I think the Claremont school district needs this support.
HB1399
House · 2026 sessionDemocraticDied in HouseClaremont school renovation funding
AIAppropriates funds to the Claremont school district for costs associated with the 2015 Stevens High School renovation project.
making an appropriation to the Claremont school district for costs associated with a building renovation project from the revenue stabilization reserve account.
Status
Committee recommended Inexpedient to Legislate; died at adjournment · March 4, 2026- ✓Introduced
- ✕House
- Senate
- Governor
- Law
Division of testimony
43 submissionsI support this bill
Given the corruption in the Claremont school district, this seems to be throwing good money after bad.
I support this bill to reimburse Claremont for building renovation work.
Mr. Chair & House Finance Committee Members, Unfortunately because of a conflict with my employment schedule as a security officer, I am unable to personally testify on HB 1399 today. But I am in strong support of this bill, which I understand would reimburse the Claremont School District at least somewhat for the renovation of Stevens High School, the public high school serving Claremont. Facing the loss of the high school's accreditation in 2013, Claremont voters approved a $12.6 renovation bond. A renovation bond for which they have had to pay since 2013 on their own, with no state building aid. Building aid that was discontinued a few years earlier by we in legislature due to the fiscal crisis brought on by the Great Recession of 2008 . Building aid that had given to many other school districts in the past. Because the Claremont School District has had to pay for the high school's renovation on its own, property taxes have increased resulting in Claremont having one of the highest property tax rates in our state. Such high property taxes overly burden many of my constituents who are not wealthy, & have discouraged some families & businesses from moving in to Claremont. In summary, this high tax burden is not helping Claremont to prosper not only now, but for the future. Therefore, for the sake of fairness, I urge you to give HB 1399 a unanimous OTP vote. Thank you. State Rep. John Cloutier, Claremont
Greetings from Sullivan County NO. Please do not give the school board "nonpartisan good progressives" another way to avoid accountability. We have a warrant article to sell it anyway. Buy it at auction and fix it yourself. No.
This is another clear attempt to reward Claremont voters for their negligence and apathy. Just a bailout bill by another name and on the backs of those of us who actually pay attention to what our school district is doing and then hold them accountable. Claremont voters did none of that and their situation is simply "Claremont broke it, Claremont buys it".
HB 1399-FN addresses a critical failure of state policy that left the Claremont School District uniquely vulnerable. By renovating Stevens High School in 2015, Claremont fulfilled its obligation to provide a safe, accredited facility during a state-imposed building aid moratorium. This forced local property taxpayers to shoulder 100% of a cost that the state would otherwise have subsidized. In low-wealth districts, this "starve-the-beast" approach to infrastructure has proven unsustainable and has directly contributed to the current fiscal crisis. However, a direct $5 million appropriation must be accompanied by rigorous state oversight to ensure these funds lead to long-term stability rather than temporary relief. I support this appropriation only if it is contingent upon Claremont accepting a state-appointed financial monitor and adhering to a strict timeline for completing overdue audits. We must ensure that the students of Claremont do not suffer for the accounting failures of the past, but we must also ensure that state taxpayers are investing in a district that is being held to the highest standards of financial transparency and accountability moving forward.
I support providing building aid funds for the Claremont School District. Please vote "yes" on this bill.
This is unconstitutional, according to a recent press release from the Secretary of State. An error appears in Part II, Article 83, of the NH State Constitution where the word “or” was mistakenly replaced with “of” in many printed and online versions over the past several decades. That small change materially alters the meaning of a clause that limits how state tax dollars may be used.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.