations and what we call in-home cases, is not sufficient to protect kids.

There is a tremendous amount of work to do to ensure that workers are gathering the information that they need in order to make sound decisions.

And there is what we're seeing, frankly, is is alarming in terms of the lack of adherence to those foundational aspects of good case work.

And if they need to be urgently remedied by the department.

> > Following the release of the letter, DCF Commissioner Susan Hamilton said in the statement that her agency has commenced a multi disciplinary review at the agency that review will include casework decisions, managerial oversight.

And adherence to policy and best case practice standards.

She > > Sort of what I don't know says.

if anything changes now as you move from acting to 2 newly confirmed.

But what's that relationship like like?

Are you already and in touch with DCF in terms of your findings and is there sort of I don't know, just kind of give us a sense of whether or not you think those things will be remedied.

> > So we are in conversation department.

Our office meets monthly with the DCF executive team and we use those meetings to bring issues to their attention, to talk problems that we see and make recommendations to them.

> > And and and for some time now, those meetings have included some version of we're concerned about the data and what it says about the quality of case practice.

And we want to hear what you're doing to remedy those problems.

> > And and that's really why we issued this letter of findings.

Is that we have been having conversations for some time now.

And I think there is a shared recognition that there are some concerns.

When we look at this data and what it tells us about the quality of case practice.

There have been efforts to improve the case, work.

But they have not resulted in the kinds of change that we need to see the trend is flat at best.

and so we we will continue to have those conversations directly with the department.

I am hopeful that they will put into place some more significant changes.

I do think that's what it's going to take.

And and look, this is this is hard work that the department does.

It always has been right and and I believe and and folks in our office believes that the people that go to work at DCF are there because they want to help children and families and it's really important that executive leadership as well as the state make sure that they have what they need to do, the work if they're not meeting expectations, we need to develop an understanding as to why and we need to address that.

> > I'm not I'm in no position to make a judgment call either way.

But staffing.

Is it with them as well, have something to do with any of this?

Is that something you've been concerned about in terms of whether or not they're actually able to do what they need to do to protect children because of staffing.

Yeah.

> > It is.

And I think more in terms of experience than in numbers.

And so in 2022, there was a large set of retirement.

So they lost a lot of > > that institutional knowledge and they're currently having and they have for a while now they're having a high turnover about 50% of the people they hire leave within the first 2 years.

So that means we have a lot of workers who don't have a lot of year's experience.

And we even have people at the supervisory level who have experience but probably less experience than if you had looked at the supervision.

You know, 10, 15 years ago and so that means that there needs to be strong training to supervisors strong emphasis on what needs to happen in those supervision meetings to ensure that caseworkers have the direction they need and and let me explain what I mean by that.

So in what we call the in-home cases, those are cases where there's been a finding that the child's been abused or neglected and a decision that the child can remain safely at home with services and they keep that child at home and provide services in those cases with DCF shows is that the quality of supervision was rated as a strength in less than 20% of the cases, meaning in less than 20% of the cases that the caseworker is receiving the information that that the guidance they need from their supervisor 2 to have timely direction on the case.

That's an enormous problem.

And that is something that can only be remedied by DCF, right?

We can't pass a law that that says you must supervise appropriately, right?

That's a fix.

It.

So that's really something that exact good leadership DCF needs to focus on.

And and I believe they will.

I hope they will.

you know, time will tell.

> > Your agency and state lawmakers are trying to get involved in this process of trying to oversee what's happening with DCF.

There was a DCF oversight bill, as I understand it was passed this > > That's correct.

There was session.

and that's 5, 0, 0, 4 was passed to create an oversight committee to be able to look at some of these of these issues with relate with regard to quality and with that focus on improving services and outcomes for children.

And you know, that Bill did a few things.

It it requires DCF to create a data dashboard which would give people sort of what we would call quantitative information.

How many kit, how many reports did they get?

How many that they investigate?

How many were substantiated, how many kids are and what kinds of placement?

And that's really good.

very important piece puzzle, but it's not the whole puzzle who's on this committee.

Is it a legislative committee?

It is a legislative committee.

It has many, many state agencies and and really any state agency that might have any connection to this work is is on that committee.

And I believe we were made members and then there are appointments that will need to be made that will include people with lived, experience expertise in the area.

Just getting some comments from listeners.

We got city of from Glastonbury.

I want to appreciate her sharing your perspective.

> > Senator ex-husband was a truant officer and saw a lot of issues at home visits.

She also has some experience.

I understand with her sister on school, their kids in another state supports the new legislation and thinks it should be strengthened with more home visits evaluations and efforts to make sure home school children keeping up.

We haven't even talked about the curriculum piece, which is something that you are wanted in there.

> > We wanted an annual academic evaluation to ensure that the child was, in fact, making educational progress.

And really that's about let's make sure they're receiving education right?

It's not as much about dictating specifics of curriculum, which I think is what people worry about.

It's really about, you know, our statute has subjects.

They're supposed to be taught but it's very easy to withdraw your child from school say you're going to home school and then not provide any education.

And that's just not acceptable.

Kids need to have an education and there should be a system to ensure that's actually happening.

> > And then we have another comment, as I understand it.

This is going to be a phone call that we have.

And I believe this comes from, Carol, from Bristol.

You're on the Wheelhouse this morning.

Carol, good morning.

> > Good morning.

I would have it.

Okay.

I am.

Friends and familiar with number of home schooling families and their children.

And I question where what was said about they would have to file yearly how they are educating their children because as I understand, it, as children have told me as cake there exams in order to go to college and they have to get there.

There.

pull equivalent of whatever that power that's done.

I know they take exams in order to be classified at the grade level there.

And I know there's a lot of things that go on.

So if the children are passing the exams and you already know where all the whole school children are.

Why do you need to have individual families?

Bile and educational requirement?

It seems to me that's an open door for the state or now these no, we don't have county sheriff.

Well, whatever to kind of tell you what you have to teach.

> > Carol, is an open door just really quickly.

Where do you fall out on this issue?

Where do I follow on are you supporting you want regulation do not want regulation.

What you think?

> > I am very supportive non abuse to children, but I don't think this particular portion of this whole thing applies to non abuse of children because it's invading the families right?

And as I said, I know a lot of homeschool families, not one or 2, but you know, a number of them and their kids when the most wonderful children I have ever met.

I raised 5 of my own and and they're each are good kids that have great education in when they go to college there at the top of their class and their college classes.

> > Carol, thank you so much for sharing your perspective on the Wheelhouse.

I appreciate you.

Thank you.

Have a great day which think about what you heard from Carol.

> > Well, I think it's important to sort of be really clear about what the legislation actually does.

So the requirement for notice of intent for education.

literally the parent is checking a backs.

I'm sending my child.

The public school of sending my child to private school or I'm going to parent managed learning they're not being required to provide any specifics about what their curriculum is.

And we talk about whether they should be, but that's not what the law requires.

And, you know, there are parents who are homeschooling, their children who are having them participate in different kinds of exams.

But that's not 100%.

That is not across the board.

and we know that because we know children who have been removed from school and skews me with for the stated purpose of homeschooling who received no education at all.

And there is no check to make sure that that's happening.

> > Appreciate that perspective.

Thank you so much for sharing that Christina.

What else do lawmakers need to do in the future to protect children?

Here?

What else is your office need to do to be there in support of the state's child?

Protection infrastructure?

> > You know, I think the most important thing that we can do right now.

Is really focus in on those what we would call foundational aspects of case practice at DCF.

Those policies that we talked a little bit about earlier are designed to ensure that DCF has all the information it needs that the information is current and reliable and accurate and that decisions are based on those those.

I'm gathering all of the information and without that we really can't ensure that all children our safe.

And and so that's really where our focus is and where we need.

We think that the focus of even the oversight committee needs to be.

> > I appreciate this very much.

I appreciate the work that you are all doing.

I've had a great relationship with Sari get over the years and I'm really excited too, to start this with you as well.

Christina and you are welcome on the Wheelhouse.

Any time you want to come on and talk about some business year.

I appreciate it.

> > Well, thank you so much.

It's been a pleasure to meet you and a pleasure to be here > > Thank you so much for your today.

work.

Thank you for the topic today and coming into the Wheelhouse after the break, we're going hear from another person who was there this legislative session for the policy debates.

Stay with us and call us up.

If you'd like to react.

88 7 to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, Listen in the Wheelhouse on Connecticut Public.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ This is the Wheelhouse from Connecticut Public Radio.

I'm Frankie Graziano.

You just heard from newly confirmed state Child Advocate Christina Deal about the ways the state is working to regulate home schooling.

Joining us now for further insight into the home schooling policy debate in Connecticut is tale pack.

Suzuki tail is the Connecticut Mears, Education Reporter Tale.

Thank you so much for coming on.

The Wheelhouse.

Thank you so much for having me.

I'm happy to have you want to have a talk education with you, folks really quick.

If you have a call, 8, 8, 8, 7, to 0, 9, 6, 7, 7, or you to God that we're not going to try to cut you off.

But we're just running out of time.

So the quick when you talk to us here, new State Child Advocate Christina says that home schooling, regulation, regulation is one way the state can protect children.

Why my child advocates sort of concern themselves with home schooling.

Well, you know, I think what we heard from proponents of the home schooling legislation was they felt that home schooling with sort of the one.

> > Total blind spot as far as the state is concerned.

And as far as child welfare is concerned when it comes to addressing concerns of child abuse, neglect, I think we heard from Christina that, you know, in a school kids are surrounded by mandated reporters.

> > You know, in a when kids are being educated in the home, you don't have the only people who are necessarily around them are their parents or whoever else happens to be involved.

But the state has no way of knowing who that is.

> > And so that perception of a blind spot I think was really one of the things that motivated proponents of the bill to pass legislation.

Last segment we had a caller from Bristol coming in asked about the legislation and also told us about.

> > Some requirements in terms of passing exams and things like that.

There is no current regulation really on the books in Connecticut.

I believe that is correct.

I just double check that on.

And in fact, in which is a really well-known national homeschooling advocacy group, they were opposed to H the 5, 4, 6, 8, the homeschooling bill.

> > According to them assessments and stuff like that are not required.

I don't believe there's any kind of curriculum requirements yeah, no, that's that's the state of it.

> > Connecticut currently has some of the least restrictive, a homeschooling regulations in the country.

According to your reporting, of course, a group that advocates for homeschooling policy regulation said that prior to the legislation, Connecticut was one of 12 states without meaningful homeschool regulation.

Help me understand what the debate was like this year.

A public hearing testimony just kind of give us a sense of what was happening at the state Capitol building throughout this whole process or at the legislative office building.

> > Yeah.

So I think even before the session started when it was clear that homeschooling was going to be an issue, I think a lot of people predicted that it was going to get pretty contentious.

there's just that sort of been the pattern, Ashley, when these kinds of things happening.

And that's certainly what we saw play out here in Connecticut.

From the moment that the concept was raised very early in the committee process.

You had Republicans signaling that there was going to be you know, spirited debate about the topic and then pretty much every subsequent step you had a number of home schooling advocates, homeschooling parents, homeschooling kids arriving at the Capitol, sitting in on hearings during the public comment many, many, many people signed up to speak.

I think almost 300 and then there were a lot of cases of written testimony that were submitted.

> > More the or or more of these people that were against the legislation, then for.

> > Very much so now different people have different interpretations of what that means about broader public sentiment.

Of course, people opposed to the bill point to that to say there was huge public dissatisfaction with it.

Proponents of the bill say most people who aren't involved in home schooling are surprised that we don't already have regulations like this on the books.

> > Could you attribute that to like?

I think we talked about this earlier.

I think it would be sort of a lobbying effort that this, that this sort of community or advocacy group has where they're able to sort of.

Get all these people to testify again, that be attributed to what's happening here.

> > Yeah, I mean, I think lobbying can mean a lot of different things.

Certainly they were very well organized.

I mean, you know, these I was at these, you know, these weren't just lobbyists from various, you know, nonprofits are or what have you.

And you did have a lot of parents and a lot of kids showing up, right?

But they were very, very good at mobilizing people to come in large numbers.

> > Kristina earlier in the show address criticism from people advocating on behalf of homeschooling saying the new legislation is an overreach that infringes upon civil liberties.

She said that she thinks, hey, you still get to sort of the still get to home school, your children, if you want > > Did anybody in the in the to.

General Assembly assembly sort of season.

That idea the overreach and the > > state liberties was anybody if any, any particular a lawmaker sort of making that argument?

> > Yeah, we heard a lot of concern about that from Republican lawmakers.

You know, I think particularly during the recall during the Senate debate.

There were a lot of concerns about some pretty fundamental rights that people have that parents in particular.

Have you saw little bit of overlap with some other conversations about parents rights that we've heard and various other educational topics.

But this idea that, you know, parents have a sort of fundamental right to determine the educational, their child and that any kind of state intrusion into that is a violation of those rights was certainly something we saw particularly from Republican legislators very fascinating part of the conversation.

We so we're establishing here, the lawmakers and advocates think home schooling regulation is really a part of the effort to improve.

> > The overall well-being of children in Connecticut.

What else do lawmakers do this legislative session, Connecticut to help children?

I guess I'm asking you what else happened on the education front?

> > Lots of things.

So the big one I think was education funding.

This money.

Yes, this was something that lawmakers signaled.

Very early on was sort of priority number one.

We have seen certain costs for schools increasing drastically health insurance and special education being 2 of them.

And the way that Connecticut figures out how much money as a state to give to individual school district has kind of been weighed down by this formula that hasn't been adjusted for inflation in a very, very long time.

So all the inflation we've experienced of the last several years, none of that has been factored into the sort of core formula.

The Connecticut uses to figure out how much money should be paid.

Schools.

So as a result you know, schools have a number of schools, particularly those that struggle to, you know, pay costs through local property taxes have been finding themselves cutting services.

And it was very much a desire of legislators actually on both sides of the aisle to address that and more these alliance districts.

Are they who's having the trouble in that regard that you just mentioned?

> > It's a lot of Towns, Alliance district, certainly.

But, you know, you also see.

> > Any town that doesn't have the local property wealth because that's how towns pay for schools as you raise property taxes.

If the if the property wealth isn't or indirectly, you know, income isn't there because obviously people pay property taxes with their income.

> > the town really doesn't > > then have very many options as far as how to pay costs when costs rise and they can raise property taxes.

I you know, but if if you your amount of taxable property value, taxable property isn't particularly high relative to the number of students that you serve, which is the case, for example, in Hartford.

then you are kind of you just don't really have any options.

Back in February, we talked about how lawmakers also debated a plan to take cell phones out of the classroom.

But that didn't pass right?

> > It didn't.

And, you know, as a as legislative reporter who who in their first legislative session, I was like, welcome to Connecticut.

Yes, good to be > > And, you know, the cell here.

phone bill, unlike the homeschooling bill, did have bipartisan support was not unanimous support.

There was some opposition, but > > it did have bipartisan support in the House and then it just didn't get called in the Senate, which is what happens with bills.

You know, not entirely clear exactly what happened, but it seems like.

Senators just kind of ran out of time to address all the concerns in the room and south never got called.

So the bill never got called.

> > That means that local school districts remain in charge of what happens here or not.

> > Yeah, more or less.

You know, the Connecticut does have a cell phone law on the books.

The law basically specifies that schools should design policy in accordance with guidance from the State Department of Education that guidance leaves room for them to have cell phones in place for, you know, kind of.

Instructional purposes.

This sort of set the limits.

You can have them in cafeterias.

You can have them in the hallways that's still the status quo.

For now, though, the Montas said that, you know, they're working on it on developing some clear guidelines because he certainly feels this is still the direction the state is moving in.

> > We had teachers come on the show and they said that they really are really in favor of this legislation and trying to keep kids focused.

I don't know if I can ask you how everybody feels about it.

But it was a sentiment like on this bill.

Was there a lot of testimony in favor of this bill from I guess that perspective of the teachers, the administrators?

> > teachers, absolutely very much in favor of it.

Administrators somewhat mixed and school boards were opposed.

At least the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, which represents the school board, says opposed students.

Also were in schools that did not have built about cell phone bans were opposed to it.

I did speak with some of them and I've heard that students and schools that do have the bans in place feel a little bit better about it.

> > You did see the.

> > There is some disagreement that along those lines.

> > The idea of local control in school districts is one aspect of the resistance here.

Is that sort of why this didn't not necessarily why didn't pass, but is that one part of it?

Are there other parts to this with a local control aspect here?

> > Yeah, I think that's a big part of it.

You know, they're so I spoke with some folks over in Meriden which does not have a bell to bell ban in place.

And there was a feeling they're among the administration and many students that there was value to giving kids access to their phones for instructional purposes.

It was integrated into some classrooms and then also that there's value in teaching kids how to manage the impulse to check your phone rather than just taking it away that maybe by leaving it nearby, they, you know, and this would sort of train those those better phone habits.

Now, proponents of the bell to Bell Ban would say that the trade-off simply isn't worth it.

And that the cost of the distraction is is far too great.

> > I know we just got to the end of the session.

I know we're not in summer yet.

Have you wrap your mind around what might come up next year in January in the long session or at least whether some of these bills that didn't get passed this year will resurface any initial thoughts on next year.

Tail?

> > Yeah.

Well, so cell phones is certainly on the menu, at least for now.

Both Governor Lamont and also some legislators have signaled they want to bring it back.

I and the school funding question is in the long run, not at all settled the way that the General Assembly and the governor handled it this year.

They did direct a couple 100 million dollars more toward schools.

But they didn't.

Surely change that formula that I mentioned earlier, the what they did was way too complicated to explain here.

But but they they didn't actually change that formula.

And so that's something they're going to have to come back and address.

There's also a a blue ribbon commission that Lamont has created 2 investigate.

The question of state funding of public schools.

More generally.

And that commission seems to have pretty broad rain to really interrogate how Connecticut approaches.

Funding You know, so we could see potentially depending on what they come up with.

See even more drastic changes proposed.

Yeah, we'll have to wait until January to figure out what that is.

> > That's tale Peck Suzuki and education reporter with the Connecticut Mirror were meeting for the first time.

And I'm so happy to be working with tail and hope you come back on the Thanks.

Great to be here.

couple of pieces of business before we go out here next week, we're going to be talking to lawmakers that are recently leaving their posts.

We're talking about their job, their career.

What comes next and working across the aisle.

Also locally here in Connecticut.

Audi in New Hartford.

Tonight talking about civic engagement with the youth.

That's going to be a brewery, legitimate us.

Take a look at that on line in New Hartford.

You've been listening to the Wheelhouse today.

Show is produced by Chloe when edited by Patrick Scale.

Technical producer is dealing rants.

Thank you to test terrible Megan Fitzgerald, Isaac boss, Bradley O'Connor, Megan Boone and Sam Hockaday for their work.

Download the Wheelhouse anytime on your favorite podcast app on Free Graziano.

This is the Wheelhouse.

Thank you for listening.

♪