Committee Summary for House Education Funding (10/28/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB295 01:08:07.359 - 9:36:53 AM	Executive Session	making school building aid program funds nonlapsing.	Cahill, Michael(D)[CT]2024
HB366 01:13:06.560 - 9:41:52 AM	Executive Session	relative to school building aid for eligible projects.	Cahill, Michael(D)[CT]2024
Unclear 01:23:22.560 - 9:52:08 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
HB742 01:49:31.440 - 10:18:17 AM	General Working Session	requiring catastrophic special education state aid funding to be drawn from the education trust fund.	Luneau, David(D)[CT]2024
HB443 02:39:05.600 - 11:07:51 AM	General Working Session	relative to terms of appointed members on the higher education commission.	Cordelli, Glenn(R)[A-]2024
HB510 02:42:41.439 - 11:11:27 AM	General Working Session	relative to establishing certain due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty members facing disciplinary actions by state institutions of higher learning.	Lynn, Bob(R)[A]2024

HB295: Representative McGuire Oppose01:08:07.359 - 9:36:53 AM; Representative McGuire moved to find HB 295 inexpedient to legislate. He argued that the school building aid program has not been successful, creating winners and losers, and is expensive to administer. He believes it needs replacement. Additionally, he opposes non-lapsing funds as they hamstring future legislatures from setting their own priorities each biennium.
HB295: Representative Peoples Oppose01:08:07.359 - 9:36:53 AM; Representative Peoples seconded the motion and concurred with Representative McGuire, stating that non-lapsing funds are not always the best way.
HB295: Representative Fellows Support01:09:24.880 - 9:38:10 AM; Representative Fellows opposed the motion, arguing that the bill involves a small amount of money. He noted that the current distribution may not work well due to insufficient funding overall. Making leftover funds non-lapsing would allow funding for an extra project every year or two.
HB295: Representative Damon Support01:10:35.120 - 9:39:21 AM; Representative Damon supported the bill, disagreeing that the program is unsuccessful. Districts that benefit from it value it, and while improvements are needed, more funds are essential for effectiveness. Non-lapsing leftover funds ensures the allocated money stays for building aid.
HB295: Representative McGuire (further) Oppose01:11:51.760 - 9:40:37 AM; Representative McGuire reiterated that most districts receive no funds and would not consider the program successful.
HB295: Representative Damon (further) Support01:11:51.760 - 9:40:37 AM; Representative Damon acknowledged unfunded districts are unhappy due to insufficient appropriations but emphasized the need for more resources.
HB366: Representative Peoples Oppose01:13:06.560 - 9:41:52 AM; Representative Peoples moved to find HB 366 inexpedient to legislate. He argued against retroactively paying for past projects, as it is unfair to those waiting in line. The focus should be forward-looking, not fixing past issues where projects proceeded without program approval.
HB366: Representative McGuire Oppose01:13:06.560 - 9:41:52 AM; Representative McGuire seconded the motion.
HB366: Representative Fellows Support01:14:17.679 - 9:43:03 AM; Representative Fellows opposed the motion, noting the proposed increase from $50 million to $60 million is small and building aid is underfunded overall.
HB366: Representative Damon Support01:14:17.679 - 9:43:03 AM; Representative Damon echoed that the increase is token compared to needs. The $5 million retroactive aid is small; many districts face fiscal distress from projects done during the building aid moratorium, with long-term consequences. It is disrespectful not to address their needs.
HB366: Chairman Lad Oppose01:15:37.760 - 9:44:23 AM; Chairman Lad opposed retroactive aid, noting prior warnings that unapproved projects would not be reimbursed. Districts proceeded knowingly, and now face shortages, but appropriations should address current issues forward.
HB366: Representative Pelos Support01:16:43.040 - 9:45:29 AM; Representative Pelos explained historical context: 15 years ago, the building aid formula differed, allowing choices without caps, leading to state bonds. Low interest rates spurred projects simultaneously. The situation is the legislature's fault for not anticipating, not the districts'.
HB366: Representative Damon (further) Support01:17:58.400 - 9:46:44 AM; Representative Damon noted districts did projects in crisis, like Claremont losing accreditation, requiring essential renovations. Providing partial funding for moratorium-era projects makes sense.
Unclear: Chairman Lad Information Only01:23:22.560 - 9:52:08 AM; Chairman Lad discussed the special education commission's progress, issuing a report on November 1. They have heard from experts, reviewed materials, and plan to address charter school and EFA special education. Need more data from DOE on IEPs, overidentification (IEP numbers stable or rising despite declining population), costing formulas, and district variations. Recent changes to catastrophic aid set proration at 80% with general fund backfill if needed, without altering thresholds. Lacks data to adjust thresholds. With commission ongoing, duplicating efforts in subcommittee is inefficient; suggests waiting for commission or recommending interim study.
Unclear: Representative Damon Information Only01:25:38.880 - 9:54:24 AM; Representative Damon agreed on need for more data but expressed concern about inaction on special ed funding while waiting for commission. Noted bills addressing formula changes are coming in 2026 LSRs.
Unclear: Chairman Lad (further) Information Only01:27:37.600 - 9:56:23 AM; Chairman Lad suggested recommending interim study to avoid duplication with commission.
HB742: Chairman Lad Information Only01:49:31.440 - 10:18:17 AM; Chairman Lad introduces the discussion on HB742, explaining it seeks to ensure funding for catastrophic special education aid comes from the education trust fund if needed to reach 80% proration, similar to last year's changes. He notes the bill is retained, with a subcommittee recommendation pending, and highlights the concurrent commission studying special education costing, which has specific duties and involves experts. He discusses the $16 million shortfall last year, $68 million in differentiated aid for FY26, total special ed costs at $977 million annually with 85% borne by local districts, skyrocketing costs, increased IEPs (25% rise in 4 years), growth in certain categories, lack of data on students below 3.5 times average cost, and potential Medicaid opportunities. He recommends relying on the commission rather than acting on the bill now, as it doesn't resolve core issues, and opens for discussion.
HB742: Representative Papovich Oppose01:55:33.119 - 10:24:19 AM; Representative Papovich notes the 25% increase in special education students over the last four years, with no clear reasons identified despite inquiries. He argues HB742 aims to remove the cap on proration, but good parts like limiting proration and guaranteeing reimbursements are already law via the budget. He sees no need to advance the bill.
HB742: Chairman Lad (response) Information Only01:57:52.400 - 10:26:38 AM; Chairman Lad responds that possible reasons for the increase include better identification and intervention in society, but deeper research is needed to determine if it's over-identification, better identification, or both. He emphasizes the commission's role in providing answers through expert research.
HB742: Representative Bricky Support01:57:52.400 - 10:26:38 AM; Representative Bricky agrees more data on special ed is needed but clarifies HB742 focuses on funding source, not formula or amount. She argues the aid should come from the education trust fund to avoid competition with other programs or the general fund. She looks forward to commission answers but notes delaying action puts it off for years; the bill is about securing the money source now.
HB742: Representative Papovich (further) Oppose01:59:06.880 - 10:27:52 AM; Representative Papovich states the budget already sources the money from the trust fund and limits proration. The bill's remaining parts remove proration entirely, which isn't in the budget, but he believes the policy won't change and passing it won't alter the annual budget process meaningfully.
HB742: Representative Damon Support02:00:18.480 - 10:29:04 AM; Representative Damon notes last year's bill caps proration at 80% for predictability, but statute requires state payment at 3.5 times average pupil cost, making proration a violation for these high-need students. She suggests reasons for increased identification include addiction, food insecurity affecting cognition, and past under-identification due to lack of expertise. She clarifies the budget uses the trust fund for this biennium but not statutorily, and passing HB742 would codify it, though budgets could override. She confirms HB2 appropriates from the trust fund.
HB742: Chairman Lad (caucus and further) Information Only02:02:44.560 - 10:31:30 AM; Chairman Lad calls a one-minute caucus to decide between interim study or ITL, citing the ongoing commission as more thorough. He explains the commission's reports (initial November 1, final next year) for future legislation, notes LSRs modeled after Arkansas, and that proration is common in other states due to costs. He reiterates changing proration won't address growing costs with 85% local burden, and urges action via the commission.
HB742: Representative Peoples Information Only02:10:43.840 - 10:39:29 AM; Representative Peoples moves for interim study on HB742 to keep it alive as a vehicle for future commission findings.
HB742: Representative Papovich (on motion) Support02:10:43.840 - 10:39:29 AM; Representative Papovich seconds the motion and agrees to interim study to maintain the bill for ongoing work.
HB742: Representative Daily Oppose02:11:52.159 - 10:40:38 AM; Representative Daily appreciates interim study over ITL but finds it inadequate, as second-year studies often stall. She stresses addressing special ed funding needs critically for districts; while not perfect, the bill does good things, and she will vote against interim study.
HB742: Chairman Lad (vote outcome) Information Only02:12:49.440 - 10:41:35 AM; Chairman Lad announces the motion for interim study passes 3-2, recommending it to the full committee on November 12th or 13th, concluding subcommittee work on HB742.
HB443: Chairman Lad Oppose02:39:05.600 - 11:07:51 AM; Chairman Lad recommends ITL for HB443, as the department that proposed it states the appointment term issues have been resolved, and the bill is no longer needed. He explains the bill sets five-year terms until a successor is appointed, allowing replacement if members no longer represent their groups.
HB443: Representative Burton Oppose02:40:20.240 - 11:09:06 AM; Representative Burton moves for ITL, noting the sponsor never explained why the bill is needed despite testimony, and they have enough legislation addressing real problems.
HB443: Representative Papovich Oppose02:40:20.240 - 11:09:06 AM; Representative Papovich seconds the motion for ITL.
HB443: Representative Bricky Oppose02:41:24.720 - 11:10:10 AM; Representative Bricky votes yes on ITL.
HB443: Representative Brown Oppose02:41:24.720 - 11:10:10 AM; Representative Brown votes yes on ITL.
HB443: Chairman Lad (outcome) Information Only02:41:24.720 - 11:10:10 AM; Chairman Lad announces the ITL motion passes 5-0, recommending to the full committee on November 12th at 1:00 PM.
HB510: Chairman Lad Information Only02:42:41.439 - 11:11:27 AM; Chairman Lad discusses HB510, noting a communication from university representatives (Katherine Provenue and Lauren Banker) highlighting issues, such as the bill allowing direct cross-examination of witnesses, including victims in sexual assault cases, which could chill reporting. He mentions prior discussions on definitions aligning with statute and an amendment needed. He seeks clarification on Title IX, advisor roles (university-appointed or selected by the accused?), and opens for discussion on readiness to act or need more info.
HB510: Representative Burton Oppose02:45:14.800 - 11:14:00 AM; Representative Burton states the sponsor never explained the need for the bill despite multiple hearings and direct questions, arguing they should focus on legislation addressing actual problems.
HB510: Representative Bricky Oppose02:46:42.479 - 11:15:28 AM; Representative Bricky recalls testimony indicating due process works on campuses without complaints, suggesting the bill seeks a problem that doesn't exist.
HB510: Representative Papovich Support02:47:32.960 - 11:16:18 AM; As co-sponsor, Representative Papovich expresses concerns about the current process for serious accusations, emphasizing the need for cross-examination of witnesses by defendants or victims. He criticizes the current setup where an administrator conducts cross-examination, potentially representing both sides, which undermines validity and fair determinations.
HB510: Representative (unidentified) Information Only02:49:43.920 - 11:18:29 AM; The representative proposes adding language to the bill on page two, line 19, item E, to ensure the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses in matters of sex-based discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, or other provisions under Title IX, the Violence Against Women Act, and institutional policy, specifying that cross-examination must be done by an advisor.
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only02:51:01.200 - 11:19:47 AM; Representative Papovich reacts to the proposed language, suggesting it should extend to other serious accusations and emphasizes that one advisor cannot effectively represent two opposing parties.
HB510: Representative Damon Information Only02:52:12.399 - 11:20:58 AM; Representative Damon clarifies that the bill language on page two, lines 2 through 4, entitles the accused student, organization, or faculty member to an advisor, and per item H, the advisor cannot serve in any other role or represent both parties. He requests a copy of the proposed language for review.
HB510: Representative (unidentified, likely chair) Information Only02:53:30.880 - 11:22:16 AM; The chair notes that legislative services reviewed the proposed language as a start but indicated more work is needed. He expresses concern about doing it correctly to avoid litigation, referencing past work with the Department of Education on Dartmouth issues. He stresses that advisors should represent either the complainant or respondent, not both, and not be appointed by the university to question both sides. He advocates for compliance with Title IX and states no action will be taken today as questions need answers.
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only02:54:53.200 - 11:23:39 AM; Representative Papovich clarifies that questions to Ms. Proventure were about the current system, not the bill's proposals, to understand the existing processes.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only02:56:01.439 - 11:24:47 AM; Drawing from experience as a former dean and college president at UNH and member of Durham Town Council, Representative Burton explains that serious crimes in Durham, like demonstrations or felonious sexual assaults, are handled by civil authorities, such as Stratford County police and courts, not university proceedings.
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only02:57:07.120 - 11:25:53 AM; Representative Papovich asks if there are situations where someone accused of sexual assault on campus receives administrative punishment but is not referred for criminal prosecution, questioning how their rights are protected in such cases without court involvement.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only02:58:06.080 - 11:26:52 AM; Representative Burton explains that universities must enforce conduct rules, which may lead to suspension regardless of civil prosecution. He shares a personal anecdote about being threatened with suspension and discusses managing 12,000 young students in Durham, emphasizing the need for university boards to assess conduct for safety, sometimes resulting in temporary or permanent separation. He notes past efforts to accommodate student rights and reflects on differing on-campus and off-campus standards.
HB510: Representative (unidentified) Information Only02:59:16.479 - 11:28:02 AM; The representative states they are not ready to move forward with the bill until questions about advisors, confidentiality of complainant background information, and advisor definitions are answered, urging all concerns be put on the table for resolution.
HB510: Chair Information Only03:01:25.520 - 11:30:11 AM; The chair discusses an amendment defining 'student,' 'student organization,' and 'faculty' to align with existing statute (from HB1305), presenting it as a technical correction to synchronize definitions across chapters. He notes the bill's original definitions differed and seeks agreement on adopting these statutory ones if the bill moves forward.
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only03:01:25.520 - 11:30:11 AM; Representative Papovich requests a copy of the amendment language to review before voting, noting prior discussion was on intent, not specific language.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only03:02:28.080 - 11:31:14 AM; Representative Burton comments that in 11 years on Durham Town Council, UNH student body presidents have never complained about due process, including many women.
HB510: Representative Bricky Information Only03:03:32.319 - 11:32:18 AM; Representative Bricky notes the committee must complete work by November 21st for reports, suggesting a need to resolve by the next meeting on the 12th or 13th.
HB510: Committee members (various) Information Only03:04:21.279 - 11:33:07 AM; The committee discusses scheduling challenges, confirming a meeting on the afternoon of the 13th, with some members unavailable on the 12th due to other commitments in Laconia and Plymouth.
HB510: Representative Papovich Support03:07:46.960 - 11:36:32 AM; Representative Papovich moves to recommend adoption of amendment 2025-3009h for HB510, suggesting it be handled now if agreed, regardless of overall bill support.
HB510: Representative Bricky Support03:08:56.640 - 11:37:42 AM; Representative Bricky seconds the motion to adopt amendment 2025-3009h.
HB510: Katherine Fincher, University System Information Only03:10:34.720 - 11:39:20 AM; Katherine Fincher explains UNH policy: parties may choose an advisor, or the Title IX coordinator appoints one for cross-examination; the same advisor does not serve both sides. She lacks information on confidentiality and the pool of eligible advisors (e.g., university employees).
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only03:13:56.800 - 11:42:42 AM; Announces conclusion of work on HB510 and moves to HB212, the civics bill. Suggests postponing tweaks to HB212 until the next meeting on November 10, noting it will be mostly an executive session to save time due to a 1 p.m. commitment.
HB510: Unidentified Representative Information Only03:14:52.720 - 11:43:38 AM; Agrees to discuss HB510 further, questioning the use of the immigration citizenship test as a qualifier for civics knowledge. Raises concerns about costs associated with tracking and administering the program, despite the sponsor's claims. Wonders if this is the best way to ensure students grasp citizenship responsibilities, noting high school students already take the test and suggesting alternatives like a required civics course in general education to avoid additional costs.
HB510: Unidentified Representative Oppose03:17:03.279 - 11:45:49 AM; Suggests exceptions for military personnel, veterans, local government officials, and student leaders who have demonstrated civics knowledge. Proposes alternatives like a general education civics course or state-designed tests used in 14 states, which integrate into existing tuition without extra cost. Shares draft amending language for these options and notes exemptions for NH high school graduates.
HB510: Representative Bricky Information Only03:18:14.399 - 11:47:00 AM; Confirms that students who graduated from New Hampshire high schools, having taken the test, would be exempt.
HB510: Unidentified Representative Oppose03:19:07.680 - 11:47:53 AM; Expresses concern about emphasizing testing in education, referencing trends away from tests toward portfolios in other areas like homeschooling. Questions the relevance of the citizenship test to practical skills and doubts its ability to measure true knowledge, especially since it's supposedly online but still incurs costs.
HB510: Representative Burton Oppose03:19:57.760 - 11:48:43 AM; Highlights the older average age of community college students (27-28 or older) and argues the test doesn't promote active citizenship, focusing instead on historical facts like wars without addressing involvement. Shares personal anecdote about legal implications of war declarations and objects to barring older students from graduation over the test, emphasizing differences between university and community college populations.
HB510: Representative Papovich Support03:23:23.680 - 11:52:09 AM; Stresses the importance of assessing student proficiency in education, advocating for appropriate methods like standardized testing or portfolios to measure civics knowledge without eliminating assessment altogether.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only03:24:31.760 - 11:53:17 AM; Suggests integrating civics across the curriculum in various disciplines rather than a single course or test. Notes few states use the immigration test (only one via statute), and most use custom tests or courses. Emphasizes applying civics responsibilities over memorization and supports a general education course on American foundations, as discussed with a provost who welcomed it.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only03:29:25.200 - 11:58:11 AM; Advocates for co-curricular and extracurricular activities to promote civic engagement, sharing personal experiences like anti-war demonstrations and meeting Martin Luther King. Suggests these experiences teach civics better than mandated courses or tests.
HB510: Representative Ricky Information Only03:29:25.200 - 11:58:11 AM; Questions if the bill should go to interim study given the ongoing discussion and time constraints, suggesting further deliberation.
HB510: Unidentified Representative Information Only03:30:33.920 - 11:59:19 AM; Inquires about involving provosts to assess requiring a general education course on American foundations, noting it might take time but such courses already exist.
HB510: Chancellor Mueller Information Only03:31:44.800 - 12:00:30 PM; Acknowledges the bill's intent to foster free speech and civic activity. Agrees the citizenship test may not indicate success and notes campuses are revamping general education, including civics integration and multi-state collaboratives on civil discourse. Opposes legislating graduation requirements as it removes faculty control over curriculum, offering to provide information on current civic learning by November 10 or sooner.
HB510: Representative Burton Information Only03:33:16.880 - 12:02:02 PM; Asks the chancellor about accreditation standards requiring civic-minded student development.
HB510: Unidentified Representative Information Only03:34:12.319 - 12:02:58 PM; Requests follow-up information on HB510 and HB112/212 for the committee.
HB510: Representative Papovich Information Only03:34:12.319 - 12:02:58 PM; Urges faster delivery of information by next Monday to allow time for drafting and agreeing on language amendments.
HB510: Representative Brown Support03:35:28.560 - 12:04:14 PM; Notes a decline in US history and civics knowledge due to emphasis on globalization in curricula over the past 25 years, arguing a measure like this bill is needed.

Ladd, Rick(Chairman)(R)[B+]2024	Brown, Pam(Clerk)(R)	Spilsbury, Walter(V Chairman)(R)[B+]2024
McGuire, Dan(R)[A+]2024	Ames, Dick(D)[CT]2024	Burton, Wayne(D)[CT]2018
Luneau, David(D)[CT]2024	Colcombe, Riché(R)[A-]2024	Chretien, Suzanne(D)
Popovici-Muller, Daniel(R)[A+]2024	Damon, Hope(D)[CT]2024	Kofalt, Jim(R)[A+]2024
Fellows, Sallie(D)[CT]2024	Erf, Keith(R)[A]2024	Bricchi, Tracy(D)
Weinstein, Toni(D)	Peeples, Raymond(R)	Mehegan, Peter(R)