Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs correction to interdistrict choice law as school boards warn of costs
Summary
SB 579 would clarify that School Administrative Units are included in interdistrict choice. Sponsors say it corrects drafting errors; school boards warn the provision could create unanticipated tuition costs and equity issues if interpreted as open enrollment within SAUs.
Senators reviewed SB 579 on Feb. 25 as prime sponsor Senator Victoria Sullivan described the bill as a technical correction intended to include School Administrative Units (SAUs) in last year’s interdistrict school choice statute.
Sullivan said the earlier law did not clearly allow families who reside within an SAU to use interdistrict choice and that the bill would restore the original intent so families within the same SAU can access choice options. "The intention of the bill was to include SAUs in that choice for families," she said.
School board representatives expressed concern that, if implemented as open enrollment within an SAU, the change could have significant fiscal and capacity impacts. Barry Christina, executive director of the New Hampshire School Boards Association, told the committee that intra‑district transfers already function differently because open enrollment can create tuition obligations resident districts did not budget for. He pointed to RSA 193:3 and explained reassignment and tuition provisions already require superintendents to jointly establish tuition rates for reassigned students.
Key questions raised by committee members included who would pay tuition when students move within an SAU, how capacity would be defined and enforced, and whether specialized programs might be diluted if larger schools accept students from smaller districts. Christina recommended clarifying the bill’s intent — whether it is an expansion of open enrollment or simply a correction to allow SAU participation under existing reassignment rules.
Next steps: the hearing concluded with testimony and questions; no vote was recorded. The bill remains in committee pending any drafting clarifications.
