New Hampshire Senate Bill SB386

New Hampshire 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/23/21
• Refer: 12/23/21
• Report Pass: 2/9/22
• Engrossed: 3/23/22
• Refer: 3/23/22
• Report Pass: 4/20/22
• Enrolled: 5/27/22
• Chaptered: 6/8/22
• Passed: 6/8/22

Caption

Relative to the determination of state adequate education grants and chartered public school tuition amounts.

Impact

One of the significant changes proposed by SB386 is the adjustment of the funding models based on actual attendance data while ensuring that aid distributions are equitable. This move is intended to ensure that municipalities receive their appropriate share of education grants based on a revised methodology that reflects current economic conditions, particularly considering factors like the Consumer Price Index. The changes aim to create a more transparent and efficient framework for managing educational expenses within the state, particularly at the local level.

Summary

Senate Bill 386 addresses the funding mechanisms for chartered public schools and the determination of adequate education grants for municipalities in New Hampshire. This bill introduces technical modifications to the existing definitions of average cost per pupil and average daily membership in attendance. By clarifying these terms, the bill aims to enhance the consistency and fairness of the funding process across various districts and schools. Additionally, SB386 seeks to streamline the way funding is allocated to charter schools, especially for those that are conversion schools located in a pupil's resident district where no tuition charge is imposed.

Contention

However, the bill has sparked debates regarding the adequacy and the methods of calculating educational grants. Stakeholders have voiced concerns that without rigorous oversight, the adjustments made under SB386 could lead to disparities in funding among districts. Critics argue that while the intention is to standardize funding, the technical adjustments might inadvertently narrow the financial support for some municipalities, especially those with fewer resources. This has led to discussions around ensuring the bill not only maintains funding levels but also addresses the unique needs of various localities, particularly those serving at-risk populations.