HB719

I am a teacher at a charter school that has closed multiple times this year because of frozen pipes in our portable classrooms and our heating system leaking oil. Access to unused building could give our students the space and consistency they need in their education.

I oppose this Bill as this discriminates against children/students. If a government-run school has vacant space, there is no win for anyone by removing this option. Most importantly, children lose. The important aspect of education is the child/student. Why would someone want to do something where the children lose. Seems to me that the ongoing objections about the high level of school taxes, which appear to continually increased even in the presence of lower enrollment, means the goal should be to have no vacant space in any institution of any type.

Hello, I sit on the Board of Directors of Spark Academy and I oppose this bill. First, it would repeal a law enacted for the benefit of charter schools yet there is no text provided that supports the reason for such a repeal. That lack of transparency is concerning. Second, this law would remove the opportunity for a charter school to make use of unused space already designated for school use - without any justification for same. What other use should that unused space have? Again, the lack of transparency or the reason for this bill is concerning. Third, charter schools provide an important educational alternative to the students in our communities. Removing the right of first refusal to charter schools for space already designated for school use seems mean-spirited and counter-intuitive to the best interests of children and parents who deserve the right to have educational options. The NH Constitution and the NH Supreme Court have held that education is a fundamental right. An element of that right includes the right to choose how to be educated. This bill does not propose a repeal of the funding for charter schools so why remove the right of first refusal for them to obtain the real estate they need? Finally, a reasonable inference from the absence of text is that repealing the current law would allow towns or cities (or the state; whoever owns the real estate) to lease or rent said real estate to an entity that could pay more in rent. Additional income should not outweigh the ethical principle of education. Providing a charter school with the opportunity to have the space it requires to provide children with a choice in education is a more principled reason to keep the current law intact. Thank you for your time. Respectfully submitted, Donna Daneke

I oppose HB719 to repeal the right of first refusal for charter schools in NH to access unused district school buildings. Without this policy, taxpayer-funded buildings would sit vacant while our charter schools struggle to find space, diverting critical resources away from students. Securing facilities remains one of the biggest challenges for charter schools, and we must keep every option available. Vacancy is not economical and there could be revenue models for districts to capitalize on, by making mutually beneficial leases with Charter Schools. HB719, if passed, could have a major economic impact: vacant buildings are not properly maintained and the deferred maintenance could depreciate a building past its useful life, leaving it sit until it needs to be demolished. Taxpayers pay for the building to sit vacant and then for the eventual demolition. There is a revenue generating solution, which benefits districts, communities, taxpayers, charter schools, children, and families. That solution seems reasonable, therefore, I oppose HB719.

I oppose HB719 to repeal the right of first refusal for charter schools in NH to access unused district school buildings. Without this policy, taxpayer-funded buildings would sit vacant while our charter schools struggle to find space, diverting critical resources away from students. Securing facilities remains one of the biggest challenges for charter schools, and we must keep every option available. Vacancy is not economical and there could be revenue models for districts to capitalize on, by making mutually beneficial leases with Charter Schools. HB719 could have a major economic impact: vacant buildings are not properly maintained and the deferred maintenance could depreciate a building past its useful life, leaving it sit until it needs to be demolished. Taxpayers pay for the building to sit vacant and then for the eventual demolition. There is a revenue generating solution, which benefits districts, communities, taxpayers, charter schools, children, and families. That solution seems reasonable, therefore, I oppose HB719.