[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6659234,"mediaKeyId","2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a","parentId",2472392,"title","Senate committee delays bills on school materials after debate over \"contemporary local community standards\"","audioSeconds",1442,"startMs",462000,"endMs",1904000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a&start=462&end=1904","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a/thumbnail_462000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6659234/New-Hampshire/Senate-committee-delays-bills-on-school-materials-after-debate-over-contemporary-local-community-standards","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6659234-c5f2751533c1efeac13e8db8f2b5afc0/orig.mp4?Expires=1775185310&Signature=ljyvebse2LSd8nfyWzBhQHN0aGBV6wS6Utv6YUw08yp69sK-FzGWZcv8nu3hyj2rCf8E1WHqqA-KSjbH~0ylVKHt2PJJb-wcqKNq-HH6syXnuLlWzTrvTOun1OksRDTraMEubBU37N9c82ZUQh60toM03j4pCpz~49~jiTseKp8vgBu7Wy7rHANFGbUa9dQRclJyIhg~WFbR4yihA6qOZ3Kq1egR3bxHMe-gjiJ-Ig-KXVR~mn4jbBj~0zEwr2tswBjLPWuC7e5BE5hDGAnzNfF~ZxTVsMTrp6yLbtZMAd~aXsZYD46MXB466-sEp2qYmTgW2Zg4H67bC5YMGgDDRg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-03-03T17:54:02.397Z","article","Lawmakers in the Senate Education Committee delayed action on two related bills proposing procedures for challenging public school materials after wide-ranging debate over an amendment offered for both bills.

The committee discussed an amendment circulated by \"Barry Christina\" that would add procedures and standards for evaluating challenged school materials in Senate Bills 33 and 208. Members expressed concerns about several elements of the amendment, including the phrase \"applying contemporary local community standards,\" the standard for judging whether material “lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value,” and a 10‑year prohibition on mandatory review of material once a determination is made.

Committee members said the phrase \"contemporary local community standards\" is commonly used in legal contexts but leaves too many open questions for a statewide education policy. One senator argued the phrase could produce inconsistent results across New Hampshire communities and asked that the language be more precisely defined or limited to a state‑level standard. Another member said the phrasing appears in court decisions that define obscenity and is already used in state law, but acknowledged the phrase can be misapplied in school settings, for example when age‑appropriate, evidence‑based programs about personal body safety are challenged.

Lawmakers also debated timing requirements in the amendment. Multiple senators proposed changing deadlines measured in \"days\" to \"business days\" to avoid creating situations where timelines would lapse during school vacations or summer breaks. Committee members discussed changing 10‑day and 30‑day deadlines throughout the amendment to business days; several senators described that change as a straightforward technical fix.

Several senators urged clearer limits to ensure local school boards retain authority to adopt narrower local policies and to protect instructional material that addresses race, ethnicity, culture or authors' viewpoints. One senator suggested borrowing language from an existing Salem school‑district policy that states a superintendent \"shall not restrict material because of the race, nationality, political, or religious views of the writer\" and that ‘‘every effort will be made to provide materials that present all points of view.’’ Another member objected to removing an existing statutory definition drawn from state law and proposed instead to add supplemental local policy language rather than replace the current text.

After more than an hour of discussion, a senator moved to re‑refer the bills for further work and stakeholder engagement; a motion to re‑refer SB 208 passed on a roll call (vote recorded in the transcript as 3‑2). The committee also moved to re‑refer SB 33 for additional work and discussed combining the two measures into a single bill to address common concerns. Several members expressed support for a re‑refer so stakeholders and staff can develop clarified definitions and procedures in a work session.

The discussion ranged from technical edits (deadlines counted in business days) to larger policy choices about statewide standards versus locally tailored review processes and about how to protect educational materials that address race, culture and political viewpoints.

Next steps: committee members asked staff to arrange a work session with stakeholders and to draft clearer language addressing the concerns raised about definitions, review timelines and carve‑outs for culturally or politically sensitive material.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Education (03/03/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Lawmakers in the Senate Education Committee delayed action on two related bills proposing procedures for challenging public school materials after wide‑ranging debate over an amendment offered for both bills.","taxTitle","Judiciary, Senate , Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",29511,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6659228,"Committee advances bill on intra‑district transfers after debate over private‑school transfers and manifest‑hardship rules",1828,2443000,4271000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a&start=2443&end=4271","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a/thumbnail_2443000.jpg","/articles/6659228/New-Hampshire/Committee-advances-bill-on-intradistrict-transfers-after-debate-over-privateschool-transfers-and-manifesthardship-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6659228-d3e252917ac3e95a090b492adc57e88f/orig.mp4?Expires=1775185310&Signature=WjTzoGz338gwUuRDOhhGdrd11bxGllsbZhdaH1Cxfh0HubW3OH5ls~oJNIFzVYMa7gJ0KstL6QFJ-J30ZLvFLqHtM4UXyufvRhp~Ozvifjgqp2k-89aT6jYU-w8FRy6O9KO3WLmLOpUcVXrGJZBuAzytqTucHGz1ySwNWhPZbgDkreMunPnzrzxmxnNZ4cQWnO3TcrYOl673mRlIPZ-JA6kZBtXzKrY72U4dOBUUl62amy6XbfTmH72c0Uw18i9pEn0B9U-sAOVb16~QTbImEk0yZrTwLBAv2NzQzEbCHYHh-z189MbYWLRN5s2gQ4gxLT1leZT848B-IiMubm1pTA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Education Committee advanced Senate Bill 97 after detailed discussion about how the proposed transfer rules interact with existing law that governs reassignment for a student's best interest or manifest educational hardship.

SB 97 would let a parent or guardian apply to a student's superintendent to change the student's school assignment to another public school, public academy, or an approved private school within the district and would require school boards to adopt policies addressing instances where requests exceed school capacity. Committee members sought clarification on whether the bill would change existing law allowing reassignment to an approved private school under a manifest educational hardship determination.

A committee aide provided members with RSA 193:3 during the hearing. Committee discussion and testimony from an amendment author clarified that current law already allows parents to request reassignment — including reassignment to approved private schools — under both best‑interest and manifest educational‑hardship standards. Several senators urged care in how SB 97 would modify the role of superintendents and school boards when considering reassignment requests.

The committee adopted an amendment requiring school boards to \"adopt a policy addressing instances in which there are more requests to transfer to a school than there is ability to accommodate students\" (language in the transcript). Some senators urged the policy be permissive — allowing each district to decide whether to adopt an intra‑district transfer program — while others said the requirement would help parents and preserve stability for students. At least one senator proposed making such policy adoption contingent on a vote of the local school board; proponents of the bill said that change would allow districts to avoid adopting policies where they are unnecessary.

After discussion the committee recorded an \"Ought to Pass\" recommendation on SB 97 as amended (transcript shows a committee vote recorded 3‑2). Members said the amendment addressed capacity concerns and that the bill largely aligns with existing RSA 193:3 procedures for hearings, superintendent meetings and appeal pathways to school boards.","The Senate Education Committee advanced Senate Bill 97 after clarifying how the proposed intra‑district transfer requirements interact with existing state law on best‑interest and manifest educational‑hardship reassignments.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6659224,"Committee splits on oversight of Children’s Scholarship Fund; some senators want state control",407,6506000,6913000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a&start=6506&end=6913","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a/thumbnail_6506000.jpg","/articles/6659224/New-Hampshire/Committee-splits-on-oversight-of-Childrens-Scholarship-Fund-some-senators-want-state-control","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6659224-e8ca2f9f107645989379e7ce26019d34/orig.mp4?Expires=1775185310&Signature=bRwwJdd2z3ocLQduF0DxCncLzKzqGjYgt32XcebhH58QYaDWMdbsz6og0MUaTn~JPEXwgh9-XCGjbg2sZr2l5UAQ4qZawJ1Y60ck9QYoZAOPx6-F3IWu7MLgZ~QL1o9fD7NWh2Wcr1S0uiy25t67BrRLqZ-1qZqYcTN91r49zfW0aiEeX5xxCMnzWvBxd3-7lA0Vvv9lWeip7k0Vq4NQqsYX7RqVj~pHKEHKZ3fRp3eLR0H26YKnIgpDgJtiD9IZ9hqouQxEvq93yl8xumTRNCDWcApQrks3vV7T80tDAzTO5EShxeY4KsdqBn~eRcHKinNbN-3uZ6pZh1jq1QA0hA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Education Committee spent significant time debating oversight and administration of the Children’s Scholarship Fund and the Education Tax Credit program after members raised concerns about administrative fees, financial transparency and who benefits from interest on deposited funds.

One senator urged moving administration of the scholarship program into the Department of Education to improve state oversight and ensure public accountability for funds that originate in the education trust. Committee members discussed whether the charitable nonprofit currently administering parts of the program has repeatedly resisted providing detailed financial documentation; members said the Legislative Budget Assistant has been involved but that more transparency is needed.

Specific financial concerns raised in the hearing included the program's reported administrative fee (previously described by the nonprofit's representatives as approximately 8% in recent years, compared with an initial 10% fee), and the practice of third‑party vendors holding account balances that may earn interest. One senator said money sitting in a \"class wallet\" program can earn interest that accrues to private vendors rather than to the state; committee members asked why interest on public funds was not retained by the state. Members noted the nonprofit has undertaken digital and print outreach that increases program participation and therefore administrative revenues.

The bill under discussion would have required the Department of Education to administer the program. Supporters argued a state agency should manage the program because it affects the state education trust fund and because in‑house administration would allow state oversight of administrative costs and program growth. Opponents said the Department of Education had previously declined to operate the program and that further conversations with DOE leadership are needed before a transition. Several senators said they will pursue enhanced oversight through the Legislative Budget Assistant and the oversight commission already established by statute.

At the conclusion of debate the committee recorded a motion consistent with Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) on the administration change (transcript shows a recorded committee vote of 3‑2 in favor of ITL). Committee members asked staff to continue oversight work, pursue documentation from the nonprofit administrator and to consider whether a state‑run model is feasible with the Department of Education.","The Senate Education Committee debated whether the Children’s Scholarship Fund and Education Tax Credit program should be moved from a nonprofit administrator to the Department of Education amid concerns over administrative fees, interest on held funds and documentation.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":93,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6659215,"Votes at a glance: key Senate Education Committee actions",4828,2085000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a&start=2085&end=6913","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a/thumbnail_2085000.jpg","/articles/6659215/New-Hampshire/Votes-at-a-glance-key-Senate-Education-Committee-actions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6659215-8b74fb730e6bd48eaf3feafe3d84e40a/orig.mp4?Expires=1775185310&Signature=Opmo6FG9-DR1JzOshB5EniXQ-0-OcbJWpe7PDd3VHuaMKDKVtxqK0exNbGFWRc4lpWMWkdy8XPLpsfpHCyPLAq-P1n8B2JAUZq5piSd50bnQV~w573w97pwKMUnILFE4qyD~Qph~68uzda7jYvlCD8XKCCosF33nm4sC-Qo9pvgv7MjyYaIaDdkvzCrfPqqf9Y~lvA0jIWtdQm2iJzNQPXWE9-gujPLXxilaRsXY2YZ3PhQY6uHpxNhxfGQG3kUz9NMUtswdriXZRpznEVVyaTskgh4mxTPscSgjmXiNKXjOtyy0LTq0vMiS3FAG3qjU6kcx1cwl7pqSzBhGmq82xg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Education Committee took formal action or recorded recommendations on a number of bills during the executive session. The items below summarize the committee's recorded dispositions as reflected in the meeting transcript. If the transcript did not provide a precise roll call number, the tally is marked \"not specified.\" All votes took place in executive session.

- SB 208: Motion to re‑refer for further work and stakeholder engagement. Recorded roll call in transcript: 3‑2 in favor of re‑refer.

- SB 33: Committee discussed the same amendment as SB 208 and moved to re‑refer the bill for further work; transcript indicates the bill was placed on consent for re‑refer and staff were asked to prepare combined language for both bills. Specific roll‑call numbers for final disposition not specified in transcript.

- SB 97 (interdistrict transfers): Committee adopted an amendment requiring school boards to adopt policies addressing capacity and recorded an Ought to Pass as amended; transcript records the committee vote as 3‑2 in favor of OTP on the amended bill.

- SB 101 (referred): Committee voted to re‑refer SB 101 to the next committee (transcript places it on consent); specific roll‑call numbers not specified.

- SB 203 (Children's Scholarship Fund / administration): Committee debated moving administration to the Department of Education and recorded a motion consistent with recommending ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate); transcript records the committee vote as 3‑2 in favor of ITL.

- SB 204 (school meal opt‑in): Committee voted Ought to Pass (transcript records unanimous consent 5‑0 on the amended bill).

- SB 205 (school meal reimbursement): Committee recorded an ITL recommendation in committee (transcript shows 3‑2 in favor of ITL).

- SB 206 (student device policies): Committee adopted amendment 0653s and recommended Ought to Pass as amended by unanimous consent (5‑0 recorded in transcript).

- SB 207 (education reform administration): Committee recorded an ITL recommendation (transcript shows committee vote 3‑2 in favor of ITL).

Other smaller items were put on consent and several bills were \"taken out\" of committee by members who volunteered to carry them forward; the transcript records a number of unanimous‑consent placements on consent calendars. For items where the transcript does not supply a full roll call, staff should consult the official committee minutes or clerk's record for precise vote tallies.

Formal actions recorded in the transcript include motions to re‑refer, motions to recommend Ought to Pass (OTP) as amended, and motions to recommend Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL). Several items were placed on consent or taken out for further work by sponsoring senators.","The committee recorded formal dispositions on several bills during its executive session. Where transcript records a roll call or unanimous consent, the outcome and any available tallies are listed; where the transcript does not provide a precise roll call, tallies are marked \"not specified.\"",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6659220,"Senate panel approves bill letting districts set limits on student cell‑phone use with narrow exceptions",856,5386000,6242000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a&start=5386&end=6242","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2472392-1844d6c0779967ab74007001d4b6260a/thumbnail_5386000.jpg","/articles/6659220/New-Hampshire/Senate-panel-approves-bill-letting-districts-set-limits-on-student-cellphone-use-with-narrow-exceptions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6659220-29346095a8f8b8722f0a69ed40ab89bd/orig.mp4?Expires=1775185310&Signature=lV51FZmBYCTsyDNRzOA9DLS16MIn-ZuB8oMqxzXibJdSd5j57fnH6f--VVbl~LZrGlF1yJO9zdDoiDkL~tKpUhMTdgnwozf6QmajgSbk~cG71yLK-bUYKnCISlp6n0AX2Tude4tsAHpHBbl-L9tlo7YELg3RF0Snn1gp5gBPWsjHZKUqqsYVwHiRZDA1pe8fB8WJwbht3Xfkk5dwq4lETFW5o~tLEcdV0sPPiR~lUgQnnNut3XrieHsW7p---h0aiW1Dn2lLfoSQyaACuXMDCerpAl3~ojDuBBscgPV3j2dWhKvkmH6uteU3H0T1LUPjuw~IHVkVpzx1Lkx3r7Oegw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Education Committee advanced a bill that would require school districts to adopt policies limiting the use of personal devices by students during the school day while preserving narrowly defined exceptions.

Under the committee‑amended language, local school district policies may limit or prohibit student use of personal devices during instructional time. The amendment preserved specific exemptions for students who require devices as part of an individualized education program (IEP) or under Section 504 accommodations, and for emergent multilingual students who may rely on device‑based translation and learning supports.

Committee debate focused on who should be included in the local policymaking process. One senator proposed including \"education associations\" (unions) among stakeholders; another argued that teacher input is important but that unions should not be written into law as policy makers. After discussion the committee adopted an amendment (transcript identifies amendment file 0653s) that retains teacher involvement while allowing districts to craft rules suited to local needs and resources.

Supporters emphasized practical classroom considerations: some teachers use phone‑based programs such as Kahoot for instruction and some districts lack laptop ratios that would otherwise permit digital learning without personal devices. The adopted language allows districts to make local decisions—placing the details of prohibitions and exemptions in district policy rather than imposing a statewide ban.

The committee voted Ought to Pass with the adopted amendment by unanimous consent on the floor (recorded in transcript as 5‑0 on the amended bill). Members said the approach balances classroom management, equity, and student‑support needs.","The committee approved a bill that leaves cell‑phone policy to local school districts while carving out exceptions for students with disabilities and emergent multilingual learners; senators debated whether teachers' unions should be mentioned in the bill's stakeholder list and agreed on language that keeps policymaking local.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee delays bills on school materials after debate over "contemporary local community standards"

Committee advances bill on intra‑district transfers after debate over private‑school transfers and manifest‑hardship rules

Committee splits on oversight of Children’s Scholarship Fund; some senators want state control

Votes at a glance: key Senate Education Committee actions

Senate panel approves bill letting districts set limits on student cell‑phone use with narrow exceptions