HB1586

I oppose this bill.

The American Federation of Teachers - NH opposes this bill. Withholding all funding, or even all Special Education Funding from a school district because of an unresolved dispute over the district's ability to provide the services required to support an individual student's access to a free and appropriate public education is an inappropriate solution. It would punish all the students in the school district and hurt their education because of an issue that may be completely out of the school district's control - such as the loss of a key employee and the inability to fill that position with a replacement employee in a timely manner. Collectively punishing every student in the district by withholding funds, even "just" the Special Education funds will harm the educational opportunities and outcomes for every student as money is moved around in the budget to cover the lost funds. This is the wrong approach to better helping districts' meet their obligations provide supports for individual students. Public schools have a moral and legal obligation to educate ALL students, so punishing the whole district, and all the students, is a poor substitute for the state better supporting districts with Special Education costs.

Opposition Testimony for HB 1586: Withholding Funds from Public Schools HB 1586 proposes granting the commissioner of the Department of Education the authority to withhold funds from public schools that fail to provide special education services in compliance with state law. While the bill aims to ensure that students with disabilities receive the necessary supports outlined in their Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), it raises significant concerns regarding its underpinnings. Notably, the bill introduces high-stakes penalties without sufficiently addressing heightened administrative burdens or offering clarity on how compliance will be effectively monitored or enforced. Oversight and Funding Issues A critical oversight in HB 1586 is its lack of funding provisions for the necessary oversight mechanisms. The bill does not authorize any new personnel to oversee the enforcement of compliance, yet it suggests that substantial administrative duties will fall to existing staff within the Bureau of Special Education Support. As outlined in the fiscal note, the potential need for additional personnel to track IEP compliance could lead to costs of $80,000 to $87,000 per year. Without designated funding or explicit authorization for these roles, the bill risks diverting resources from vital educational services and placing undue burdens on already overwhelmed administrative teams. Intersectional Framework and Ethical Concerns Moreover, the sponsorship of this bill by Rep. Kristin Nobile, recently implicated in leaked communications promoting divisive and segregated educational policies, underscores a troubling lack of commitment to equity and inclusion. Implementing a punitive funding model can exacerbate inequalities, particularly affecting marginalized and vulnerable student populations who already face systemic barriers in accessing education. The bill's framework does not adequately consider how the enforcement of such measures could lead to adverse outcomes for students with disabilities, including potential isolation and further marginalization. Policymakers must prioritize an inclusive and supportive approach that directly addresses the unique needs of all students, ensuring that educational interventions do not come at the cost of ethical governance or equitable access to resources.

My name is Karen and I live and vote in Bristol. I do NOT believe the Commissional of Education should be allowed to withhold funds from public schools if such schools are not providing special education services in compliance with state law. It ignores reality when audit reports lag and the marketplace employment opportunities don't exist, and it inserts political motivations into public education policy.

This study is absolutely necessary if we are to save our state from irreparable harm. We cannot continue successfully with the revenue stream being so dependent on property tax and innumerable fees; the revenue from gaming has never been fulsome. I'm old enough to remember when the original State lottery was sold as THE answer to funding education. Yeah. Right.

While I agree there should be consequences for not providing sped services, withholding funding is NOT the right one. NH already refuses to fund an adequate education so this seems like just another avenue to withhold funding

The Members of the NH Council on Developmental Disabilities believe this will could have a negative effect on the NH disability community. Allowing for the Commissioner of the Department of Education to withhold funds will only make it harder for those districts to comply with standards relative to supported education services.

I oppose HB1586 because I believe it consolidates too much power into the political seat of Commissioner, and may lead to politically motivated withholding of monies from school districts due to external uncontrollable factors rather than intentional noncompliance.

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.