Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Partisan School Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends against allowing partisan school-district elections; sponsors cite turnout goals
Summary
The Senate committee voted to recommend 'inexpedient to legislate' on House Bill 356, which would have allowed school districts to hold partisan elections. Sponsors argued labels could boost turnout; school boards and municipal associations warned about added partisanship and closed-door caucusing.
The Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs Committee voted in executive session to recommend “inexpedient to legislate” on House Bill 356, which would have allowed school districts to hold partisan elections.
An unnamed sponsor introduced the bill to permit partisan labels on school district ballots. The sponsor argued that party labels can increase voter turnout in low‑participation local elections, and that partisan organization could encourage candidate recruitment and caucusing that energize voters.
Representative Ross Barry, chair of the House Election Law Committee, described underlying concerns about low turnout — sometimes 10 to 25 percent — in local school elections and said proponents believe party labels offer familiar cues that could increase participation. “When you take that off the ballot, you remove a critical piece of information for voters,” he said, arguing the change could give voters more information about candidates.
Witnesses opposing the bill included Barrett Christina, executive director of the New Hampshire School Boards Association, and Brody Deshaies of the New Hampshire Municipal Association. Barrett Christina said the association would oppose the bill; she flagged a specific provision that would allow members of a political party on a local school board to caucus, which she said risks decisions being made “behind closed doors, with, outside of the public view.” She also noted that adding a letter next to a candidate’s name may overstate uniformity within parties and risk reducing transparency. Brody Deshaies warned that voters themselves should determine town meeting rules and moderators' procedures, and that institutional rules should not be altered by statute to treat petitioned articles differently.
After hearing testimony, the committee approved a motion recommending the bill be declared “inexpedient to legislate.” The committee report will reflect that recommendation and move to the Senate calendar.
Public comment on the bill was heavily weighted against the change in the online record: one online comment supported the bill while 17 opposed it, according to the committee's hearing record.
The committee’s recommendation means the bill is unlikely to proceed this session unless further action overrides the committee report.
