Committee Summary for House Education Funding (01/30/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB563 00:06:27.759 - 8:35:03 AM	Public Hearing	relative to adequate education grant amounts for pupils receiving special education services.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB563 01:02:03.240 - 9:30:39 AM	Public Hearing	relative to adequate education grant amounts for pupils receiving special education services.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB603 01:09:35.560 - 9:38:11 AM	Public Hearing	relative to increasing the adequacy grant for pupils receiving special education services.	Howard, Heath(D)[F]2024
HB717 02:11:37.480 - 10:40:13 AM	Public Hearing	relative to catastrophic aid for special education.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB742 02:24:44.760 - 10:53:20 AM	Public Hearing	requiring catastrophic special education state aid funding to be drawn from the education trust fund.	Luneau, David(D)[CT]2024
HB675 03:49:29.239 - 12:18:05 PM	Public Hearing	increasing the total revenue raised under the statewide education property tax, requiring municipalities to remit excess statewide education property tax payments to the department of revenue administration, limiting the authority of school districts to make certain appropriations, and increasing base adequacy costs per pupil.	Sweeney, Joe(R)[A-]2024
HB527 04:34:18.599 - 1:02:54 PM	Public Hearing	replacing the statewide education property tax with a local revenue contribution.	Fellows, Sallie(D)[CT]2024
HB373 05:19:16.680 - 1:47:52 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the management and regulation of town real property.	Pauer, Diane(R)[A]2024
Unclear 06:22:16.478 - 2:50:52 PM	General Working Session	Unclear

HB563: Rick Ladd, Grafton 5 (Haverhill, Piermont, Warren, Benton, Landaff) Support00:06:27.759 - 8:35:03 AM; Representative Rick Ladd introduced HB 563, focusing on adjusting the adequate education grant amounts for pupils receiving special education services. He detailed the bill's components, which include a base cost of $4,266 per pupil, reflecting a 2% increase from the previous year, and differentiated aid for various categories such as free and reduced meals, English language learners, and special education. Ladd emphasized the need to address the funding shortfall in catastrophic aid, acknowledging the constitutional responsibility to provide adequate education. He explained the three categories of special education aid based on the time spent in the classroom, and highlighted the bill's alignment with previous legislative efforts, noting that it had passed unanimously out of the committee last year. He also mentioned upcoming discussions on the funding model and the need for adjustments to ensure sustainability and fairness in special education funding.
HB563: Representative MCU Information Only00:14:06.519 - 8:42:42 AM; Representative MCU inquired about the wording in existing law related to special education services and its absence in HB 563. He expressed concern that schools might exploit the system to increase funding by providing special education services for a short period. Ladd responded by explaining the rigorous process required for special education services, emphasizing that short-term IEPs for a day are not logical and that funding is based on the previous year's data.
HB563: Representative Ames Information Only00:16:28.040 - 8:45:04 AM; Representative Ames praised the advancement in differentiating aid for special education and sought clarification on how the three categories of special education costs were determined. Ladd explained that the costs were based on the FY 26 budget projections with adjustments for each category, highlighting the need for weighted formulas to address the sustainability of special education funding. He also noted that catastrophic aid, which addresses high-cost special needs, would be considered separately.
HB563: Representative Margaret Dry Information Only00:22:54.320 - 8:51:30 AM; Representative Margaret Dry thanked the committee for hearing the bill but did not provide further testimony within the provided transcript.
HB563: Representative Margaret Dry, Sullivan District 7 (Plainfield, Cornish, Newport, Unity, Charlestown) Support00:22:58.919 - 8:51:34 AM; Representative Dry supports the idea of differentiated categories for special education funding as proposed in HB 563. She highlights her experience on the education funding subcommittee and emphasizes that the targeted approach of categorizing special education students allows for more effective allocation of resources where they are most needed. She argues against a lump sum approach, likening it to 'firing buckshot at a target' and stresses the need for differentiated aid to match the diverse services provided. She is open to further differentiation of categories if it means better targeting of funds.
HB563: Bonnie Dunham, Marlow, NH Oppose00:24:55.760 - 8:53:31 AM; Bonnie Dunham, a parent of an adult son who received special education services, strongly opposes HB 563. She argues that the bill provides a financial incentive for school districts to place students with disabilities in more restrictive environments, which could lead to fewer students learning in inclusive settings. She shares her personal experience where her son benefited significantly from being educated in general education settings with additional supports. Dunham criticizes the bill for potentially stigmatizing students and suggests funding should be based on the actual cost of services, not the placement of the student. She emphasizes the importance of inclusive education for all students and urges the committee to recommend the bill as inexpedient to legislate.
HB563: Karen Rosenberg, Policy Director at the Disability Rights Center New Hampshire Oppose00:33:08.279 - 9:01:44 AM; Karen Rosenberg opposes HB 563 due to concerns about its potential to incentivize schools to place students in more restrictive settings than necessary. She acknowledges the committee's challenge in addressing special education funding but argues that the bill's categories could lead to unintended segregation of students with disabilities. Rosenberg suggests that while increasing funding for special education is needed, it should not be tied to the degree of segregation in the student's educational placement. She proposes alternatives such as increasing overall adequacy funding for special education students or providing upfront funding to support students in the least restrictive environment, which could be more beneficial and less likely to create perverse incentives.
HB563: Kristen Mmanani, Advocate for Special Education in New Hampshire Information Only00:40:39.160 - 9:09:15 AM; Kristen Mmanani did not explicitly state support or opposition to HB 563 but focused on the financial implications of special education funding. She expressed concern over the potential for perverse incentives in categorizing students but emphasized the need for adequate funding to reflect the actual costs of providing special education services. Mmanani suggested that the proposed funding levels in the bill are significantly lower than the real costs and highlighted the importance of funding based on services needed rather than placement. She offered to submit sample cost analyses to the committee and stressed the need to avoid creating division between special and general education by underfunding special education needs.
HB563: Damon Information Only01:02:03.240 - 9:30:39 AM; Damon inquired about the funding differences between categories in the bill and whether the additional funding in category A covers the additional services required beyond the basic formula. He expressed concerns about the incentives for districts to categorize students differently based on the funding allocations.
HB563: Mark Bone, Town of Berlin, Former Elementary School Principal Oppose01:03:36.799 - 9:32:12 AM; Mark Bone, representing the town of Berlin and having experience as an elementary school principal, opposed the bill. He used a fictional student, Martin, to illustrate the challenges of categorizing students under the proposed 80/20 formula, emphasizing that individual student needs vary and cannot be easily categorized. He argued that the funding amounts proposed are too low and that the formula does not fit well with the work of IEP teams, which require flexibility and adequate resources to meet students' needs in the least restrictive environment.
HB563: David Trumble Oppose01:06:46.480 - 9:35:22 AM; David Trumble criticized the bill for not sufficiently increasing special education funding, noting that it would only raise the state's contribution from 11% to 12%. He used data to illustrate that the bill's proposed funding would not cover the costs of special education adequately, suggesting that instead of categorizing students, a general increase in special education aid would be more beneficial. He emphasized the need for a more significant state contribution to solve the special education funding problem.
HB603: Representative Heath Howard, Towns of Strafford and Barrington Support01:09:35.560 - 9:38:11 AM; Representative Heath Howard introduced HB 603, emphasizing his personal experience with special education and the need for increased funding to meet constitutional obligations. He highlighted the volatility of special education costs across districts and argued that HB 603 would help provide services to students, alleviate local property tax burdens, and allow for more flexible spending and hiring decisions. He discussed the fiscal note and responded to questions about the bill's approach to funding special education, acknowledging the complexity of categorizing special education needs and costs.
HB603: Deborah House, President, American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Support01:23:07.920 - 9:51:43 AM; Deborah House supported HB 603, noting that it would help support students with specialized education needs and reduce the burden on local property taxpayers. She emphasized the need for investment in the education workforce to fill vacancies and improve learning outcomes for students with special education needs. She highlighted the human aspect of the issue, discussing the challenges faced by educators and the importance of consistent support for students.
HB603: Michaela Deiter, Dover School Board Member and Staff, New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project Support01:28:28.040 - 9:57:04 AM; Michaela Deiter supported HB 603, presenting data on the increasing costs and number of out-of-district placements in Dover schools. She argued that the bill's funding would not represent new expenses but would help shift the financial responsibility to the state, evening out costs across communities. She emphasized the importance of adequate funding to manage special education costs and provide better services to students.
HB603: Michaela Deiter, Dover School Board Member and Staff, New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project Support01:28:28.040 - 9:57:04 AM; Michaela Deiter discussed the increase in out-of-district placements despite a drop in overall student population. She explained that these placements are often due to specific medical or educational needs that the local public school system cannot meet, such as severe autism, emotional disturbances, or being deaf or blind. These placements are necessary because the students' needs are beyond what general education settings can provide.
HB603: Damon, Dover School Board Member Support01:33:34.560 - 10:02:10 AM; Damon discussed the proposed 'Harbor Program' by Dover, which aims to create an in-district alternative to out-of-district placements. The program would serve students from K-4 who have emotional or educational needs that cannot be met by regular education. The goal is to keep students within their home district, providing them with specialized support while allowing them to engage with their peers in general education settings when possible.
HB603: Kristen Mann, Special Education Advocate's Office Information Only01:37:27.920 - 10:06:03 AM; Kristen Mann testified that the funding numbers in HB603 closely match the actual cost of special education but pointed out a flaw in using a flat rate. She explained that the flat rate could create perverse incentives, potentially pushing students who should be in multi-tiered systems of support into special education. She suggested that funding should be based on the services provided, which would require further study and resources from the Department of Education.
HB603: Maggie Larson, Somersworth School Board Support01:42:52.080 - 10:11:28 AM; Maggie Larson, representing the Somersworth School Board, emphasized the dire need for more special education funding. She highlighted that Somersworth taxpayers fund 83% of their special education needs, and recent budget cuts have forced the district to eliminate teaching positions. Larson stressed the importance of early interventions and in-house programs to reduce out-of-district placements but noted that additional funding is crucial to achieve these goals.
HB603: Burton, Somersworth School Board Information Only01:45:05.440 - 10:13:41 AM; Burton discussed the historical context of Somersworth's school district, noting that it was once part of a larger district. He suggested that being part of a larger district previously might have provided more support for special education services, highlighting the challenges faced by smaller districts like Somersworth.
HB603: Fellows, Somersworth School Board Information Only01:45:50.920 - 10:14:26 AM; Fellows inquired about the possibility of regional centers for special education services, mentioning a past program called 'SEST' that offered such services. He suggested that such centers could benefit districts like Dover and Somersworth, reducing the high costs associated with out-of-district placements.
HB603: Lois Esposito, Executive Director, Able New Hampshire Support01:47:29.960 - 10:16:05 AM; Lois Esposito shared her experiences as a special education teacher, focusing on the challenges of teaching students with emotional and intellectual disabilities. She described the inadequate facilities and resources she encountered, which hindered student progress and increased teacher burnout. Esposito supported increased funding to improve the quality of special education services.
HB603: Zach Shen, Executive Director, New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project Support01:51:23.960 - 10:19:59 AM; Zach Shen testified in support of HB603, explaining that the bill aims to address the significant gap in special education funding. He presented data showing that the current funding is insufficient and that the percentage of school budgets dedicated to special education is increasing. Shen emphasized the need for significant investments in the adequacy formula to meet the growing demands of special education services.
HB603: Brany, Department of Education Bureau of School Finance Information Only01:54:59.760 - 10:23:35 AM; Brany from the Department of Education Bureau of School Finance provided clarification on the fiscal note related to HB603. They specified that the figure of 400 EFA students receiving special education services in FY 26 was estimated to be 6% of the total EFA students for that fiscal year. Brany acknowledged that they might not be able to provide complete insights into the fiscal note but confirmed the estimate was based on historical data from the EFA program. They also discussed the differentiation of aid for these students, stating that the 400 students would receive funding with a differentiated aid factor as per the existing formula. When questioned about the qualification process for special education differentiated aid, Brany mentioned it involves identification by regular districts or the Children's Scholarship Fund, but they lacked complete information on how the latter identifies students.
HB603: Lisa Stemman, resident of Troy Support02:00:22.960 - 10:28:58 AM; Lisa Stemman, a resident of Troy and a mother of a child with Down syndrome, spoke in support of HB603. She highlighted the financial burden that families with special needs children place on their communities and the stigma that can follow. Stemman shared her experiences as both a parent and a 15-year school board member, emphasizing the challenges districts face when accommodating new students with special needs. She advocated for funding that consistently follows the student, suggesting that it would reduce the stigma and financial stress on districts, making them more welcoming to new families.
HB603: Heidi Crumrine, resident of Concord Support02:03:16.159 - 10:31:52 AM; Heidi Crumrine, a teacher at Concord High School and a mother of three public school students, spoke in support of HB603. She shared her personal experience with her daughters, who receive special education services, and emphasized the importance of empowering schools with the necessary resources. Crumrine argued that providing schools with adequate funding would allow them to better serve all students, reducing the focus on the cost of special education and fostering an inclusive environment. She stressed the foundational value of public schools in serving all students and the need for state support to fulfill this commitment.
HB603: David Trumble Support02:06:36.559 - 10:35:12 AM; David Trumble spoke in support of HB603, citing three reasons. First, he emphasized the presumption of competence and the societal return on investment in special education, referencing a Texas case study where the absence of special education services significantly impacted students' educational outcomes. Second, he argued that increasing the state's share of special education funding from 11% would alleviate pressure on local communities, reducing stigma and allowing for better long-term solutions. Lastly, he proposed a solution to address concerns about windfall funding by adjusting the catastrophic aid formula to ensure adequate funding for students with higher needs, suggesting a phased increase in state funding over several biennial budgets.
HB717: Rick Lad, Representative from Hinsdale Information Only02:11:37.480 - 10:40:13 AM; Representative Rick Lad from Hinsdale presented HB717, which addresses catastrophic aid for special education. He explained that the bill adjusts the formula for state participation in catastrophic aid, aiming to increase state involvement. Lad highlighted the current financial structure where districts must cover costs up to three and a half times the average per pupil cost before state aid kicks in, and how the state takes over 80% of costs beyond that threshold. He stressed the importance of discussing and potentially revising this aid to support districts better and ensure compliance with federal law. Lad proposed using HB717 as a vehicle for further discussion and potential work sessions on the issue.
HB717: Representative Margaret Dry, Sullivan District 7, Charlestown, Unity, Newport, Plainfield, and Cornish Information Only02:16:40.040 - 10:45:16 AM; Representative Dry highlighted the challenges faced by smaller school districts in her area, such as Charlestown, Unity, Newport, Plainfield, and Cornish, where most towns do not have high schools and operate with smaller budgets. She discussed the difficulties these districts face when incurring extraordinary costs for special education, especially when reimbursement rates fall short of promises. She expressed concerns about the bill's provision for extra funds for towns with populations of 1,000 or less, noting that none of her towns fit this category. She suggested considering a larger community size or focusing on school budget size rather than population. She emphasized the importance of meeting reimbursement promises to maintain credibility when seeking federal funding.
HB717: Michaela Deer, representing herself Support02:19:07.439 - 10:47:43 AM; Michaela Deer, speaking extemporaneously, supported Representative Lad's effort to decrease the threshold for catastrophic Aid, now called special education Aid. She argued that the reduction from three and a half times to three times the average cost to educate a student is insufficient, advocating for a further reduction to one and a half times, aligning more closely with the true additional costs of special education in New Hampshire. She appreciated the committee's effort to listen to real-life stories from school districts and taxpayers.
HB717: Jerry F.W., Associate Executive Director of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association Information Only02:21:57.479 - 10:50:33 AM; Jerry F.W. commended the committee to review the testimony submitted by Superintendent Chip McGee from Pelham regarding HB77. He highlighted Pelham's challenge with a shortfall of $266,000 in special education aid due to a lower reimbursement rate than anticipated. He encouraged the committee to consider McGee's amendment to help districts recover current year costs and provided insights into the state's education department budget over the last seven years.
HB742: Dave Luno, representing Merrimack County District 9, Hopkinton and Boscawen Support02:24:44.760 - 10:53:20 AM; Dave Luno discussed the importance of HB742, which aims to ensure that catastrophic special education state aid funding is drawn from the education trust fund. He emphasized that this bill does not change the grant's threshold but focuses on how the funding is managed. He noted the state's shortfall in special education funding this year, leading to over $17 million less than expected, and stressed that this burden falls on local property taxpayers. He supported drawing funds from the education trust fund, which guarantees payments, to prevent such shortfalls and ensure districts receive what they are owed.
HB742: Kristen, Special Education Advocates Office Information Only02:42:21.279 - 11:10:57 AM; Kristen from the Special Education Advocates Office suggested that the committee consider further reductions in the catastrophic Aid threshold from three and a half times to potentially as low as one and a half or two times the average cost to educate a student. She argued that this could alleviate concerns about setting caps, flat dollar amounts, or categories, and would better align aid with actual costs, ensuring districts receive necessary funds without the challenges of federal prohibitions on placement-based aid.
HB675: Joe Sweeney, Representative from Rockingham District 25, Salem Support03:49:29.239 - 12:18:05 PM; Representative Joe Sweeney introduced House Bill 675, which aims to reform education funding in New Hampshire. The bill proposes to increase the base adequacy aid per pupil from $4,100 to $7,356, aiming to ensure equitable resources for quality education across different zip codes. It also ties education funding increases to the Consumer Price Index for predictable and gradual adjustments, and implements spending controls by capping school district budget increases (excluding facility construction) to align with either a three-year average change in student enrollment or past appropriations. This cap can be overridden by a 2/3 supermajority vote of the local legislative body. Sweeney emphasized the bill's role as a legislative vehicle for potential responses to pending court decisions and highlighted its focus on fairness, sustainability, and predictability in education funding.
HB675: Representative McGuire Information Only03:52:40.840 - 12:21:16 PM; Representative McGuire asked Representative Sweeney about the timing of the Supreme Court ruling on the ConVal case relative to the passage of HB675. Sweeney responded that he did not have specific information on the timing of the court's ruling.
HB675: Representative Information Only03:53:26.279 - 12:22:02 PM; A representative inquired about the similarity of language in HB675 to an amendment from the previous year in Division 2 concerning the processing of SWEPT money. Sweeney confirmed the similarity in the language.
HB675: Representative Damon Information Only03:53:36.920 - 12:22:12 PM; Representative Damon sought clarification on whether the bill would increase the ATM but eliminate differentiated aid, specifically referencing lines on page three of the bill. Sweeney confirmed that the bill would increase the base adequacy aid but was unsure about the elimination of differentiated aid, suggesting further clarification might be provided by other testifiers.
HB675: Representative Fellows Information Only03:54:24.319 - 12:23:00 PM; Representative Fellows expressed concerns that the bill would shift costs onto school districts and questioned why the bill was placed in the tax section. Sweeney explained that the bill's spending controls would prevent property tax increases for property owners and confirmed that the bill increases the adequacy grant from $4,100 to $7,356.
HB675: Representative Information Only03:56:06.720 - 12:24:42 PM; A representative clarified that the bill does not impact differentiated aid, as it only changes the base adequacy aid from roughly $4,200 to $7,300, while leaving the existing law on differentiated aid unchanged. Sweeney acknowledged the clarification and admitted to answering a previous question incorrectly.
HB675: Representative Luno Information Only03:57:41.920 - 12:26:17 PM; Representative Luno asked for confirmation on the definition of statewide base adequacy aid and the statewide education property tax in the bill, which Sweeney confirmed as correct.
HB675: Eric Power, Brookline Support03:58:56.159 - 12:27:32 PM; Eric Power, a resident of Brookline with extensive experience in local governance and education, supported HB675 as a solution to the state's housing crisis driven by high property taxes due to school spending. He praised the bill's provision for increased aid with necessary spending controls, suggesting that it would lead to property tax relief. Power suggested potential improvements to the bill's language, such as defining facilities acquisition and construction more clearly and ensuring that the 2/3 majority vote for budget overrides be done by ballot rather than voice or show of hands. He also commented on the bill's potential to address the housing crisis by making it more feasible for towns to accommodate new students without financial strain.
HB675: Representative Luno Information Only04:04:23.439 - 12:32:59 PM; Representative Luno engaged with Eric Power, discussing the relationship between state funding for schools and property taxes. Power was not able to answer specific questions about property taxes in other states or New Hampshire's rank in state funding for public schools, but he maintained that HB675 could help address these issues.
HB675: Papovich Information Only04:05:20.439 - 12:33:56 PM; Papovich, responding to a question from Representative Luno, explained the rationale behind the belief that increased state aid does not lead to reduced property taxes. He noted that despite increased aid, local tax efforts do not decrease because the funds are often reallocated to other expenditures. He referenced RSA 325e, a recently passed law that enables school district budget caps, as a potential solution to ensure that state aid leads to tax relief. Papovich suggested that without such controls, school districts tend to view state aid as a windfall and spend it rather than reducing taxes. He also discussed the use of a three-year average for ADM (Average Daily Membership) in the bill, suggesting that extending it to five years might be beneficial, though he did not contribute to the bill's drafting.
HB675: Damon Information Only04:10:33.760 - 12:39:09 PM; Damon asked Papovich about the recent vote in the Kearsarge Regional School District, where a budget cap proposal was rejected by 92%. He questioned the state's imposition of a budget cap versus respecting local control. Papovich responded by affirming the value of the budget cap legislation and noted its popularity among many school districts. He argued that state aid should come with conditions like spending controls, which he believes are in line with public demand. He also suggested that the method of voting at traditional meetings might not accurately reflect community sentiment compared to all-day voting.
HB675: Lil Mahan, Lebanon School Board Chair, SAU88 Oppose04:12:44.279 - 12:41:20 PM; Lil Mahan, speaking as the chair of the Lebanon School Board and a parent, opposed the bill due to its impact on local control and the method of calculating aid. She criticized the bill for imposing funding limits that she views as legislative overreach, arguing that it would lead to cuts in education, including teacher layoffs and reductions in core academic and vital programs. Mahan highlighted the issue with using ADM (Average Daily Membership in Residence) for funding calculations, which disadvantages growing districts like Lebanon. She expressed concerns that the bill's provisions might divert funds to the Education Freedom Account rather than increasing per-pupil spending, ultimately harming public education.
HB675: Mark Deotto, Waterville Valley Town Manager, Chair of Education Coalition Communities 2.0 Oppose04:16:33.479 - 12:45:09 PM; Mark Deotto, representing Waterville Valley and the Education Coalition Communities 2.0, opposed HB675 for reinstating the donor-receiver community system, which was previously repealed in 2011. He argued that the bill unfairly requires towns to tax their citizens and send the money to other towns without accountability for how it is spent. Deotto detailed how the bill would increase the SWEPT (Statewide Education Property Tax) portion of the tax rate in his town, forcing them to raise and then send back significant funds, only to have to raise additional local taxes to cover the shortfall. He highlighted the potential negative impact on education programming and the creation of 'winners and losers' among towns, emphasizing the lack of fairness and fiscal responsibility in the bill.
HB675: Representative Spillsbury Information Only04:23:02.439 - 12:51:38 PM; Representative Spillsbury inquired about a list of the 27 and 47 towns that would be impacted by the incremental increase in the bill. The request was to share a spreadsheet from the Department of Education (DOE) that identifies communities with negative numbers, which would be helpful for the committee's understanding.
HB675: Representative Luna Information Only04:23:49.279 - 12:52:25 PM; Representative Luna sought clarification on the towns impacted by the bill and asked for a list of Coalition 2.0 members to understand the scope of the discussion. They also questioned if the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) is considered a state tax, to which it was confirmed that it is part of the local property tax rate but functions as an equalized tax.
HB675: Representative Ames Information Only04:24:36.119 - 12:53:12 PM; Representative Ames asked about the breakdown of the tax bill in the speaker's community, specifically if there are two lines related to education funding. It was confirmed that there are indeed two parts to the property tax rate used for education funding, the SWEPT and the local education tax rate.
HB675: Representative Burton Information Only04:25:48.319 - 12:54:24 PM; Representative Burton questioned the effectiveness of a single formula system for funding education across all towns, suggesting it might be better than the current donor-receiver system. The response indicated openness to exploring alternative funding formats but opposition to the current system due to its annual variability.
HB675: Representative Luno Information Only04:26:37.279 - 12:55:13 PM; Representative Luno inquired about the collection of other state taxes and how they are distributed back to municipalities. It was explained that taxes like rooms and meals taxes are sent to the state and portions are returned to municipalities, impacting local tax rates.
HB675: Representative Ames Information Only04:27:45.960 - 12:56:21 PM; Representative Ames asked how Waterville Valley is held accountable to taxpayers for the use of state aid. The response detailed that state aid offsets the local tax rate, and the town's budget process involves offsetting revenues against appropriations.
HB675: Representative Ames Information Only04:28:31.279 - 12:57:07 PM; Representative Ames questioned the use of excess SWEPT funds in donor towns, specifically if they are directed towards school building aid or catastrophic aid. The response indicated opposition to redirecting these funds, as they are already used for the school budget, and reallocating them would require additional local tax increases.
HB675: Representative Ames Information Only04:31:42.840 - 1:00:18 PM; Representative Ames raised the issue of the constitutionality of the SWEPT system, referencing a Superior Court ruling that found it unconstitutional, which is under appeal at the New Hampshire Supreme Court. The speaker confirmed the details and the ongoing legal challenge.
HB527: Sally Fellows, representing the towns of Plymouth, Ashland, and Holderness Support04:34:18.599 - 1:02:54 PM; Sally Fellows presented a bill to replace the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) with a local revenue contribution. She explained the history of SWEPT, created in response to a Supreme Court ruling to fund an adequate education. The bill aims to remove the SWEPT line from property tax bills, acknowledging that the total tax paid remains the same but recognizes it as local support for education. Fellows argued that SWEPT is unconstitutional due to inconsistencies in equalized valuations and proposed the bill as a revenue-neutral solution that addresses the donor town issue and allows time to study the impact of property tax shifts.
HB373: Representative Ames Support05:19:16.680 - 1:47:52 PM; Representative Ames presented a bill regarding the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) and the low and moderate income homeowners property tax relief program. The bill proposes that SWEPT revenue be collected by municipalities but sent to the state for deposit into the Education Trust Fund, rather than being retained locally. The bill also includes a cost of living adjustment to the $363 million SWEPT rate, extending tax relief to both SWEPT and school taxes for eligible homeowners, and establishes a study committee to address property tax relief for renters. Ames highlighted the historical and ongoing legal challenges to SWEPT's constitutionality.
HB373: Representative Maguire Information Only05:35:03.360 - 2:03:39 PM; Representative Maguire inquired about the justification for the utility tax property exemption and whether it contributes to the nonuniformity issue raised in the Rand lawsuit. Ames responded that utilities are treated differently due to their unique nature and are subject to a higher tax rate, which is remitted directly to the state.
HB373: Representative Maguire Information Only05:36:36.160 - 2:05:12 PM; Representative Maguire asked if municipalities would be required to send the full amount of SWEPT to the state, even if some taxpayers do not pay their property taxes. Ames was unsure of the exact process but suggested it should be clarified by the Department of Revenue.
HB373: Representative Luno Information Only05:37:24.080 - 2:06:00 PM; Representative Luno sought clarification on how the low and moderate income homeowner property tax relief program works and whether it would affect the state's appropriation. Ames confirmed that the relief is a rebate from state dollars, applied for by eligible homeowners.
HB373: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:38:39.798 - 2:07:15 PM; The speaker discusses the $30 million cap mentioned in the bill, clarifying that no such cap exists in current law. They emphasize the need for the Department of Revenue Administration (DRA) to manage the process due to potential proration issues. The speaker also mentions discussions with the DRA about issuing rebates and setting deadlines to manage the total need and adjust payments accordingly. They suggest that the bill addresses two separate issues: one related to low and moderate income and another concerning a study committee. The speaker stresses the importance of the first two parts of the bill even if the committee does not support the study committee aspect. They highlight the constitutional implications of the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) and the need to ensure its constitutionality, without advocating for or against its existence.
HB373: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:41:46.320 - 2:10:22 PM; The speaker continues discussing the potential beneficiaries of the low and moderate income property tax relief program, emphasizing the complexity of income levels and property values. They point out that even in high-end communities, there are low-cost housing options like manufactured homes, which could benefit from the program. The speaker also mentions rural towns with lower property values where residents could be eligible. They highlight the program's $1,100 per taxpayer ceiling and compare it to the current program, noting that the school tax is a significant element in the calculation.
HB373: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:44:49.600 - 2:13:25 PM; The speaker clarifies that the $1,100 tax relief is per household, not per individual, and addresses a question about the cap on home value for tax relief eligibility. They explain that the cap was set lower due to the inclusion of the school tax in the calculation. The speaker also mentions the upcoming work sessions on school funding and confirms the existence of a fiscal note for the bill.
HB373: Zach Shen, New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project Support05:47:59.320 - 2:16:35 PM; Zach Shen supports HB373, highlighting its similarity to a previous bill (HB569) aimed at expanding the low and moderate income property tax relief program. He notes that the program, established in 2001, has seen a significant drop in claims due to stagnant limits until recent adjustments. Shen emphasizes the bill's dual approach of changing SWEPT back to a true statewide tax and expanding relief for individuals in communities with high property values. He provides statistics on the current underutilization of the program and suggests that the bill offers meaningful relief in line with the original intent of SWEPT and recent court rulings.
HB373: Representative Cordelli, Tuftonboro, Wolfeboro, and Ossipee Information Only06:01:21.760 - 2:29:57 PM; Representative Cordelli introduces HB137, which deals with the allocation of excess SWEPT funds for local school and municipal purposes. He explains that since 2011, towns have been allowed to keep these funds for educational purposes, clarifying that the bill aims to codify this practice to dispel any misconceptions about the use of these funds. Cordelli mentions the historical context of the funding formula and the importance of ensuring that these funds are used for educational purposes.
HB373: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:05:40.638 - 2:34:16 PM; The speaker inquires about the impact of HB137 on small towns with no students or where the excess funds would exceed educational costs. They discuss how some towns collect more than required due to high property values and ask about the implications for towns with negative tax rates. The discussion touches on the use of these funds for tuitioned students in unincorporated places.
HB373: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:08:00.798 - 2:36:36 PM; The speaker questions Representative Cordelli about a 2004 legislation and a 2011 bill (HB337) related to the use of excess SWEPT funds. They discuss potential language changes to include instructional purposes and infrastructure needs, and the possibility of supplemental grants for other districts to improve test scores.
HB373: Paul Desmarais, Town of Newington and Education Coalition Communities 2.0 Support06:19:12.400 - 2:47:48 PM; Paul Desmarais supports HB137, emphasizing its role in codifying the use of excess SWEPT funds for educational purposes. He confirms that these funds are turned over to school districts and believes it's equitable for communities generating these funds to benefit from them. Desmarais incorporates previous comments made by Mark Takoto under another bill number, aligning with the viewpoint that communities should retain the funds they generate.
HB373: Representative Luno Information Only06:20:41.280 - 2:49:17 PM; Representative Luno inquired about the taxation status of power plants in Newington, specifically whether they are considered utility property and how they are taxed. It was clarified that the power plants are exempt from the Statewide Education Property Tax (SWEPT) but are subject to the direct utility tax of $6.60 per thousand, assessed by the state. They do pay the local school tax but are exempt from the SWEPT portion. Further, it was noted that Newington does not retain the utility tax assessed by the state.
Unclear: Committee Chair Information Only06:22:16.478 - 2:50:52 PM; The committee chair announced the closure of the public hearing and outlined the schedule for the upcoming work session, which will focus on special education and catastrophic aid, starting at 10:00 AM and ending at noon. The chair emphasized the need for efficient scheduling and coordination with various departments like the Department of Revenue Administration and the Department of Education to ensure their availability during relevant discussions. The chair also mentioned the completion of hearings by the end of the next week and the need to prepare for executive sessions on several bills, suggesting quick action on some bills where possible.

Ladd, Rick(Chairman)(R)[B+]2024	Brown, Pam(Clerk)(R)	Spilsbury, Walter(V Chairman)(R)[B+]2024
McGuire, Dan(R)[A+]2024	Ames, Dick(D)[CT]2024	Burton, Wayne(D)[CT]2018
Luneau, David(D)[CT]2024	Colcombe, Riché(R)[A-]2024	Chretien, Suzanne(D)
Popovici-Muller, Daniel(R)[A+]2024	Damon, Hope(D)[CT]2024	Kofalt, Jim(R)[A+]2024
Fellows, Sallie(D)[CT]2024	Erf, Keith(R)[A]2024	Bricchi, Tracy(D)
Weinstein, Toni(D)	Peeples, Raymond(R)	Mehegan, Peter(R)