Katherine Moretti

Chairman and members of the committee, Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I am writing to express my opposition to HB 1093, a bill that threatens the stability of traditional public school funding and overrides the essential land-use authority of our local communities. While proponents frame this bill as a matter of "equity," it is, in reality, an attempt to bypass the fiscal and regulatory safeguards that protect New Hampshire taxpayers. I urge you to vote Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) for the following reasons: 1. Diversion of Critically Limited State Building Aid New Hampshire’s school building aid is currently capped at $50 million annually. Our traditional public schools already face a massive backlog of hundreds of millions of dollars in deferred maintenance and essential safety upgrades. By expanding eligibility for this capped fund to 30+ charter schools "on the same basis" as traditional districts, this bill will inevitably push existing community schools further down the waiting list, leaving local property taxpayers to foot the bill for urgent repairs. 2. Erosion of Local Control and Land Use Authority HB 1093 seeks to grant charter schools "governmental land use exemptions". This provision would allow charter schools—often operated by private boards rather than elected local officials—to bypass municipal zoning ordinances and neighborhood planning. Our cities and towns have a fundamental right to manage their own development, traffic safety, and community character. Stripping this authority from local zoning boards for the benefit of a single class of entity is a direct assault on the principle of local control. 3. Lack of Public Accountability Traditional school districts are governed by elected boards and must have their budgets approved by local voters. In contrast, charter schools are not subject to the same level of direct voter oversight regarding their capital expenditures. Awarding state-funded construction grants—calculated and disbursed in the same manner as traditional districts—without the accompanying democratic accountability is a misuse of public funds. 4. Prioritizing Constitutional Obligations The New Hampshire Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled in the ConVal and Rand cases that the state is currently failing its constitutional duty to adequately fund public education. It is fiscally irresponsible to expand infrastructure obligations to a new category of buildings before the state has met its core obligation to fully fund the basic education of students in our existing neighborhood schools. HB 1093 puts "the cart before the horse" by expanding facility funding before fixing the state's fundamental adequacy formula. It risks further draining the resources of our community schools while stripping municipalities of their right to regulate land use. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the committee to recommend ITL on HB 1093. As a special education teacher in a public school, as a parent, as a taxpayer, as a citizen concerned with the well-being and education of all children in my community, we have a responsibility to those in the public school system. Already the way charter schools are funded in NH negatively impacts public schools. Don’t let this further harm them and our children, teachers, and our communities in the process. Sincerely, Katherine Moretti Rochester, NH