Latest news with #DaveCummings
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House Republicans push for universal open enrollment in public schools; Senate skeptical
This year, House Republicans are pushing to make open enrollment mandatory across the state, advocating for a law that would require all school districts to accept students from outside their district if they have capacity. (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) In 2009, New Hampshire lawmakers passed a law intended to be transformational. The new law allowed public school boards to vote to accept students from any school district in the state. Prospect Mountain High School in Alton chose to adopt that policy of 'open enrollment.' To the school's superintendent, Timothy Broadrick, it was a survival move in an era of declining enrollment. 'I can tell you from our direct experience that if you wish to have a functional public school choice system in the state of New Hampshire, this is necessary,' he said at a Senate hearing in April. But nearly two decades later, Prospect Mountain is the only school in the state to choose the open enrollment option. This year, House Republicans are pushing to make open enrollment mandatory across the state, advocating for a law that would require all school districts to accept students from outside their district if they have capacity. Though the idea has seen resistance in the Senate this year, the House doubled down last week. The chamber added a last-minute amendment to an unrelated piece of legislation, Senate Bill 210, sending the universal open enrollment idea to the Senate one more time. The Senate has voted multiple times this year to hold similar proposals for further study. And representatives of public schools are urging lawmakers to put the brakes on the idea, arguing it could create chaos for school districts. But on Thursday, senators will vote on whether to accept the House's proposal and send it to Gov. Kelly Ayotte, reject it entirely, or request further negotiations with the House through a committee of conference. The amendment in SB 210 would require that public school districts post monthly reports to their websites listing the number of vacancies in each school. It would allow parents to apply to send their children to school districts, without paying application fees. And it would require the receiving district to accept the student as long as there is space, with exceptions possible if the student was expelled from the previous district or has a documented history of disciplinary issues or chronic absenteeism. The bill would require the district in which the student lives to pay the receiving district at least 80% of the per-pupil annual cost at the receiving district; under the bill, the Department of Education would set the exact amount. To House Republicans, the bill would be another step forward for the school choice movement, whose supporters believe parents should have more options for their kids' education than the public school district in the town where they live. Rep. Glenn Cordelli, who authored a similar bill earlier this year, argues open enrollment policies would create more opportunity. 'We hear that public schools are open to all students, but that's not true,' he said at a hearing in April. 'We practice ZIP code discrimination when it comes to public schools that children can attend.' Cordelli contends that making the policy mandatory would force public school districts to compete for students, knowing they could lose them to other districts. That, he says, could inspire schools to try new teaching approaches to attract students. Broadrick agrees with that idea. 'My school boards, along with our high school faculty and myself, welcome an opportunity to compete with charter schools, with private schools and with other public schools, to show families that we are worthy of their choice,' he said. But others are warning the Senate not to vote to make open enrollment mandatory, arguing it would be unfair for both wealthy and under-resourced districts. 'You're basically forcing one school district to subsidize a different school district,' said Barrett Christina, executive director of the New Hampshire School Boards Association, in testimony to the Senate in April. 'The voters in one town are going to be subsidizing the school district in another town.' Brian Winslow, chairman of the Northwood School Board, said if universal open enrollment passed, it would be difficult for school boards to set budgets, not knowing if they will be receiving students or losing them. 'This just would represent an unfunded additional charge to Northwood students that may balance out (or that) may not balance out,' he said. Observers believed the House's proposal had stalled this year after the Senate voted to retain House Bill 714 and removed similar language from the House-passed budget. But with the potential re-emergence of the issue — both in SB 210 and in the coming negotiations between the House and Senate over the budget policy bill, House Bill 2 — the New Hampshire School Administrators Association is urging restraint. In a press release Tuesday, the association issued a bulleted list of issues it has with implementation of SB 210, including how special education funding would be coordinated between districts receiving students, how the new law would affect existing tuition agreements between school districts, and how school districts could budget for increases or decreases in students throughout the year. 'A district that sees a sudden increase of students during the school year will face two choices: Cut existing services to stay within approved spending, or call a special meeting to raise taxes. Similarly, a district that sees a sudden decline in enrollment will face a decrease in revenue and simultaneous increase in expenses,' the association said in a statement. The Senate has expressed skepticism about the bill, and in particular about implementing it in time for the 2025-2026 school year. When an earlier version of the bill, House Bill 741, was heard before the Senate in April, nine people registered support and 752 people registered as opposed, according to a Senate hearing report. The Senate later voted to re-refer the bill to the Senate Education Committee, allowing the committee to work on the bill until January, when it must make a decision. Cordelli argues the bill would address advocates' longstanding concerns about keeping public dollars in public schools. But he argues that providing choice is important. 'The status quo was not working in many places,' he said. 'The education freedom that we have been talking about is not available only for private schools or home schooling. It should be available for public schools as well, so that the child can have the education opportunity that best meets their individual needs.' Prospect Mountain's open enrollment status has sparked a legal dispute with the Pittsfield School District, after Prospect Mountain accepted four Pittsfield students and asked the Pittsfield School District to pay tuition. The Pittsfield School District has argued it did not authorize the students to go to Prospect Mountain and should not have to pay the tuition; the New Hampshire State Board of Education ruled in May 2024 that they must. Pittsfield School District filed an appeal of the State Board's ruling to the state Supreme Court in August 2024; in November, the court indicated it would take up the appeal. The court has not yet scheduled oral arguments, but could decide to waive oral arguments and issue a written decision from the briefs. It has not yet issued a decision. In the meantime, lawmakers did pass a separate bill this year, House Bill 771, that clarifies that school districts must pay tuition to open enrollment school districts under the current law. That bill is awaiting House approval of changes made by the Senate.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NH Supreme Court rejects Dover and Rochester's 2020 redistricting complaint
Dover, Rochester, and 10 residents filed a lawsuit against the State of New Hampshire and Secretary of State David Scanlan alleging that the state's maps violated the New Hampshire Constitution. (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the House district maps created by the Republican-controlled state Legislature in 2020 are not illegal, despite allegations made by the cities of Dover and Rochester and a number of residents from throughout New Hampshire. In 2022, Dover, Rochester, and 10 residents filed a lawsuit against the State of New Hampshire and Secretary of State David Scanlan alleging that the state's maps violated the New Hampshire Constitution. They argued that the constitution requires Dover Ward 4, Rochester Ward 5, New Ipswich, Wilton, Hooksett, Lee, Barrington, and several other towns to have their own state House districts because their populations are large enough to warrant them. The maps currently in use do not give those wards and towns their own districts. They also alleged the map's population configuration deviates more than 10%, which is a violation of the 14th Amendment's one-person-one-vote requirement. They ask the court to forbid the state from using the maps and to ostensibly fix them. They provided a map they deemed to be more legal. In 2024, a trial court in Strafford County ruled against Dover and Rochester, agreeing with the state and Scanlan that creating maps where every city, town, or ward with the necessary population had their own districts would be impossible to accomplish. It also ruled previous case law determined that presumptive violations of the one-person-one-vote requirement may be justified by efforts to make districts compact, respect municipal boundaries, preserve the cores of prior districts, and avoid contests between incumbent representatives. Citing a previous court decision, the court declared that 'a legislatively enacted redistricting plan 'is not unconstitutional simply because some 'resourceful mind' has come up with a better one.'' Dover, Rochester, and the rest of the plaintiffs promptly appealed the ruling and the state Supreme Court considered the case. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that because they did not sufficiently show that the Legislature had 'no rational or legitimate basis' to enact the map, they denied the appeal. 'We are pleased that the New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state's redistricting plan for the State House of Representatives,' Attorney General John Formella, who represented the state, said in a statement Wednesday. 'Today's decision reaffirms the Court's prior precedent recognizing the Legislature's broad discretion in the area of redistricting and recognizes that the Legislature must balance complex constitutional requirements when determining the most appropriate map. We are delighted that the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's finding that the Legislature acted within its constitutional authority, and I thank our litigation and appeals teams for their excellent work in achieving this important outcome.' Jennifer Perez, Dover's deputy city attorney wrote in an email to the Bulletin, 'We are disappointed in the result but respect the Court's determination.' Officials from Rochester did not immediately respond to the Bulletin's requests for comment.
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
If New Hampshire appreciates its teachers, now is a good time to show them
"At the state and federal level, anti-public education politicians are trying to turn public funding into blank checks for private schools." (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) Every day, teachers are nurturing and supporting our precious students in classrooms across New Hampshire. Teachers dedicate their careers and their lives to providing young Granite Staters with the tools they need to build bright futures and live out their dreams. May 5-9 marks Teacher Appreciation Week nationwide — an important moment to ensure the teachers in our lives know how much they mean to us and our communities. It's important to show — and tell — our gratitude. I am so grateful for every New Hampshire teacher. To those who taught me how to teach, to my colleagues in the classroom who supported me and guided me throughout my career, to the dedicated professionals who I trust to teach my three sons — thank you! You inspire me every day, and you inspire the next generation to be their best selves. This year, I hope you'll join me to show your appreciation and show up for teachers. We can drop off a gift card and we can drop by a school board meeting. We can tell teachers how much we care about their work. And we can tell our policy makers to protect our neighborhood public schools. At the state and federal level, anti-public education politicians are trying to turn public funding into blank checks for private schools. They want to give more handouts and tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires while breaking our public schools and taking resources away from teachers and students. We can't afford to let them turn funding for public school students and teachers into private school vouchers. We can't afford to let them slash programs like Medicaid and children's health insurance that keep students healthy and ready to learn. We can't afford to let them cut programs that keep our kids safe, like the Office of the Child Advocate. These harmful proposals — and more — are all contained in the current state budget draft. We know what appreciation would look like in action. Teachers would have classrooms that are stocked with supplies they need and full of the joy that students deserve. Teachers would come to work at schools that are safe, welcoming, and well-funded. Teachers would have the careers they deserve that can support their families and support our communities in every corner of this state. Whether you speak out on your social media accounts or call your lawmakers, when we transform our appreciation into support for teachers we protect and strengthen public schools. Teachers go above and beyond for their students every day — even in the face of anti-public education politicians' attacks on their profession and their school. They bring joy and determination to their work to ensure every student — no matter the color of their skin or the ZIP code they live in — has the resources they need to succeed. We know the overwhelming majority of Granite Staters support the teachers at their community public schools, which are attended by nearly 90% of students and 95% of students with a disability. Now it's time for us to go above and beyond for teachers and turn our appreciation into actions that will protect our public schools and help teachers get the support and resources they deserve.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New Hampshire House defeats proposal to ban rodent glue traps
The bill would have made New Hampshire the first state in the nation to ban adhesive-based rodent traps. (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) The House voted to indefinitely postpone a bill that would've made New Hampshire the first state in the nation to ban adhesive-based rodent traps. Members voted, 190-140, to indefinitely postpone House Bill 152, which means the topic can't be raised again this year or next. The motion was made by Rep. Judy Aron, the South Acworth Republican who chairs the House Environment and Agriculture Committee, which had recommended, 9-5, that the chamber kill the bill. She argued that glue traps were a nonpoisonous, effective tool used in food storage facilities and in places where there are children and senior citizens, and that banning them would be problematic and easy to circumvent. Meanwhile, those in favor of the bill argued that the traps resulted in slow, painful deaths for rodents and other creatures that they catch unintentionally. Rep. Nicholas Germana, a Keene Democrat, argued that the traps were 'a very primitive form of pest control,' and that better options existed. He said the bill continuously came up because constituents want it. Last year, a similar measure was referred to interim study; a committee voted this fall not to recommend it for future legislation.
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump order boosts school choice, but there's little evidence vouchers lead to or better outcomes
"The vast majority of children in the U.S. attend traditional public schools. Their share, however, has steadily declined from 87% in 2011 to about 83% in 2021, at least in part due to the growth of school choice programs such as vouchers." (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) The school choice movement received a major boost on Jan. 29, 2025, when President Donald Trump issued an executive order supporting families who want to use public money to send their children to private schools. The far-reaching order aims to redirect federal funds to voucher-type programs. Vouchers typically afford parents the freedom to select nonpublic schools, including faith-based ones, using all or a portion of the public funds set aside to educate their children. But research shows that as a consequence, this typically drains funding from already cash-strapped public schools. We are professors who focus on education law, with special interests in educational equity and school choice programs. While proponents of school choice claim it leads to academic gains, we don't see much evidence to support this view – but we do see the negative impact they sometimes have on public schools. The vast majority of children in the U.S. attend traditional public schools. Their share, however, has steadily declined from 87% in 2011 to about 83% in 2021, at least in part due to the growth of school choice programs such as vouchers. Modern voucher programs expanded significantly during the late 1980s and early 1990s as states, cities, and local school boards experimented with ways to allow parents to use public funds to send their kids to nonpublic schools, especially ones that are religiously affiliated. While some programs were struck down for violating the separation of church and state, others were upheld. Vouchers received a big shot in the arm in 2002, when the Supreme Court ruled in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris that the First Amendment's Establishment Clause permitted states to include faith-based schools in their voucher programs in Cleveland. Following Zelman, vouchers became a more realistic political option. Even so, access to school choice programs varied greatly by state and was not as dramatic as supporters may have wished. Because the Constitution is silent on education, states largely control school voucher programs. Currently, 13 states and Washington, D.C., offer one or several school choice programs targeting different types of students. Total U.S. enrollment in such programs surpassed 1 million for the first time in 2024, double what it was in 2020, according to EdChoice, which advocates for school-choice policies. Voters, however, have taken a dim view of voucher programs. By one count, they've turned down referendums on vouchers 17 times, according to the National Coalition for Public Education, a group that opposes the policy. Most recently, three states rejected school choice programs in the November 2024 elections. Kentucky voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to enshrine school choice into commonwealth law, while Nebraska voters chose to repeal its voucher program. Colorado also rejected a 'right' to school choice, but more narrowly. At its heart, Trump's executive order would offer discretionary grants and issue guidance to states over using federal funds within this K-12 scholarship program. It also directs the Department of Interior and Department of Defense to make vouchers available to Native American and military families. In addition, the order directs the Department of Education to provide guidance on how states can better support school choice – though it's unclear exactly what that will mean. It's a task that will be left for Linda McMahon, Trump's nominee for secretary of Education, once she is confirmed. Trump promoted school choice in his first term as well but failed to win enough congressional support to include it in the federal budget. The push to give parents more choice over where to send their children is based on the assumption that doing so will provide them with a better education. In the order, Trump specifically cites disappointing data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress showing that 70% of eighth graders are below proficient in reading, while 72% are below proficient in mathematics. Voucher advocates point to research that school choice boosts test scores and improves educational attainment. But other data don't always back up the notion that school choice policies meaningfully improve student outcomes. A 2023 review of the past decade of research on the topic by the Brookings Institution found that the introduction of a voucherlike program actually led to lower academic achievement — similar to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. A 2017 review by a Stanford economist Martin Carnoy published by the Economic Policy Institute similarly found little evidence vouchers improve school outcomes. While there were some modest gains in graduation rates, they were outweighed by the risks to funding public school systems. Indeed, vouchers have been shown to reduce funding to public schools, especially in rural areas, and hurt public education in other ways, such as by making it harder for schools to afford qualified teachers. Critics of voucher programs also fear that nonpublic schools may discriminate against some students, such as those who are members of the LGBTQ+ community. There are some reports of this already happening in Wisconsin. Unlike legislation governing traditional public schools, state laws regulating voucher programs often do not include comprehensive anti-discrimination provisions. Criticisms of voucher programs aside, many parents who support them do so based on the hope that their children will have more affordable, high-quality educational options. This was especially true in Zelman, in which the Supreme Court upheld the rights of parents to remove their kids from Cleveland's struggling public schools. There is little doubt in our minds that in some cases school choice affords some parents in low-performing districts additional options for their children's education. But in general, the evidence shows that is the exception to vouchers, not the rule. Evidence also suggests most children — whether they're using vouchers to attend nonpublic schools or remain in the public school system — may not always benefit from school choice programs. And when it takes money out of underfunded public school systems, school choice can make things worse for a lot more children than it benefits. While the poor reading and math scores cited in Trump's executive order suggest that change is needed to help keep America's school and students competitive, this order may not achieve that goal. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
