March 5, 2010 NHSBA Legislative Bulletin

Mandatory School Board Training Bill Sent to Interim Study

SB 372, requiring school board members to receive a minimum of 6 hours of annual training, was sent to interim study on a voice vote in the Senate. This action effectively kills the bill for this year's session. A committee report will be submitted with findings and recommendations, but any legislative recommendation/proposal would have to be submitted as new legislation next year.

___________________________________________________________________________
Labor Bills Re-Scheduled for House Votes next week
HB 1411, requiring notice of the decision against rehiring to be provided to educational support personnel, will be voted on by the full House when it meets next Wednesday. Proposed language requires written notice to education support personnel and non-certified employees of the intent to continue, or not, that employment into the next school year. Such notification may also contain "special circumstances as defined by the employer". There is NO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION since the committee vote was tied at 10-10.

ACTION ITEM
Please make sure your local legislators are aware of your opposition to this important bill. Without a committee recommendation, the House has been provided two statements, one in support of the bill and one in opposition. NHSBA opposes this bill since it interferes with local policy and bargaining matters by mandating written notice to education support personnel and non-certified employees, a significant change in local employee/employer labor relations and an intrusion into local control issues. It also provides a vague reference to "special circumstances" that may be included in the notice, leaving this subject to possible different interpretations.

HB 1412, requiring that all school employees receive due process protections and just cause as part of any disciplinary action, will also be considered, having been removed from the Consent Calendar.

ACTION ITEM
Please make sure your local legislators are aware of your opposition to this important bill and SUPPORT the Committee recommendation of INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE. The bill provides employees with due process protections as part of any disciplinary action and would not allow discipline of an employee without just cause. The phrase "just cause" has no specific meaning, but instead is left to outside judges/arbitrators to apply in given circumstances. That is exactly the reason that school districts in NH have long resisted its inclusion in collective bargaining agreements, or in the alternative, have strictly limited its application to specified disciplinary actions. And, the NH Supreme Court has determined that it is an issue that school boards are not required to bargain because of its likely intrusion on the exercise of legitimate managerial rights. In short, the phrase "just cause" is an undefined phrase, subject to unilateral interpretation by outside forums, and has been recognized as potentially encroaching on governing bodies ability to manage the personnel systems in public schools.

______________________________________________________________________________

Proposed Suspension of Building Aid - Senate Vote March 10, 2010

SB 486, prohibiting the Department of Education from making any building aid grants for projects approved on or after June 30, 2010 until June 30, 2012, had a public hearing this week. Senator Kelly introduced an amendment to shorten the suspension from two years to one year. Rep. Randy Foose supported the bill, and State Treasurer Catherine Provencher spoke to the problems associated with bonding as the method to fund the program. All other testimony was in opposition. The committee later adopted the amended version of the bill, which suspends state building aid for projects approved "on or after June 30, 2010 until June 30, 2011." It provides for a waiver based on conditions that "constitute a clear or imminent danger to the life or safety of occupants" and also requires the current Building Aid Study Committee "to continue to solicit and consider public input on the goals, procedures, and operation of the school building aid grant program."

ACTION ITEM
Contact your local senator and let them know this bill is in direct conflict with the NHSBA resolution that was adopted unanimously at the January 2010 Delegate Assembly: "The NHSBA supports the full and traditional funding, by the NH Legislature and the Governor, of State Building Aid, a program that has effectively created local and state partnerships in financing school building improvements that benefit all students of New Hampshire, and which should be considered a significant part of fulfilling the State's Constitutional duty to provide an adequate education to all children."
The work of the Building Aid Study Committee can continue without implementing a suspension of the aid program. Any recommendations for possible changes should then be made with full public knowledge and, as urged in another NHSBA Resolution, not take effect before the next biennium so that districts have time to plan accordingly.
_________________________________________________________________________
House Rejects Extension of "Transition Period" for Education Adequacy Aid
HB 1677, extending the provisions governing the amounts of aid distributed as total education grants to municipalities through the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years, was defeated by a 203-131 vote. The bill sought to continue for the next biennium the hold harmless/maximum increase provision commonly referred to as the collar.
Two similar bills, SB 462 and SB 465, remain under consideration in the Senate Finance Committee.
______________________________________________________________________________

House Rejects Local Spending Cap Bill
This week the House rejected a bill authorizing cities and towns to adopt charter provisions establishing limitations on the growth of budgets and taxes. The House statement in support of killing the bill (Inexpedient to Legislate) was:
This bill would allow cities and towns to amend their charters to permit a tax cap on the city or the school district budget. The cap could only be overridden by a 2/3 vote. During the hearing on this bill, the only favorable testimony was presented by the sponsors. Tax caps bring with them many unintended consequences. They can lead to a reduction in a community's bond rating causing increased costs to taxpayers. They are inflexible and cannot address changes in circumstances such as a decline in assessments, declines in non-property tax revenue, changes in the consumer price index or changes in demands for services. Tax caps have led to a decline in services that have resulted in declining property values. In New Hampshire, budgets are passed on an annual basis. Each governing body of a community should be free to adjust those budgets either up or down to meet the current needs and wishes of its community. Well funded interest groups should not be able to handcuff future public officials. In current law, budgets are passed by a simple majority or changed by a simple majority. A tax cap can be passed by a simple majority vote but would require a 2/3 vote to exceed. There was repeated testimony that tax caps are dangerous public policy.
The Roll Call vote to defeat the bill was 202-148.

Meanwhile, the Senate Public and Municipal Affairs Committee held public hearings on two similar bills: SB 487, relative to charter limitations on the growth of budgets and taxes and to the validity of certain city and town charter provisions; and SB 488, allowing towns, school districts, and other political subdivisions to adopt a spending cap. A committee recommendation on these bills has not yet been reported.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Residency Restrictions on Sex Offenders
The House has considered three bills relative to residency restrictions for sex offenders.
HB 1442 prohibited offenders against children from residing within 2,000 feet of a public or nonpublic elementary or secondary school or a childcare facility. This bill was killed on a vote of 253-88 supporting the motion Inexpedient to Legislate. While the bill was intended to protect children from sexual predators, the committee heard compelling testimony that enacting the measures contained in HB 1442 would likely impede those very efforts. The bill was opposed by the department of safety (DOS), the state police sex offender registry, NH civil liberties union, the NH association of criminal defense lawyers, child and family services, the NH coalition against domestic violence and the Manchester police. There was significant empirical evidence that enacting residency restrictions does little to protect children and may, in fact, put society at greater risk.
HB 1484 prohibits any political subdivision of the state from adopting an ordinance or bylaw that restricts the residence of a sexual offender or an offender against children. This bill was adopted by a voice vote in the House on February 17. The House statement in support of adopting the bill was as follows:
The committee had compelling testimony from victims' advocacy groups, children's rights advocates, child and family services, the attorney general's office, criminal justice and legal organizations who supported banning restrictions on residency requirements for sex offenders released to the community. Residency restrictions encourage sex offenders in non-compliancy with reporting requirements. Restrictions make offenders' re-entry into the community more difficult. Restrictions interfere with an ex-offender's ability to re-integrate into the community and negatively affects the process of rehabilitation after incarceration.
HB 1647 prohibits certain sexual offenders from residing less than 25 miles from the victim or the victim's family and also requires any person convicted of first or second degree murder against a child under 18 years of age to register for life on the department of safety's public list.
The committee recommendation of Inexpedient to Legislate was scheduled for a House vote this week. However, the bill was removed from the Consent Calendar and is now scheduled for consideration when the House meets next week.
____________________________________________________________________________