Committee Summary for Senate Education (01/28/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:02:39.760 - 8:01:20 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
SB69 00:34:24.839 - 8:33:05 AM	Public Hearing	relative to acceptance of or rejection of charitable contributions, gifts, or donations by local school boards.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB97 00:52:34.240 - 8:51:15 AM	Public Hearing	relative to intra-district public school transfers.	Sullivan, Victoria(R)
SB98 01:33:18.239 - 9:31:59 AM	Public Hearing	extending the donations to regional career and technical education center programs.	Watters, David(D)[CT]2024
SB101 01:38:03.480 - 9:36:44 AM	Public Hearing	authorizing parents to enroll their children in any public school in the state.	Lang, Timothy(R)[C+]2024

Unclear: Joel Moore, Education Commission of the States Information Only00:02:39.760 - 8:01:20 AM; Joel Moore, the director of state relations with the Education Commission of the States (ECS), introduced himself and provided an overview of ECS. He explained that ECS is a national nonpartisan education policy research center based in Denver, Colorado, created through an interstate compact for education in the 1960s. ECS's mission is to monitor and track education policy information nationwide to support state education policymakers in making informed decisions. ECS does not advocate for specific policies but provides data and comparisons across states, such as teacher recruitment and retention, state accountability systems, K-12 funding, and school facilities construction. They also offer resources like policy reports, 50-state comparisons, information request services, webinars, and in-person convenings.
Unclear: Claus Von Zastrow, Education Commission of the States Information Only00:09:36.200 - 8:08:17 AM; Claus Von Zastrow, senior director of policy at ECS, discussed the policy trends they have observed across the country in 2024. He highlighted trends in teaching, including paid pathways, holistic staffing, and certification and licensure. In K-12 funding, he discussed changes to funding formulas and teacher compensation, with specific examples from states like South Dakota, Colorado, and Mississippi. He also covered school choice trends, noting the increase in eligibility for private school choice programs, and discussed various mechanisms like education savings accounts and their impact on different income groups. Finally, he touched on postsecondary education, early care and education, and career and technical education trends, emphasizing the focus on affordability, access, and workforce readiness.
SB69: Senator Keith Murphy, District 16 Support00:34:24.839 - 8:33:05 AM; Senator Keith Murphy presented Senate Bill 69, which addresses an issue where a school district refused a donation to pay off school lunch debt and instead chose to sue families over the debt. The bill aims to ensure that school boards must discuss and vote in a public session before rejecting any gifts. Murphy emphasized the need for transparency in such decisions, especially when it involves turning down donations from community organizations like churches. He noted that the bill does not force acceptance of gifts but requires a public explanation for rejection, highlighting the importance of accountability and voter awareness.
SB69: Senator AR Schiller Information Only00:36:55.040 - 8:35:36 AM; Senator AR Schiller questioned whether the bill might be an overreach by the state into local community affairs. Schiller suggested that the issue could be resolved at the local level by the community revising its policies. Murphy responded by explaining that the state often steps in to guide local decision-making and emphasized that the bill does not mandate acceptance of gifts but calls for transparency in rejecting them, especially since the decision in the cited case was made by an appointed administrator, not an elected official.
SB69: Senator Sullivan Information Only00:40:04.160 - 8:38:45 AM; Senator Sullivan asked if the bill could be seen as enabling legislation since the school district in question claimed they lacked a policy to accept donations. Murphy clarified that the bill requires a public vote to reject gifts, not necessarily to create a policy for accepting them, though he would be open to amendments that enhance transparency further.
SB69: Senator Prince Information Only00:40:50.240 - 8:39:31 AM; Senator Prince shared a similar incident that occurred in Keene, where the school did not pursue legal action against families with lunch debt but instead worked on policy changes. This comment was to provide context and comparison to the situation discussed in the bill.
SB69: Senator Abbis Information Only00:41:12.520 - 8:39:53 AM; Senator Abbis inquired about existing town policies for accepting donations and whether they require approval by local governing bodies. Murphy confirmed that such policies are common at both the school and town levels and mentioned that many town parks originated from such gifts.
SB69: Senator Al Chiller Information Only00:41:59.040 - 8:40:40 AM; Senator Al Chiller asked if the bill would have required a public process in the case of the Gtown incident and suggested an amendment to include public discussion for both acceptance and rejection of gifts to enhance transparency. Murphy agreed to consider such an amendment if it reflected the committee's wisdom.
SB97: Victoria Sullivan, Senate District 18, Manchester South End and the town of Lychfield Support00:52:34.240 - 8:51:15 AM; Senator Victoria Sullivan introduced Senate Bill 97 FN, which aims to allow intradistrict school choice within a student's district. She highlighted the importance of the bill, especially in larger towns and cities like Manchester, by citing an example of a family needing a school change due to logistical issues with a grandparent's availability. The bill would enable students to attend any school within their district where there is capacity, thus addressing issues like bullying and providing more educational stability for transient students. Sullivan also mentioned that the bill has support from parents and some members of the Manchester school board, particularly for high school transitions, and could help alleviate overcrowding in certain schools.
SB97: Jerry FW, New Hampshire School Administrators Association Information Only01:15:05.120 - 9:13:46 AM; Jerry FW, representing the New Hampshire School Administrators Association, acknowledged the intent of providing choice for parents but raised concerns about the implications of the bill, especially in rural districts compared to urban areas like Manchester. He pointed out contradictions in transportation responsibilities across different bills and urged the committee to take a careful and thoughtful approach to avoid creating legal complexities. FW also highlighted the need for a clear process to handle situations where schools receive more transfer requests than they can accommodate, suggesting a need for more structured guidelines.
SB97: Bar Christina, New Hampshire School Boards Association Information Only01:19:27.400 - 9:18:08 AM; Bar Christina from the New Hampshire School Boards Association stated a neutral stance on the bill but raised questions about its implementation. Christina suggested an amendment to allow school boards to develop their own policies for handling excess transfer requests, such as through lotteries or first-come, first-served bases. They also discussed the current law regarding private school transfers and how the new bill might align with or reiterate existing provisions, emphasizing the need for clarity on how bullying and social welfare issues are addressed within the bill.
SB97: Deborah House, American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose01:23:10.239 - 9:21:51 AM; Deborah House, president of the American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire, expressed opposition to SB97 FN. She argued that the bill prioritizes choice over ensuring equal educational opportunities across all districts. House highlighted that public schools in New Hampshire do not provide the same level of education in every district due to funding issues. She criticized the bill for not clearly defining the 'best interest of the child' and for potentially moving students away from necessary supports like reading and math interventions or behavioral programs. House also pointed out the financial implications of transferring students between districts, including costs that might not be considered in the bill, such as additional staff needed for more students. She stressed the need for adequate funding to ensure all students have access to robust public education before supporting bills like SB97 FN.
SB97: Unnamed Speaker, East Kingston Information Only01:29:25.320 - 9:28:06 AM; An unnamed speaker from East Kingston discussed the implications of SB97 FN on special education students. They raised a concern about a student transferring from East Kingston to Exeter, questioning whether East Kingston would be responsible for any increased costs of special education services in Exeter. The speaker highlighted that the Individualized Education Program (IEP) would travel with the student, but the new school would re-evaluate the student's needs, potentially leading to different support levels and costs.
SB98: Senator David Waters, District Four Support01:33:18.239 - 9:31:59 AM; Senator David Waters, representing District Four, introduced Senate Bill 98, which extends the donations to Regional Career and Technical Education (CTE) center programs from a repeal date of 2026 to 2031. He explained that the original bill from 2019 included a repeal date to evaluate the program's success. The program offers a tax credit of up to 50% for donations related to employee time, internships, and donations of real property, such as machinery, to CTE centers. Waters emphasized the program's success in forging connections between businesses and CTE centers, which has increased over time. He noted that the extension is justified due to the program's positive impact on student training and business partnerships.
SB101: Senator Lang Support01:38:03.480 - 9:36:44 AM; Senator Lang introduced Senate Bill 101, advocating for universal public school choice in New Hampshire. The bill allows any public school student to attend any public school within the state, with parents responsible for transportation costs. It also addresses special education costs, capacity issues, and state funding. Lang emphasized that the bill is about providing the best education for each child, citing an example of a district unable to hire a music teacher. He argued that the bill empowers parents to choose what is best for their child's education, whether it be for music, sports, or academic programs. Lang addressed concerns about funding and equity, asserting that recent increases in education funding have been directed towards property-poor towns.
SB101: Senator Sullivan Information Only01:45:01.040 - 9:43:42 AM; Senator Sullivan raised concerns about the criteria for refusing a child's transfer under SB101, specifically mentioning issues like truancy or expulsion which might be due to circumstances within the school. They questioned whether the bill might exclude students who need the program the most. Sullivan also discussed the potential for the bill to exacerbate inequalities between 'haves' and 'have-nots' in school districts, particularly regarding funding and opportunities for sports and other programs. They argued that while the bill might benefit some students, it could also create disparities.
SB101: Senator Apprentice Information Only01:46:34.599 - 9:45:15 AM; Senator Apprentice discussed their concerns about SB101, focusing on the reasons for student transfers and the potential unintended consequences of dissolving school district borders. They questioned whether the bill's criteria for denying transfers could unfairly impact students who are struggling and whether the bill might be used for non-educational purposes like sports. Apprentice highlighted the importance of considering the best interest of the child and the potential for the bill to create inequities in sports programs and educational opportunities across districts.
SB101: Senator Al Chill Information Only01:51:59.239 - 9:50:40 AM; Senator Al Chill expressed concerns about SB101, specifically regarding the potential to widen the gap between 'haves' and 'have-nots' by allowing students from wealthier districts to transfer to schools with better programs. They questioned the equity of the bill, suggesting it might benefit students from families with the resources to transport them to different schools. Chill also raised concerns about the potential for schools to receive private gifts and grants, which could lead to recruitment for sports programs and further disparities.
SB101: Senator Lang Information Only02:04:11.960 - 10:02:52 AM; Senator Lang provided information regarding the implementation of open enrollment across the United States, noting that 43 states already have some form of open enrollment. He highlighted its success in providing opportunities for students. He also engaged in a detailed discussion about the policy specifics of the proposed bill, particularly focusing on how school districts would determine and manage open slots for enrollment. He explained the monthly reporting requirements and the process for parents to check vacancies in different schools. Senator Lang also clarified the funding mechanism, stating that the resident district pays the receiving district based on the average cost per pupil, with adjustments for differences in costs.
SB101: Jerry FW, Associate Executive Director of New Hampshire School Administrators Association Information Only02:12:57.960 - 10:11:38 AM; Jerry FW expressed concerns about the complexity of the proposed legislation, emphasizing the need for careful consideration. He discussed the implications of monthly capacity reporting and the potential burden on small rural districts. He raised questions about the duration of student enrollment in a receiving district, the impact on classroom dynamics, and the need for clearer guidelines on reasons for denial of enrollment. He suggested working with a study committee to refine the bill to ensure it meets the best interests of students, taxpayers, and staff.
SB101: Deborah House, President of the American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire Oppose02:17:34.160 - 10:16:15 AM; Deborah House opposed Senate Bill 101, arguing that all Granite State children deserve a great public school education. She criticized the bill for only benefiting a few students whose families can afford transportation and other costs associated with transferring schools. She emphasized the need for adequate funding for all schools to provide necessary academic and behavioral supports, small class sizes, and a comprehensive curriculum. She also raised concerns about local control and the impact on taxpayers, pointing out that the bill mandates tuition agreements without voter input. She stressed the importance of meeting the state's constitutional obligation to provide an adequate education to all students.
SB101: David Trumble, from the town of Ware Oppose02:29:00.800 - 10:27:41 AM; David Trumble raised several questions and concerns about the bill. He questioned how schools would define their capacity, whether it would be based on building size or staffing, and how changes in capacity might affect students who transfer. He argued that the bill could lead to a lack of continuity in education if capacities change annually. He also pointed out that the bill might discriminate against low-income families, students with disabilities, and students of color due to transportation and additional tuition costs. Trumble emphasized that the state should first ensure adequate funding for all schools before implementing an open enrollment policy, highlighting the current disparities in funding and the constitutional right of every child to an adequate education.
SB101: Sarah Scott, Americans for Prosperity, New Hampshire Support02:39:33.720 - 10:38:14 AM; Sarah Scott, representing Americans for Prosperity in New Hampshire, spoke in support of SB101, which aims to expand open enrollment opportunities in New Hampshire's public schools. She emphasized that the bill supports the idea that parents know what's best for their children. Scott highlighted that the bill's impact extends beyond curriculum choices, pointing out other reasons families might seek different schooling options, such as childcare needs, proximity to family members in neighboring towns, and the commuting challenges faced by teachers. She also mentioned that families on the outskirts of districts could benefit from being geographically closer to other schools. Scott agreed with the testimony of Senator Lang and expressed her hope for the bill's advancement.

Ward, Ruth(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Sullivan, Victoria(V Chairman)(R)	Prentiss, Suzanne(D)[F]2024
Altschiller, Debra(D)[CT]2024	Abbas, Daryl(R)[C+]2024