[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6369384,"mediaKeyId","2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41","parentId",2154779,"title","Rep. Leon seeks law to make in‑district school transfers presumptively allowed \"in students' best interest\"","audioSeconds",1304,"startMs",11046000,"endMs",12350000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41&start=11046&end=12350","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41/thumbnail_11046000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6369384/New-Hampshire/Rep-Leon-seeks-law-to-make-indistrict-school-transfers-presumptively-allowed-in-students-best-interest","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6369384-0cb85a34991d5c230f248e129e6b791f/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141552&Signature=Z6UmOaUFw1XXDBjcUjxRwyVi3iwDmHIEhitO1ri6gYP4-k8TEUi3NLjBBTKNbgafg6S-Zfx9TObTPXEy8ngJRN0DpqsY7~O-3wEDxLd4p3sNyo0dkHnEwnoulTDWdkktT18aFJ3WN1we715WyomTCFaEZyfCmexghvwT1SyK7v~YYgfZ3AaLjGqrJX78wfgrOuiCS7jbtSGmvxMl1rv8em1xzL0DuZDdU6ZApxpu-rtMS7OFBX1PVCCWuuHfJoQQtxvVCgmoNSqvd-UIBlxySDsVttrxMoR2frzhG0z17mZHnnKn5MGmqNkNksY1ah-IiX~ISMwneNG5XiYzGyVNkA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-01-27T00:00:00Z","article","Rep. Erica Leon told the committee HB 68 would make an affirmative presumption that a parent’s request to move a child to a different school within the same district should be approved unless the superintendent identifies a valid reason to refuse. Leon said the proposal would preserve families’ ability to stay in the public district while addressing individual student needs — for example, following a specialist, removing a child from a bullying environment, or preserving an instructional relationship that benefits a child.

Leon described a local example in Derry where school consolidations and redistricting placed fourth‑grade classmates in different elementary schools; some parents sought transfers to keep children with teachers or peers who had supported a student’s progress. Under current law Leon said, parents can request a manifest educational hardship hearing but some requests have been denied without explanation and time limits for superintendent responses have not always been honored.

Supporters told the committee they wanted clear transparency: written reasons when a superintendent declines and a firm 10‑day timeline for a response. Leon said the bill would not change transportation rules (parents remain responsible) and would preserve legitimate refusal grounds such as lack of available seats. Several members and witnesses urged careful drafting to avoid unintended consequences, asking how districts would allocate seats if many simultaneous requests were filed and whether transfers could disrupt schools that concentrate specialized services such as Title I or specialized supports.

Opponents noted districts sometimes concentrate services at a single building to maximize scarce resources and cautioned that transfers could move students away from the specific supports they require. Witnesses from districts and the American Federation of Teachers urged collaborative local problem solving and said blanket statutory presumptions risked imposing unfunded obligations on districts.

Why it matters: HB 68 seeks to increase family choice within a child’s home district while balancing seat capacity, transportation responsibilities and district service delivery patterns. The bill raises tradeoffs between parental choice and efficient allocation of specialized services.

What’s next: The committee heard testimony and several members asked for clearer definitions of ‘‘valid reason’’ and procedures a superintendent must follow before denying a request. The bill remains in committee for further drafting and possible amendment.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Education Policy and Administration (01/27/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Rep. Erica Leon proposed HB 68 to make in‑district school transfer requests presumptively granted unless a superintendent cites a valid reason to refuse, with the sponsor citing examples such as bullying and following a specialist teacher.","taxTitle","Education, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17745,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6369389,"Bill to broaden experience eligible for school‑nurse certification draws support from nursing association",1236,6803000,8039000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41&start=6803&end=8039","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41/thumbnail_6803000.jpg","/articles/6369389/New-Hampshire/Bill-to-broaden-experience-eligible-for-schoolnurse-certification-draws-support-from-nursing-association","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6369389-b2cca710fbb18848afc615518a2ffd28/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141552&Signature=chjXGPRNL~iLrqGURyUpq4g2lSu4Ut2H8lBYWF8Rk58AcViBWP4HFsW8~8T7wU9hvwIHZEBBBZQbCBYOV2WaXMh4EOul-6UiJI~nSth3B58Yg~5m6~tWrfaa~ufKNhpDmMM46-sNEDPT8USYBvwMctq18fy1qKsz7PHRz0VrKADvIKF3wZfFjkeJ~bMnmMf-BuJOV~rMoG2-X-a9j3CifymM1TsUhlEfrpLjw0nRx7pciPocvovneeAZxa2uNuDdyrHku2OAArcgPCPwfT7yYssuh4jXWucnxfqs7GNe-HSH-k5vNHDiK31EbSqVZTeGq90XLNMwoMeBYuYkml2INA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Rep. Jess Edwards told the committee HB 208 was drafted after conversations with a local superintendent and the New Hampshire School Nurses Association to address recruiting problems for school nurses. The proposal would adjust statutory language that currently emphasizes pediatric experience and make acute and chronic care experience explicitly acceptable as qualifying background for certification and hiring.

Edwards said the change would give districts greater flexibility to hire experienced registered nurses who have worked in non‑pediatric settings (for example, emergency or chronic‑care settings) and to consider demonstrated leadership and aptitude in lieu of narrowly defined prior pediatric experience. “If you can’t hire anyone, you have no school nurse,” Edwards said, arguing the bill preserves quality standards while expanding the pool of applicants.

Department of Education staff (Steven Appleby) told the committee existing statutory language can be interpreted as restrictive: some applicants with nursing experience in long‑term care or other settings have been judged not to meet the ‘‘related area’’ requirement under current law. Appleby confirmed past statutory and rule changes have not fully alleviated hiring difficulty. Representatives from the New Hampshire School Nurses Association (represented in the hearing by counsel Sean Thomas) told the committee they support the drafted changes as a way to maintain standards while addressing workforce shortages.

Committee members asked technical questions. Rep. Cornell asked whether dual certification requirements (RN license plus DOE school‑nurse certification) were driving shortages; Appleby and witnesses said licensing and certification requirements are in place to maximize student safety, but recruiting remains difficult. The statute and administrative rules also include time limits and pathways for associates‑degree nurses who are enrolled in bachelor programs; witnesses said those provisions assist some candidates but do not solve supply issues in all districts.

Why it matters: Many New Hampshire districts report difficulty recruiting school nurses; HB 208 aims to widen the eligible pool while retaining professional standards for school health services. Advocates argued the measure will help districts fill essential health positions without lowering clinical standards.

What’s next: The bill received supportive testimony from the School Nurses Association and DOE staff described current statutory constraints. The committee heard the measure; next steps include committee deliberation and any amendment drafting.","Rep. Jess Edwards introduced HB 208 to allow acute or chronic nursing experience to qualify for school‑nurse certification and to give districts more hiring flexibility amid nurse shortages.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6369394,"Legislative hearing on HCR 6 draws heated testimony over Bow superintendent removal",1076,3210000,4286000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41&start=3210&end=4286","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41/thumbnail_3210000.jpg","/articles/6369394/New-Hampshire/Legislative-hearing-on-HCR-6-draws-heated-testimony-over-Bow-superintendent-removal","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6369394-8bfdb38a123fd7a5b495fcce225c6df5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141553&Signature=IW~keKWNvnFaFnU2Rz5D87-JyLXGnRxPI2Zx0hzuNuS~tsviACowOsZrC35UkGdRKEJyrlHvijBEvGgREMUQCJ2HnnBVBJ6pJgIluzzNp9VLZ-zevx5ihhOEo4hOaB9c0yR9s6v-PTaqgp~vNUc1NhpqaJyyqHVij44Glg9NB7ESqvut4761ZZx2ZCzGBHIlEgC8msN4pI61TuQVipPPFn2VIUWBZ6JTLMMrpzuZxshp870hNn3KCcab1ESP-0RZn~rXqKX6230fYT1BwBkBqmPwUeTtMCeogaeGSP1To16bqQUdfqOnZMX9BtmJowWBB0l32qdJbsqJcq3kAv6VVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Mike Belcher introduced House Concurrent Resolution 6 (HCR 6), a measure asking the legislature to remove for cause the superintendent of School Administrative Unit (SAU) 67. Belcher told the committee the resolution is intended as a \"bill of address\" exercise of the legislature’s oversight when a locally appointed official exercises authority inconsistent with state law or constitutional protections. He said the resolution stems from an incident in which parents at the sideline of a Bow High School girls’ soccer game wore protest signage and the superintendent — he said — applied school rules to adults in a way that chilled free expression.

Local officials and school administrators pushed back strongly. Clement Madden, chair of the Dunbarton School Board and SAU 67 board member, urged the committee to decline the resolution, citing RSA 194‑C:5 (which vests removal authority in the school administrative unit board) and arguing the legislature lacks authority to terminate a lawfully executed local contract. “Simply put, the legislature has no authority here,” he said.

Superintendent Marcy Kelly testified in opposition and described the resolution as “a significant overreach by the state legislature” that would erode local control. Kelly said her decisions were aimed at protecting students and staff and were made with legal counsel and under applicable district, NHIAA and state policies. “As superintendent, my primary responsibility is to create a safe, respectful, and supportive environment for every student and staff member,” she told the committee.

A stream of witnesses — including the Dunbarton and Bow school board chairs, athletic and administrative staff, former superintendents and administrators, and other residents — gave largely consistent testimony opposing HCR 6 and supporting Kelly’s actions. They argued the superintendent and local board acted to prevent disruption and to safeguard a 14‑year‑old athlete, and warned that legislative intervention would set a precedent for state interference in local hiring and firing.

Opponents of the superintendent’s actions were also heard in committee. Rep. Belcher and some members cited concerns about First Amendment implications, alleged overbroad application of school rules to adults at a public event and an asserted mismatch between the punishment and the conduct. Belcher said he had provided media accounts and that the committee has historical precedent for removal actions in extreme cases.

Legal and process questions dominated much of the discussion: whether HCR 6 preempts local school board authority under RSA 194‑C:5, whether the issue is already the subject of pending litigation in federal court, and whether the resolution would create an improper legislative intrusion into a local personnel matter. Jerry Frew of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association said adjudication of constitutional free speech claims belongs to the courts, not the legislature, and urged the committee to declare the resolution inexpedient to legislate.

Committee members asked whether the state should set precedent for removing appointed or contracted local employees; Belcher said the legislature should step in where rights are being deprived. Opponents noted local voters may hold school boards accountable at the ballot box; supporters of the measure said state oversight is appropriate if local remedies fail.

Why it matters: HCR 6 raises tensions between local control of school administration and state‑level oversight. The resolution also intersects with free‑speech claims now before the courts and carries political and legal precedent implications if the legislature acts to remove an appointed local official.

What’s next: Committee members agreed during executive session to hold HCR 6 for further legal review and to revisit the resolution after staff research into the constitutional and procedural questions; no committee recommendation was issued at this hearing.","HCR 6, a concurrent resolution introduced by Rep. Mike Belcher seeking removal of the SAU 67 superintendent, prompted a full committee hearing with contrasting testimony on local control, free speech, and proper authority for personnel removal.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6369399,"Committee hears bill to tighten 'evidence‑based' definition for classroom methods",2718,196000,2914000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41&start=196&end=2914","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41/thumbnail_196000.jpg","/articles/6369399/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-bill-to-tighten-evidencebased-definition-for-classroom-methods","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6369399-be8ab5298aa4972184cd7939c92713bf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141553&Signature=CM0eI1zv~YN-NQly4R7d8cWlSqzjd5CRgEfUUCvmarrSAEJmBWX0BgA4LL8FgLFz571wcbj9fmun6hiDqQb3Q11yuZga-4duAFtN~g8d1aFaGdIazI9~Itk41-z4KOCr8ZJ8wqWjJuzv9ujmZA1F7ssJFpm2p-vjNVRF6YbKZSI~U0GdzkxWU-s~v8ftnakvOcJlVZdvoeBzUuzaxjGOuuJeA-ULhjNxG6shX~5Ce2E2v7opmwu53LrhwaP6zkiWBpGVqDgNMcaif3UJn2LH9lBfwfO7qjeM0ZE3J49BigPzTh6OcFlry6JBMfJ1iM6SzW32PK2twCfUzjQBhBhZLA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Rep. Mike Belcher, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the House Education Policy Committee HB 129 would tighten the state’s application of the federal ‘‘evidence‑based’’ standard so that teaching methods adopted by the state or local school boards rest on objective, scientific studies rather than subjective instruments such as administrator surveys.

Belcher said the change would apply to pedagogy — the way material is taught — not to curriculum content. “This bill simply firms up that definition of evidence to require that the evidence we’re using be good, objective, science‑based evidence,” he said at the start of the hearing. He told members the measure is intended to reduce “fad chasing” in schools and could produce long‑term cost savings by limiting retraining and frequent adoption of new instructional programs.

Committee members questioned where the bill would draw lines in practice. Rep. Woodcock asked whether the change would force districts to add staff to review studies; Belcher replied the Department of Education already applies federal evidence rules and that the bill would not necessarily require additional personnel. Rep. Selig, Rep. Cornell and others asked what the bill meant for individual teachers; Belcher said the bill is written to exempt an individual classroom teacher’s day‑to‑day choices and is meant to apply to district‑level adoptions and policies.

Testimony from educators and advocates illustrated how the bill might be used. Anne Marie Banfield, a parental‑rights advocate and tutor, supported the bill and urged the committee to favor methods she described as guided or explicit instruction over inquiry‑based or discovery approaches. “I think HB 129 is attempting to identify good quality teaching methods so teachers are not having to search for this on their own,” she said. Banfield cited a 2021 What Works Clearinghouse review and an American Federation of Teachers study as evidence that some instructional strategies (she referenced ‘‘guided instruction’’) have stronger evidence for improving outcomes.

Opponents and some committee members expressed concern the bill could limit innovation or local professional judgment. Rep. Woodcock said he feared the proposal could freeze pedagogy in place and discourage promising new approaches that lack an existing large body of randomized or long‑term trials. Rep. Sellick and Rep. Balboni voiced similar objections, saying classroom teachers and local professional learning communities rely on evolving ‘‘best practices’’ and collaboration to adapt instruction.

Department of Education staff and witnesses (including Sean Thomas, representing the New Hampshire School Nurses Association, who testified later in the day on a different bill) discussed technical aspects of evidence and implementation during questioning; Belcher acknowledged the fiscal note uncertainty but told the committee he expects initial costs to be small because the state already follows federal evidence rules.

The committee later took an executive‑session vote on HB 129. The roll call in committee showed the motion to report HB 129 as ‘‘ought to pass’’ carried 10‑7 with one member not voting.

Why it matters: HB 129 would change the standard districts must apply when adopting instructional methods, shifting emphasis to falsifiable, controlled studies. Proponents say that could reduce adoption of low‑quality methods and recurring retraining costs; critics say it risks constraining local innovation and professional judgment.

What’s next: The committee approved a recommendation to advance the bill. If the full House takes up the bill, legislators will continue to debate how the state should balance scientific evidence, local control and classroom flexibility.","Rep. Mike Belcher introduced HB 129 to the House Education Policy Committee, proposing a narrower definition of “evidence‑based” that would require objective, scientific studies to support district‑level pedagogical adoptions.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6369379,"Committee advances bill restricting emergency use of school facilities for certain non‑citizens; fiscal and legal concerns raised",1059,15397000,16456000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41&start=15397&end=16456","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2154779-9bfd31943660e38266931e027b9e5b41/thumbnail_15397000.jpg","/articles/6369379/New-Hampshire/Committee-advances-bill-restricting-emergency-use-of-school-facilities-for-certain-noncitizens-fiscal-and-legal-concerns-raised","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6369379-5fb953626d1e268f0a2bd0a9592720b2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141553&Signature=GixCBoLZYWXCzpNk5HFzMcHmKmFCTyKSwzJV8oVWvt2V~oSZ8de9iQ-~s8r8qIdhRovcJhoPsTu9qFt5AXsgJHldXUfYbIwg0KQkeKO1ASWwHSd~FEU4CpTVgvoNkh-MUql1OvHsmP~ZgcvrOnFZRUEpkMW8T2UreEV7nKwOqdjkb1Huwb7YkaQyN5IHW~EIVAjqEOee6RfT6PxZlpcE-7pbOS3JHlLW5nSiLMMCJgeiqS-4HyD-nwWz0C99OpE7UBJyB7UM7hQ~9VCN9BlJyH7be~~OViEHmMJVQnbscbuGUuAS~tl2WMjaNX~NS1cnkfDo7gOatKdsLbX1PAv0Hw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The committee discussed a bill identified in the record as HB 701 (described at hearing as related to emergency shelters and use of school facilities). Committee discussion and executive session motion focused on whether schools should be available as emergency shelters for people identified in testimony as ‘‘specified aliens’’ (witnesses used that statutory phrase while discussing immigration law).

Supporters of the bill said it would protect school buildings — and students — from ad hoc uses by non‑citizens who have not been vetted and who, they argued, may raise safety or public‑health concerns. Representative Nato and others framed the proposal as a preventive measure to avoid scenarios where large numbers of asylum seekers or other entrants are housed in school gyms or cafeterias without screening.

Opponents urged caution. Several witnesses, including Jerry Frew of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association and department staff, said the bill’s wording could sweep more broadly than supporters intended. DHHS officials and others told the committee a fiscal note estimated annual federal funding risks and related costs of roughly $12–$18 million if the state were to adopt a prohibition that conflicted with federal programs; witnesses also warned the language as drafted could exclude lawful non‑citizen residents (green‑card holders, refugees and those with valid visas) because of unclear statutory definitions.

Civil‑rights and refugee‑resettlement experts were cited by witnesses as cautioning that HUD and the Office of Refugee Resettlement have obligations and mechanisms for emergency placements that do not require citizenship screening at intake; excluding facilities could jeopardize federal grant programs, witnesses said. Administrators also warned the bill could prevent use of school buildings for typical disaster shelters (winter storms, floods) and that municipalities and districts routinely coordinate sheltering with state and local emergency management.

Committee executive‑session minutes show members voted to report the bill as “ought to pass” by a roll‑call (10‑7, one not voting). Several committee members said they would prepare a minority ITL report. Committee members said they will schedule minority/majority report drafting; some members asked for additional legal review of federal program interactions.

Why it matters: The bill sits at the intersection of emergency management, school facility use and federal refugee/resettlement rules. If enacted, it could change how districts respond to unplanned sheltering needs and could affect federal funding streams.

What’s next: Committee has reported the bill as “ought to pass.” Members indicated they will prepare majority and minority reports, and some asked staff to research the bill’s interaction with federal programs and civil‑rights obligations before floor debate.","Committee discussion and executive session action advanced HB 701, a contentious proposal to limit the use of school facilities as emergency shelters for certain non‑citizens; witnesses warned of legal and fiscal risks.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Rep. Leon seeks law to make in‑district school transfers presumptively allowed "in students' best interest"

Bill to broaden experience eligible for school‑nurse certification draws support from nursing association

Legislative hearing on HCR 6 draws heated testimony over Bow superintendent removal

Committee hears bill to tighten 'evidence‑based' definition for classroom methods

Committee advances bill restricting emergency use of school facilities for certain non‑citizens; fiscal and legal concerns raised