By GARRY RAYNO, InDepthNH.org

CONCORD — A bill that would establish open enrollment in all public schools in the state would be a boom to students and parents, supporters say.

But others say instead of approving Senate Bill 101, which would allow parents to enroll their children in any public school in the state, the legislature would better focus on providing additional state money to school districts so all schools have the resources to meet their students’ needs.

The bill’s prime sponsor, state Sen. Timothy Lang, R-Sanbornton, called his bill simple, but a great policy change expanding school choice.

He told the Senate Education Committee Tuesday the bill would allow a student who excels in music to find a school that has a fantastic music program or in physics or math.

“Let’s not forget the fundamental principle of education is the child, the education of the child,” Lang said. “I want the kids taken care of now.”

But others said the change would be complex and needs planning and input from many stakeholders to ensure the change does not create future problems for students, or schools, staff or districts.

Others testifying the focus should be the state meeting its obligation under the two Claremont education decisions that every child in the state has the opportunity for an adequate education and the state pays for it.

If the state paid its fair share of public education, all school districts would be able to offer students the music, physics or math programs that only some schools offer under the current system, several people told the committee.

“Being able to move someone from one school to another does not solve the problem,” said Deb Howes, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “You, the legislature, need to get funding right so every public school offers a great education.”
Under the bill, the parent would be responsible for the costs of transporting the student to the new school.

The tuition available for the child to transfer would be the average for the district he or she resides in, but if the average per pupil cost is higher in the new school, the parent would have to make up the difference. If it is less, the home district would be able to retain the leftover per pupil money.

Lang said that arrangement would mean there would be no cost to taxpayers.

Schools would have to file monthly reports on their capacity in classes and classrooms, and schools would develop their own capacity plan.

Schools could deny a transfer if the student has been expelled from school, has documented behavioral problems, is chronically absent or if the school is at capacity, under the bill.

But state Sen. Suzanne Prentiss, D-West Lebanon, noted those are the kinds of programs like manifest hardship, tuition agreements and Education Freedom Accounts that are designed to address these kinds of students, but this program would forbid their move to a new school.

Lang said it would be up to the school to decide whether to accept the student and there are extenuating circumstances that might make a difference.

Other concerns were how long the student would be able to attend the new school. Once the student transfers, he or she has a right to remain at that school until graduation or would he or she have to leave if the number of in-district students increased and the school was at capacity.

David Trumble of Weare said while the intent was not to discriminate, the bill would discriminate against low-income families who might not be able to afford transportation or tuition costs, or minorities with special needs who are more frequently expelled than white students or chronically absent.

The discrimination results from the state not doing its job for 30 years not fully funding an adequate education for every child in the state, although it is every child’s constitutional right, Trumble said.

He said the bill in essence creates another right for the child to attend any public school but does not delineate the reach of that right.

Jerry Frew, Associate Executive Director of the NH School Administrators Association expressed some concerns about the bill.

“We need to pump the brake to get it right,” he said. “This is a complex piece of legislation.”
Frew said the issue of capacity needs to be explored more and expanded to include such things as ideal size for a certain cohort of students and room dynamics with some reasonable guidelines.

He raised concerns about how long a child could remain in the new school saying that is usually in the best interest of the child to stay with his cohorts, and the transportation language in the bill might be problematic.

“We are happy to look at all of these bills to find some solution in the best interest of the kids, and the best interest of the taxpayers, and the staff.” Frew said: “Student success and achievement is the bottom line of all of it.”

Howes said her organization opposes the bill, noting it appears to appease the immediate needs of some students without “getting it right for all the state’s students.”

“You’re focusing on students but what about taxpayers,” she said. “This essentially requires every single district to have a tuition agreement with every other school district,” she said, “without ever putting it before the taxpayers.”

Local districts don’t have any say, the state is saying you have to do this, and it’s a state mandate taking away local control, she noted.

“How is a single mother in a rural town going to take advantage of something like this,” Howes said, “when she is going to have to drive her child 30 miles to a bus stop.”
Americans for Prosperity supported the bill saying it expands school choice.

Committee chair, Sen. Ruth Ward, R-Stoddard, said, “This is a huge issue that will need a lot of discussion and input from people to get this right.”
The committee did not make an immediate recommendation on the bill.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.