Committee Summary for Senate Education Finance (05/01/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB557 1825S 00:03:07.920 - 1:01:53 PM	Executive Session	relative to the information that appears on the school budget ballot.	Berry, Ross(R)[A-]2024
HB718 1831S 00:30:54.080 - 1:29:40 PM	Executive Session	requiring the state board of education to report the unfunded financial impact to school districts for rules adopted by the board which exceed state or federal minimum standards.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB771 1829S 00:37:24.640 - 1:36:10 PM	Executive Session	relative to funding for open enrollment schools.	Peternel, Katy(R)[A]2024

HB557 1825S: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:03:07.920 - 1:01:53 PM; The speaker opened the executive session and entertained a motion to discuss House Bill 557. A motion was made to pass the bill with a second, and the amendment 1825S was proposed and seconded. The amendment was discussed as addressing a conflict with existing statute regarding the cost per pupil, creating a uniform definition to align with current law.
HB557 1825S: Senator Rosen Oppose00:04:54.160 - 1:03:40 PM; Senator Rosen expressed concerns about House Bill 557, noting that it treats some cities and towns differently, particularly in cases where there is no separate school district ballot. He specifically mentioned Nashua, where the school budget is part of the city budget and voted on by the board of aldermen, indicating that the bill would not apply to such cities and questioning the necessity and fairness of the bill.
HB557 1825S: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:06:31.360 - 1:05:17 PM; The speaker responded to Senator Rosen's concerns by explaining that in cases where there is no separate school district ballot, the bill would not apply as per the corporation counsel's advice. They also discussed historical differences in how cities and towns have been treated regarding tax caps, suggesting that the current situation is not unprecedented.
HB557 1825S: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:08:20.599 - 1:07:06 PM; The speaker clarified that the ongoing discussion was about House Bill 557 and the proposed amendment 1825S. They reiterated Senator Rosen's point about Nashua, where the bill would not apply due to the city's budget structure, and questioned the broader implications of the bill on different municipalities.
HB557 1825S: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:09:06.160 - 1:07:52 PM; The speaker discussed the treatment of cities and towns differently, particularly in relation to tax caps and school districts. They highlighted that cities like Nashua and Manchester do not have a separate school district ballot and questioned the uniformity in treatment across different municipalities. The speaker sought feedback from the chair of the education committee on the matter.
HB557 1825S: Senator Ward Information Only00:10:13.519 - 1:08:59 PM; Senator Ward responded to questions about the transparency and differences in how cities and towns handle school ballots, confirming that there would be more transparency for towns than for cities without a school ballot.
HB557 1825S: Senator Al Information Only00:10:13.519 - 1:08:59 PM; Senator Al clarified that they were discussing the amendment and not the bill at large. They confirmed that the amendment had been moved and seconded, and it was adopted without opposition.
HB557 1825S: Senator Aler Information Only00:11:22.079 - 1:10:08 PM; Senator Aler raised concerns about the treatment of bond payments in school district budgets, comparing them to mortgages and stressing their importance in financial reporting. They advocated for recognizing bonds as part of the cost of operation, similar to how businesses handle them.
HB557 1825S: Senator Inis Information Only00:12:21.200 - 1:11:07 PM; Senator Inis proposed handling the issue of bond payments through a floor amendment to ensure they are properly included in the school's financial considerations.
HB557 1825S: Senator Rose Information Only00:13:54.120 - 1:12:40 PM; Senator Rose expressed concerns about the bill's assumption that spending per student should track with proficiency without considering factors like English language learners or students with disabilities. They argued that comparing absolute spending to relative proficiency can be misleading.
HB557 1825S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:14:39.680 - 1:13:25 PM; The senator suggested looking at year-over-year changes in spending and proficiency scores within a district, like Bradford, rather than comparing different districts with varying demographics and resources.
HB557 1825S: Senator Ros Information Only00:15:44.959 - 1:14:30 PM; Senator Ros pointed out that the bill captures only a snapshot of information, which may not reflect long-term trends or improvements in student performance. They argued for the necessity of ongoing communication from school districts to explain their financial and performance data.
HB557 1825S: Senator Cors Information Only00:16:49.440 - 1:15:35 PM; Senator Cors referenced a previous public hearing where questions about implementing the bill in cities like Nashua and Manchester were raised. They inquired if further clarification had been sought from the city authorities, which confirmed that the bill would not apply in those cases.
HB557 1825S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:19:11.360 - 1:17:57 PM; The senator responded to comments about tracking proficiencies, noting that taxpayers are increasingly concerned about the rising costs of public education and declining test scores. They argued that people are indeed paying attention to these issues.
HB557 1825S: Senator Alum Information Only00:20:22.880 - 1:19:08 PM; Senator Alum emphasized the availability of detailed financial and performance data at local school board meetings and online, arguing that the bill's focus on a single snapshot of data was reductive and did not provide necessary context.
HB557 1825S: Senator Carson Support00:22:45.840 - 1:21:31 PM; Senator Carson supported the bill, arguing that it provides important information to taxpayers about the costs and performance of public education. They noted that the bill helps educate taxpayers about the rising costs and declining scores, despite lower enrollment.
HB557 1825S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:25:08.640 - 1:23:54 PM; The senator proposed a committee amendment to include a five-year spread of school district achievement proficiency scores on the ballot to provide a more accurate picture of performance over time.
HB557 1825S: Senator Ward Information Only00:26:11.760 - 1:24:57 PM; Senator Ward opposed the idea of including five years of data on the ballot, citing the cost of printing and questioning the practicality of voters examining such detailed information.
HB557 1825S: Senator Rosen Information Only00:27:27.120 - 1:26:13 PM; Senator Rosen argued that adding a few extra lines of type on the ballot would not significantly increase printing costs and supported the inclusion of more detailed information.
HB557 1825S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:28:31.440 - 1:27:17 PM; The senator opposed legislating five years of data, suggesting that school districts could provide additional data if they chose to, but the bill should remain simple.
HB557 1825S: Senator Carson Support00:29:41.200 - 1:28:27 PM; Senator Carson reiterated support for the bill, suggesting that school districts could provide additional years of data in informational pamphlets or local newspapers if they wished, but the bill should only require the current year's data.
HB557 1825S: Senator (Unnamed) Vote00:29:41.200 - 1:28:27 PM; The committee voted on the amendment and the bill as amended. The amendment was not adopted, and the bill as amended passed with a vote of four to two.
HB718 1831S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:30:54.080 - 1:29:40 PM; The senator introduced the amendment, explaining that it changed the department responsible for handling the issue from the state board of education to the Department of Education. It also required listing unfunded fiscal impacts and potential indeterminate fiscal impacts.
HB718 1831S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:32:08.960 - 1:30:54 PM; The senator highlighted testimony about IEP transition planning, noting that New Hampshire exceeds federal minimums, leading to better outcomes for students with disabilities. They questioned the rationale for moving to federal minimums.
HB718 1831S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:33:34.720 - 1:32:20 PM; The senator clarified that the amendment only requires listing the rules and their fiscal impacts without changing the policy itself. They emphasized that it's about transparency, not altering educational practices.
HB718 1831S: Senator Alchiller Information Only00:33:34.720 - 1:32:20 PM; Senator Alchiller expressed concern that the amendment frames the costs of exceeding federal minimums as liabilities rather than investments. They argued that education should be viewed as an investment in students and communities.
HB718 1831S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:34:48.000 - 1:33:34 PM; The senator noted that the amendment also changes the effective date of the bill to January 1, 2026, to give the Department of Education sufficient time to comply.
HB718 1831S: Senator Rosen Information Only00:36:14.880 - 1:35:00 PM; Senator Rosen raised concerns about the timing of the bill, mentioning an ongoing audit of the Department of Education's oversight of special education. They questioned whether it was the right time to add more regulations.
HB718 1831S: Senator (Unnamed) Vote00:36:14.880 - 1:35:00 PM; The committee voted on the amendment and the bill as amended. The amendment was adopted, and the bill as amended passed with a vote of four to two.
HB771 1829S: Senator Carson Information Only00:37:24.640 - 1:36:10 PM; Senator Carson moved to pass the bill and introduced an amendment clarifying that it's the sending school district's responsibility, not the receiving school, to handle certain aspects of open enrollment. The amendment also required districts to include a line item in their budget for open enrollment tuition and offsetting revenue estimates.
HB771 1829S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:38:38.560 - 1:37:24 PM; The senator expressed concerns about the language used in the bill, particularly the term 'sending', as parents choose to move students rather than districts sending them. They also raised questions about how special education funding would be handled under the open enrollment system.
HB771 1829S: Senator Ultra Information Only00:41:20.800 - 1:40:06 PM; Senator Ultra clarified that the bill aims to clarify existing practices into law and does not obligate schools to become open enrollment but empowers local districts to make that choice.
HB771 1829S: Senator Rosen Information Only00:42:44.000 - 1:41:30 PM; Senator Rosen expressed concerns about the potential for receiving districts to cherry-pick students based on the cost per pupil from the sending district. They also highlighted the issue of the sending district still being responsible for 20% of the cost without clear projections on savings.
HB771 1829S: Senator (Unnamed) Vote00:42:44.000 - 1:41:30 PM; The committee voted on the amendment and the bill as amended. The amendment was adopted, and the bill as amended passed with a vote.
HB771 1829S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:43:40.000 - 1:42:26 PM; The senator discusses the financial implications of losing a student, suggesting that the cost of housing an additional prisoner in county jails does not increase proportionally with each new prisoner, only the cost of meals and possibly other minor expenses. The senator expresses concern over the financial assumptions related to the bill.
HB771 1829S: Senator Ward Information Only00:44:35.440 - 1:43:21 PM; Senator Ward addresses the issue of 'cherry-picking' in the context of open enrollment, suggesting that it might not lead to an exodus of students from schools but rather offers another form of school choice. The focus should be on what is best for the families and children in terms of education, not just on financial savings.
HB771 1829S: Senator H. Information Only00:45:34.160 - 1:44:20 PM; Senator H. emphasizes the need for data and numbers to understand the impact of the bill, clarifying that the bill is not about making policy recommendations but about gathering information. The senator also references a previous hearing where a business administrator from Goffstown School District did not address a question about building a new school despite available capacity in neighboring districts.
HB771 1829S: Senator Rosen Information Only00:46:36.839 - 1:45:22 PM; Senator Rosen discusses the financial implications of the bill, pointing out that a significant portion of the per pupil cost will leave some school districts, potentially leading to property tax increases. The senator also draws a comparison to continuing care retirement communities that selectively accept affluent patients, leaving counties to handle Medicaid recipients.
HB771 1829S: Senator (Unnamed) Information Only00:47:59.359 - 1:46:45 PM; The senator makes a brief comment comparing the selective nature of continuing care retirement communities to the issue of 'cherry-picking' in the context of the bill, noting its relevance despite being off-topic.