Committee Summary for House Education Policy and Administration (02/18/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB662 00:18:08.600 - 8:47:11 AM	Executive Session	requiring the discussion of abortion procedures and viewing of certain videos during health education in public schools.	Sellers, John(R)[A-]2024
HCR6 00:22:15.919 - 8:51:18 AM	Executive Session	calling for the removal of the superintendent of school administrative unit 67.	Belcher, Mike(R)[A]2024
HR9 00:26:19.360 - 8:55:22 AM	Executive Session	urging the department of education to emphasize STEM education in public schools.	Thomas, Wendy(D)[CT]2024
HB440 0188h 00:30:06.559 - 8:59:09 AM	Executive Session	relative to educator licensing.	Cordelli, Glenn(R)[A-]2024
HB222 00:45:34.720 - 9:14:37 AM	Executive Session	repealing the requirement for a memorandum of understanding between a chartered public school and school district regarding how students with disabilities will receive special education services.	Balboni, Peggy(D)[CT]2024
HB699 00:46:28.800 - 9:15:31 AM	Executive Session	relative to special education definitions.	Kuttab, Katelyn(R)[A-]2024
HB719 01:20:16.520 - 9:49:19 AM	Executive Session	repealing the use of unused district facilities by chartered public schools.	Cahill, Michael(D)[CT]2024
HB184 01:28:19.199 - 9:57:22 AM	General Working Session	establishing a committee to study changing school start times.	Wheeler, Jonah(D)[D+]2024
Unclear 03:34:42.600 - 12:03:45 PM	General Working Session	Unclear
HB108 2024-0446h 03:40:32.439 - 12:09:35 PM	General Working Session	relative to bullying and cyberbullying across multiple school districts.	McDonnell, Valerie(R)[B+]2024
HB709 05:05:08.600 - 1:34:11 PM	Public Hearing	allowing parents or guardians to admit their children into any school district where they pay any property or school district taxes.	Burnham, Claudine(R)[A]2024
HB741 0336h 05:46:39.958 - 2:15:42 PM	Public Hearing	allowing parents to send their children to any school district they choose.	Cordelli, Glenn(R)[A-]2024

HB662: Representative Cordelli Oppose00:18:08.600 - 8:47:11 AM; Representative Cordelli expressed opposition to HB662, arguing that it goes too far in mandating specific videos about abortion procedures to be shown annually in high schools. He highlighted concerns about the involvement of the Attorney General's office in monitoring and potential prosecution related to the viewing of these videos, suggesting that this might not be the best use of their time. He moved for an Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) on the bill.
HB662: Representative Freeman Oppose00:19:53.679 - 8:48:56 AM; Representative Freeman seconded the ITL motion on HB662 and agreed with Representative Cordelli's reasons for opposition. He emphasized that while he appreciated the intent of the bill, the specific requirements and oversight seemed excessive and could detract from the bill's intended message.
HB662: Representative Woodcock Oppose00:20:31.400 - 8:49:34 AM; Representative Woodcock supported the ITL motion, praising the work of health and wellness teachers in public schools and arguing against legislative interference in curriculum decisions.
HCR6: Representative Cordelli Oppose00:22:15.919 - 8:51:18 AM; Representative Cordelli moved for an ITL on HCR6, which sought the removal of the superintendent of District 67. He explained that the resolution stemmed from an incident involving no-trespass orders at a girls' soccer game, where parents wore pink wristbands in support of girls' sports. He believed that the issue was already in the courts and that setting a precedent of calling for the removal of educators over disagreements could be harmful. He recommended leaving the matter to the courts.
HCR6: Representative Paul Oppose00:24:36.320 - 8:53:39 AM; Representative Paul seconded the ITL motion on HCR6. He acknowledged the sentiment behind the resolution but felt it was inappropriate as it targeted an individual and the matter was already being addressed in the courts. He supported the ITL motion as the best course of action.
HR9: Representative Freeman Support00:26:19.360 - 8:55:22 AM; Representative Freeman moved for an Ought to Pass on HR9, which urges the Department of Education to emphasize STEM education. He highlighted the nonpartisan nature of the resolution and its importance in preparing students for the 21st century, urging committee support.
HR9: Representative Terry Support00:27:04.760 - 8:56:07 AM; Representative Terry supported the Ought to Pass motion for HR9, citing personal connections to STEM education and its importance. He expressed delight in the resolution's timeliness.
HR9: Representative Cornell Support00:27:50.440 - 8:56:53 AM; Representative Cornell supported HR9, praising the students who testified in favor of STEM education. She also expressed a wish for the inclusion of arts to make it STEAM education, acknowledging the potential for future legislation.
HR9: Representative Woodcock Support00:28:36.320 - 8:57:39 AM; Representative Woodcock supported HR9 and echoed Representative Cornell's sentiments. He praised the students' advocacy for STEM education and mentioned a family member's involvement in a STEAM festival, expressing enthusiasm for the resolution.
HB440 0188h: Representative Freeman Support00:30:06.559 - 8:59:09 AM; Representative Freeman moved to pass HB440 with an ought to pass motion. They emphasized the importance of the bill in addressing the shortage of Career and Technical Education (CTE) instructors, noting that CTE instructors do not teach core curriculum but focus on career or technical paths. This bill is seen as a way to allow more students the opportunity to pursue their chosen career paths.
HB440 0188h: Representative Hall Support00:32:45.960 - 9:01:48 AM; Representative Hall introduced Amendment 0188h to HB440, which adds the word 'initial' on line six to clarify that the amendment pertains only to the initial licensing and not to renewals. They confirmed their support for the amendment and moved to pass HB440 as amended with this clarification.
HB440 0188h: Representative Terry Information Only00:34:36.320 - 9:03:39 AM; Representative Terry asked for clarification on the amendment, specifically questioning the implications of the word 'initial' and how it limits the application of the bill to initial licenses only, expressing confusion about its necessity.
HB440 0188h: Representative McDonald Information Only00:35:28.800 - 9:04:31 AM; Representative McDonald sought further clarification on the amendment, asking if the State Board of Education could waive the assessment requirement during renewals and whether the amendment was necessary given the existing flexibility in the law.
HB440 0188h: Representative L Support00:37:02.760 - 9:06:05 AM; Representative L supported the amendment, noting that it was suggested during professional testimony and aimed to clarify the initial licensing process, ensuring it does not apply to renewals.
HB440 0188h: Representative Freeman Support00:38:45.520 - 9:07:48 AM; Following the passage of the amendment, Representative Freeman moved for HB440 to pass as amended, reiterating their previous comments on the importance of the bill for addressing CTE instructor shortages.
HB440 0188h: Beth McClure, Alliance for Public Charter Schools Information Only00:42:24.760 - 9:11:27 AM; Beth McClure, Chair of the Alliance for Public Charter Schools, clarified the oversight process for charter schools concerning students with IEPs. She explained that school district representatives lead the IEP development and approval process, with charter schools having no voting power but present at the meetings. McClure also mentioned that charter schools provide service and attendance logs to the districts, indicating significant oversight. She addressed the original intent of the MOU, which she understood to be about service delivery rather than oversight, and apologized for not circulating this information earlier.
HB440 0188h: Representative McDonald Support00:44:01.240 - 9:13:04 AM; Representative McDonald moved to pass House Bill 222, highlighting that the current statute regarding MOUs between charter schools and districts is not being followed effectively, with 94% of MOUs unsigned and 16% unsigned for two consecutive years. He argued that the law, which the bill seeks to repeal, is unenforceable and burdensome, involving unnecessary time, effort, and legal fees. He supported the bill's passage to alleviate these issues.
HB440 0188h: Representative Bon Support00:44:47.640 - 9:13:50 AM; Representative Bon supported Representative McDonald's points and added that the two groups (charter schools and districts) are working well together to resolve issues. He argued against the need for further oversight as proposed by the current legislation, suggesting it is not the right approach to solving any existing problems.
HB222: Committee Vote Support00:45:34.720 - 9:14:37 AM; The committee voted on House Bill 222, with the motion to pass receiving unanimous support with a vote of 18 to 0.
HB699: Representative Cornell Information Only00:46:28.800 - 9:15:31 AM; Representative Cornell requested a brief recess to discuss an amendment to House Bill 699 with their team.
HB719: Representative McDonald Oppose01:20:16.520 - 9:49:19 AM; Representative McDonald moved to find House Bill 719 inexpedient to legislate (ITL), arguing that the bill addresses a non-existent problem. He pointed out that the Department of Education has not received complaints about the right of first refusal for charter schools to purchase or lease unused school district buildings. He highlighted that only one charter school had leased a building since the law's enactment, suggesting that repealing the law could impede charter school expansion.
HB719: Representative Freeman Oppose01:21:32.800 - 9:50:35 AM; Representative Freeman echoed Representative McDonald's sentiments, supporting the motion to find House Bill 719 inexpedient to legislate.
HB719: Representative Bon Oppose01:21:32.800 - 9:50:35 AM; Representative Bon acknowledged the testimony supporting local control over school district real estate but agreed with Representative McDonald that the impact of the existing law has not been fully assessed. He suggested waiting to see if issues arise before making changes, citing potential problems with the original language of the bill.
HB719: Committee Vote Oppose01:22:18.239 - 9:51:21 AM; The committee voted on House Bill 719, with the motion to find it inexpedient to legislate passing 17 to 1, with no minority report.
HB184: Committee Information Only01:28:19.199 - 9:57:22 AM; The committee discussed House Bill 184, which was scheduled for the following day. An amendment to the bill was distributed in advance for members to review before the next session.
Unclear: Committee Information Only03:34:42.600 - 12:03:45 PM; The committee announced a work session scheduled for the next period to discuss three bills related to bullying: HB 108, HB 384, and HB 673. HB 384 was noted as an early bill requiring a vote by March 6th, while the other two could continue to be worked on. The committee planned to use one of the bills as a vehicle to address the topic comprehensively. The current statute on bullying was mentioned as a reference point for the discussion, which includes aspects like cyberbullying, retaliation, training, reporting, and investigation processes.
Unclear: Representative Freeman Information Only03:38:49.560 - 12:07:52 PM; Representative Freeman questioned the necessity of appointing a bullying officer as proposed in HB 384, citing that most middle and high schools already have School Resource Officers (SROs) who might fulfill similar roles. He questioned whether adding another officer would be duplicative.
Unclear: Representative Mar Information Only03:39:27.279 - 12:08:30 PM; Representative Mar raised concerns about the potential addition of a bullying officer and its impact on the Juvenile Justice System. He was curious if SROs could take on this role or if it would be within their existing responsibilities, referencing discussions about the last paragraph of the bill related to Children's Services.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Mar Information Only03:40:32.439 - 12:09:35 PM; Representative Mar raises a question about the role of the resource officer in schools, suggesting the possibility of them being designated as a 'Bullying officer' with a more punitive role. They express uncertainty about whether this role was previously discussed but emphasize the intended positive relationship between the resource officer and students.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only03:41:25.760 - 12:10:28 PM; The representative mentions concerns raised by disability rights advocacy groups about whether individuals with disabilities have adequate representation and resources. They discuss potential misinterpretations of certain behaviors as bullying when they might be related to disabilities. The representative refers to existing definitions of bullying and cyberbullying in the statute, which were reviewed but not changed in previous sessions.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative of Cornell Information Only03:42:14.680 - 12:11:17 PM; The representative from Cornell discusses the ambiguity in the role of a 'Bullying officer', questioning if it could be a resource officer or even a faculty member. They note that the statute does not specify who this officer should be, leaving it open to interpretation by school boards and trustees.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Halls Information Only03:43:00.359 - 12:12:03 PM; Representative Halls brings up concerns from Miss Rosenberg of the disability center about the lack of training in evidence-based behavior management for those involved in bullying cases. They inquire if anyone knows of any such techniques, admitting to having searched for them without success.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only03:44:26.359 - 12:13:29 PM; The representative discusses section 69D of the statute related to CHINS (Children In Need of Services), which typically deals with issues like truancy and runaway students. They express concerns about the process of CHINS petitions and the potential need for a guardian ad litem to protect the student's interests during this process.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Bon Information Only03:46:07.080 - 12:15:10 PM; Representative Bon references existing school district policies, specifically the JIC policy, which assigns the building administrator to track bullying complaints. They question the necessity of the proposed bill, suggesting that current policies may already address the issues the bill aims to solve.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only03:47:41.960 - 12:16:44 PM; The representative discusses the current statutes that require the principal or a designee to handle bullying cases, and they inquire about the need for conflict resolution aspects mentioned in the bill. They express concerns about mandating conflict resolution in all cases, noting that it might not always be the best approach.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Freeman Information Only03:49:21.040 - 12:18:24 PM; Representative Freeman discusses the situational nature of conflict resolution and the involvement of parents in resolving bullying issues. They mention existing statutory requirements for notifying parents and suggest that the approach to bullying should be flexible, depending on the specific situation.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only03:50:55.840 - 12:19:58 PM; The representative inquires about bullying prevention training at the beginning of the school year and mentions existing requirements in statute for such training, which includes evidence-based educational programs for students, staff, and parents.
HB108 2024-0446h: Marie Information Only03:51:59.040 - 12:21:02 PM; Marie mentions that most school districts provide a school code of conduct at the beginning of the year, which is accessible to students and parents. They emphasize the importance of treating allegations of bullying as allegations until an investigation is complete and note that interventions should vary by age and situation.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Noble Information Only03:54:21.080 - 12:23:24 PM; Representative Noble expresses interest in a part of the bill that suggests participation of the alleged perpetrator in an anti-bullying class or workshop. They believe that this could be a helpful approach, especially if done in a non-confrontational manner such as watching a video.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only03:55:53.920 - 12:24:56 PM; The representative agrees with Representative Noble's point about anti-bullying workshops and believes it might already be covered under existing law. They also mention instances where schools may not have addressed bullying as diligently as expected and discuss the lack of enforcement mechanisms in the current statute.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative McDonald Information Only03:58:49.120 - 12:27:52 PM; Representative McDonald introduces Amendment 0446h to House Bill 108, which addresses concerns raised during the bill's hearing. The amendment clarifies the responsibility of principals or their designees across multiple school districts to collaborate on bullying investigations, with the district first learning of the incident initiating the process.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only04:01:03.760 - 12:30:06 PM; The representative raises a question about handling cyberbullying cases involving out-of-state parties, specifically how to initiate investigations across state lines. They inquire about the necessity of involving state agencies for such cases.
HB108 2024-0446h: Diana Fenton, Attorney with the Department of Education Information Only04:02:44.439 - 12:31:47 PM; Diana Fenton discusses the challenges of handling bullying cases across districts and states, using an example from Profile, NH. She explains that cross-state communication would likely need to involve state agencies rather than direct district-to-district contact. She suggests that the Department of Education would work with its counterparts in other states to facilitate investigations.
HB108 2024-0446h: Unnamed Representative Information Only04:05:14.239 - 12:34:17 PM; The representative seeks clarification on the potential involvement of other parties, such as law enforcement or the Attorney General's office, in cross-state bullying investigations. They are informed that such involvement could be necessary and that cross-state cooperation might require legislative action, as illustrated by a previous example involving a memorandum of understanding with Massachusetts.
HB108 2024-0446h: Resident McDonald Information Only04:09:31.319 - 12:38:34 PM; Resident McDonald discussed the issue of out-of-state investigations related to bullying, suggesting the inclusion of a requirement for the New Hampshire school district to contact the state's Department of Education (DOE) which would then liaise with the appropriate state agency in other states such as Massachusetts or California. McDonald proposed that a simple line in the bill could state that in cases of bullying or cyber bullying across state lines, the New Hampshire school district should contact the Attorney General's office, which would then refer the case to the DOE if deemed appropriate. They emphasized the complexity of these cases and their potential to become criminal, advocating for the involvement of the Attorney General's office to manage these situations effectively.
HB108 2024-0446h: Freeman Information Only04:11:16.800 - 12:40:19 PM; Freeman asked if there is a federal agency specifically dealing with cyber bullying across state lines, mentioning a memory of such an agency. They acknowledged the significant impact of cyber bullying and suggested that there could indeed be a federal agency like the FBI involved, though they were not aware of specifics at the time.
HB108 2024-0446h: Litfield Information Only04:12:00.840 - 12:41:03 PM; Representative Litfield raised concerns about whether requiring the DOE's involvement in bullying cases that cross state lines might deter victims from seeking help. They questioned if local control could be more effective and expressed confusion about the complexities when bullying involves multiple states. They highlighted the challenges of interstate compacts, specifically mentioning the lack of such an agreement with Massachusetts, and the difficulties faced by a Vermont-New Hampshire school district in determining applicable laws.
HB108 2024-0446h: Marie Information Only04:16:53.720 - 12:45:56 PM; Representative Marie suggested contacting both the Attorney General's office and the FBI for input on the proposed language regarding their involvement in bullying cases across state lines. They noted that the New Hampshire Department of Safety might serve as a liaison with the FBI for any legislative changes concerning criminal records. They agreed to contact these agencies to ensure the proposed amendments align with their requirements and procedures.
HB108 2024-0446h: Becky Wilson, New Hampshire School Boards Association Information Only04:20:11.000 - 12:49:14 PM; Becky Wilson from the New Hampshire School Boards Association explained their efforts to clarify the amendment's language in response to Representative McDonald's concerns. She emphasized the intent to ensure that someone initiates an investigation into bullying incidents. Wilson discussed the legal aspects of bullying investigations across state lines and the day-to-day processing of bullying reports, underscoring the need to differentiate between general meanness and actual bullying as per the law's definition.
HB108 2024-0446h: Murray Information Only04:22:33.239 - 12:51:36 PM; Representative Murray inquired about the general time frame for bullying investigations, particularly when they involve multiple states and agencies. They expressed concern that the process might be prolonged due to interstate coordination. Wilson responded by outlining the existing timelines in the bullying law and the formal processes required for investigations, including notifications and determinations, while acknowledging the complexity when state agencies are involved.
HB108 2024-0446h: Freeman Information Only04:25:45.439 - 12:54:48 PM; Representative Freeman provided specific information from section 193 F4, subsection I, of the law which allows for a waiver from the notification requirement within 48 hours if deemed in the best interest of the victim or perpetrator. They suggested that this provision could accommodate the additional time needed for investigations that cross state lines and involve other agencies. They also discussed the possibility of adding a line in the reporting section to specify cyber bullying across state lines.
HB108 2024-0446h: Wilson Information Only04:28:08.520 - 12:57:11 PM; Wilson emphasized the need to differentiate between disciplinary consequences for bullying, interventions for students found to be bullies, and support for victims. She stressed the importance of considering individual student circumstances, including special education needs, in determining appropriate responses to bullying. Wilson also highlighted the potential overlap between bullying and safe schools violations, which could involve local law enforcement or school resource officers.
HB108 2024-0446h: Marie Information Only04:32:16.840 - 1:01:19 PM; Marie expressed agreement on potentially including a referral component to the Human Rights Commission or another entity for violations against protected classes in bullying legislation. She suggested the possibility of combining different legislative components and stressed the importance of addressing human rights violations in bullying cases.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative McDonald Information Only04:33:36.879 - 1:02:39 PM; Representative McDonald raised concerns about the lack of a statutory reference or list defining the protected class in the bullying legislation, particularly mentioning lines 11 and subsequent mentions. He questioned whether the Department of Education or another entity could provide clarification on this.
HB108 2024-0446h: Diana Fenton, Department of Education Information Only04:36:45.680 - 1:05:48 PM; Diana Fenton clarified that House Bill 673 includes language about targeted acts against a protected class and confirmed that such incidents should be reported to the Human Rights Commission. She also discussed previous legislation regarding the Department of Education's ability to file complaints with the Human Rights Commission, noting that it was not successful. She highlighted the difference between the current discussion on student bullying and educator licenses, and confirmed that local districts could report valid complaints to the Attorney General's office.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Cordelli Information Only04:39:52.520 - 1:08:55 PM; Representative Cordelli sought clarification on whether the Department of Education could file complaints with the Human Rights Commission on behalf of individuals or school districts. He expressed confusion over the process and suggested the need for amendments to clearly define this process.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Murray Information Only04:42:30.840 - 1:11:33 PM; Representative Murray discussed the potential need for amendments to address the referral of bullying incidents to the Attorney General's office or the Human Rights Commission. He noted the importance of getting feedback from these agencies and suggested setting a timeline for action before deadlines.
HB108 2024-0446h: Representative Bony Information Only04:46:11.160 - 1:15:14 PM; Representative Bony reviewed the bullying report on the Department of Education's website and noted that it does not explicitly mention protected classes but does categorize incidents by various criteria such as gender, sexual orientation, and race. He emphasized the need for more detailed data at the district level to identify patterns and behaviors.
HB108 2024-0446h: Resim Information Only04:47:15.480 - 1:16:18 PM; Resim expressed concerns about privacy and the identification of students in smaller districts when breaking down bullying data to the district level. He suggested that such data should be handled by individual districts or school boards to protect student privacy.
HB108 2024-0446h: Freeman Information Only04:49:20.760 - 1:18:23 PM; Freeman shared concerns about data privacy in smaller districts and questioned whether districts are already mandated to report crimes against protected classes to the Attorney General's office or the Human Rights Commission. He sought clarification on this from Attorney Fenton.
HB709: Representative Freeman Information Only05:05:08.600 - 1:34:11 PM; Representative Freeman introduced House Bill 709, which allows parents or guardians to admit their children into any school district where they pay property or school district taxes. He noted the presence of a fiscal note but, as he is not a sponsor, he could not discuss the merits or demerits of the bill. He simply introduced the bill and mentioned that no updated fiscal note had been provided.
HB709: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:07:50.920 - 1:36:53 PM; An unnamed speaker raised a question about the differentiation between property tax and school district tax, and whether someone who does not live in a town but owns property there would still pay school district taxes. The discussion highlighted the complexity of differentiating these taxes and the potential implications for the bill.
HB709: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:09:25.878 - 1:38:28 PM; Another unnamed speaker asked about the applicability of the bill to someone who owns a business in a different town from where they live. The speaker questioned whether paying property taxes on the business would allow them to send their children to school in that town, noting that no definitive answers were available at the time.
HB709: Christina Barrett Oppose05:10:15.760 - 1:39:18 PM; Christina Barrett, representing the NHBA, expressed opposition to House Bill 709. She raised several questions and concerns about the bill's implications, including whether out-of-state residents who own property in New Hampshire could send their children to local schools, the possibility of students switching schools for non-academic reasons, and whether the bill applies to residential or commercial property. She also highlighted potential issues with residency requirements and the broader implications of the bill on voting and tuition rights.
HB741 0336h: Representative Cordelli, representing Tuftonboro, Wolfeboro, and Ossipee Support05:46:39.958 - 2:15:42 PM; Representative Cordelli introduced House Bill 741, which expands open enrollment to allow students to attend public schools of their choice, regardless of district boundaries. He detailed the bill's provisions, including changes to compulsory attendance and residency requirements, updates to open enrollment statutes, and the requirement for schools to report capacity information. He also mentioned Amendment 0336h, which gives admission preference to children of military personnel. Cordelli supported the bill, arguing that open enrollment would benefit public schools by introducing competition and meeting family needs. He provided examples of residency verification issues and cited polls showing strong parental support for open enrollment.
HB741 0336h: Representative Hall Information Only06:01:56.840 - 2:30:59 PM; Representative Hall asked about the punishment of parents who used false addresses for school enrollment, confirming that the punishment was due to breaking the law.
HB741 0336h: Representative H Information Only06:02:44.400 - 2:31:47 PM; Representative H sought clarification on how the bill would work in practice, asking about the availability of seats in schools and the financial implications for the resident and receiving districts. Representative Cordelli explained that the 80% of the resident district's average cost per pupil would follow the student, while 20% would stay with the sending district.
HB741 0336h: Representative Murray Information Only06:05:09.120 - 2:34:12 PM; Representative Murray inquired about the transportation aspects of the bill, specifically whether there was a mileage limit for students traveling between districts. Representative Cordelli noted that neither the sending nor receiving district is obligated to provide transportation services, and parents could drive their children to schools near their workplaces.
HB741 0336h: Representative Bon Information Only06:08:03.320 - 2:37:06 PM; Representative Bon asked about the responsibility for determining school capacity and how it could change. Representative Cordelli explained that schools would determine capacity monthly, similar to how unused space is handled in charter schools.
HB741 0336h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:09:58.360 - 2:39:01 PM; An unnamed speaker raised concerns about students transferring into new districts and potentially being at different academic levels. Representative Cordelli responded that schools would evaluate and accommodate students similarly to those moving into a new district during the school year.
HB741 0336h: Freeman Information Only06:11:57.920 - 2:41:00 PM; Freeman asked two questions to clarify the bill's implications. First, he confirmed that the bill does not diminish local control of school districts. Second, he addressed concerns about transient populations in larger cities like Manchester and Nashua, noting that these cities deal with such populations. He sought confirmation that this was understood from discussions with Manchester representatives.
HB741 0336h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:12:46.000 - 2:41:49 PM; The speaker asked about the process for special needs student enrollment in the Bo school district, specifically how decisions are made when there are more applicants than available spots. They clarified that enrollment is based on a first-come, first-served basis. They also inquired about the impact of open enrollment on School Administrative Unit (SAU) budgets, expressing concern about budgeting for potentially unknown numbers of incoming students.
HB741 0336h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:13:31.160 - 2:42:34 PM; The speaker discussed the potential impact of open enrollment on rural and urban school districts, citing Wisconsin as an example where 31% of students in rural areas participate in open enrollment. They expressed uncertainty about the statistics and the potential movement of students between towns like Tuftonboro and Moultonborough.
HB741 0336h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only06:14:32.478 - 2:43:35 PM; The speaker requested research on states with open enrollment policies to facilitate a comparison, indicating a desire for more data to inform their decision-making process.
HB741 0336h: Mary Wilkey, Contoocook Oppose06:15:18.320 - 2:44:21 PM; Mary Wilkey, a retired public school teacher from Contoocook, opposed the bill for two main reasons. First, she argued that open enrollment policies favor wealthier students and disadvantage those from poorer backgrounds, as only students without disciplinary issues and those whose parents can provide transportation qualify for transfers. She highlighted the potential for increased educational disparities, using the example of two students wanting to take French, one able to transfer due to means and the other unable due to transportation issues. She emphasized the need for adequate funding to ensure all districts can offer basic educational requirements like foreign language courses. Second, she raised concerns about the bill's financial implications, particularly the funding transfer between districts, using the example of Portsmouth and Newcastle to illustrate potential budget imbalances.
HB741 0336h: Melissa Wette, New England Region Liaison, United States Department of Defense Support06:20:59.320 - 2:50:02 PM; Melissa Wette from the Department of Defense supported the bill, emphasizing its importance for military families. She noted that military families move frequently, impacting their children's education, and stressed the need for flexible enrollment options to ensure educational continuity. She highlighted that the bill originally removed military children's enrollment preferences, which they sought to reinstate through an amendment. She clarified that the amendment would not change the bill's general policy but would ensure military-connected students have priority enrollment and are exempt from school capacity limits, thus maintaining current law protections for these families.
HB741 0336h: Barrett Christina, New Hampshire School Boards Association Oppose06:27:24.080 - 2:56:27 PM; Barrett Christina from the New Hampshire School Boards Association opposed the bill, citing several concerns. He mentioned the potential disruption to existing tuition agreements across the state, which could lead to budgeting issues for school districts. He criticized the administrative burden the bill would impose on school districts, requiring them to report capacity and vacancies, which he argued would detract from focusing on educational outcomes. He questioned the definition of 'total capacity' and its implications for budgeting and enrollment, particularly in scenarios where nonresident students fill capacity before resident students arrive. He also noted ongoing litigation related to open enrollment and suggested that the bill's complexity could lead to further legal and financial challenges for school districts.
HB741 0336h: Representative (Unnamed) Information Only06:34:26.160 - 3:03:29 PM; The representative asked about concerns related to the hiring process, specifically if it could become rushed or hurried due to fluctuating school census numbers. They expressed concern about the timing, particularly from May to August, when it's difficult to find teachers with specific expertise. They also highlighted the challenge of finding paraprofessionals, noting that a child's sudden move could complicate meeting the needs specified in an Individualized Education Program (IEP).
HB741 0336h: Representative (Unnamed) Information Only06:35:55.520 - 3:04:58 PM; The representative inquired about the potential unintended impact of the bill on child and family law, specifically custody agreements and jurisdiction over school enrollment. They mentioned RSA 193:2, which allows divorced parents living in different towns to choose the school for their child. They noted that while parenting plans typically align school attendance with the parent's residence, the parties are free to determine the child's school attendance, suggesting that this issue is more related to divorce law than to school law.
HB741 0336h: David Trumble, Town of [Unspecified] Oppose06:37:40.520 - 3:06:43 PM; David Trumble expressed concerns about the bill, stating it would exacerbate inequities in New Hampshire's education system. He argued that open enrollment would only be fair if every child had access to adequate education in their home school. He cited Michigan as an example of a state that funds schools at a higher rate, allowing for better implementation of open enrollment. He criticized New Hampshire's reliance on property taxes and its low state funding for schools, suggesting that these factors make the state unprepared for open enrollment. Trumble also pointed out the potential for increased segregation based on socioeconomic status and discipline issues, which could disproportionately affect low-income families and students with disabilities. He argued that the bill would reduce local control and complicate school budgeting, potentially leading to over or under-budgeting. Lastly, he mentioned concerns about students transferring schools and the potential chaos and inequalities that could result from the bill's implementation.
HB741 0336h: Representative Murray Information Only06:44:40.040 - 3:13:43 PM; Representative Murray asked if the bill could further segregate communities based on socioeconomic status or historically marginalized groups. David Trumble confirmed this concern, explaining that those with more resources would have better access to transportation and schools, potentially leaving behind low-income families and students with discipline issues, thus exacerbating the divide between the 'haves' and 'have nots'.
HB741 0336h: Mr. Tble Information Only06:45:35.478 - 3:14:38 PM; Mr. Tble discussed the potential impact of a small number of students transferring under the proposed open enrollment policy. He questioned how even a small number of students could cause chaos and exacerbate the system, especially if the receiving school is willing to accept a few students. He noted that schools with well-funded systems might currently accept additional students, but mandating open enrollment would force all schools to allocate slots monthly, which could lead to a significant number of transfers from struggling school systems.
HB741 0336h: Deborah H, President of the American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose06:47:24.040 - 3:16:27 PM; Deborah H opposed House Bill 741, stating that the mandate for open enrollment cannot be supported until all students have access to a robust public education across the state. She highlighted the variation in educational opportunities due to the heavy reliance on local property taxes for school funding. Deborah expressed concerns about the bill's impact on local control, noting that it would require districts to adopt open enrollment policies and allow transfers unless there's no capacity or the student has discipline or absentee issues. She provided a personal example from Hudson, suggesting that residents might want to transfer to better-funded districts like Windham, which could strain Hudson's resources without providing relief to its taxpayers. She also mentioned the unclear definition of 'capacity' in the bill, which could lead to issues in planning and staffing.
HB741 0336h: Sarah Scott, Americans for Prosperity New Hampshire Support06:57:24.320 - 3:26:27 PM; Sarah Scott supported HB 741, emphasizing that the bill allows families to meet their diverse needs by choosing schools outside their district. She discussed scenarios where families might benefit from open enrollment, such as child care issues, work schedules that allow for more family time, and caring for aging family members. Scott mentioned that over 20 states have implemented similar policies successfully, addressing concerns raised in the hearing. She believes the legislation would provide significant benefits to many families in New Hampshire.

Cordelli, Glenn(Chairman)(R)[A-]2024	Drye, Margaret(Clerk)(R)[A-]2024	Noble, Kristin(V Chairman)(R)[A+]2024
Cornell, Patricia(D)[CT]2024	Freeman, Lisa(R)[B+]2018	Hall, Muriel(D)[CT]2024
Terry, Paul(R)[A]2024	McDonnell, Valerie(R)[B+]2024	Selig, Loren(D)[CT]2024
Balboni, Peggy(D)[CT]2024	Murray, Megan(D)[CT]2024	Tenczar, Jeffrey(R)[B+]2024
Litchfield, Melissa(R)[A-]2022	Woodcock, Stephen(D)[CT]2024	Kluger, Lee Ann(D)
Snodgrass, Jim(D)	Morse, Bryan(R)	Nadeau, Brian(R)