A local grass roots disability advocate group is speaking out against a proposed bill that would limit state education mandates, saying that it would be harmful to protections for students with disabilities.
The bill has been recommended to be inexpedient to legislate in committee, and is expected to be discussed in public hearings this week. The bill is a partisan bill sponsored by 11 Republicans, including Sen. Kevin Avard (R-Nashua), who represents District 12, which includes Greenville, Mason, New Ipswich, Rindge, Hollis, Brookline and Wards 1, 2, and 5 in Nashua.
The bill, HB 620, has two major functions. First, it prohibits the state board of education from proposing rules that require a school district to comply with a federally mandated curriculum, method of instruction, or statewide assessment program which is not fully paid by state or federal funds or authorized by statute. Secondly, it says that the state board shall not propose a rule that exceeds state or federal minimum requirements unless the rule is authorized by statute.
It is the second part that gave most pause to members of Advocates Building Lasting Equality, or ABLE NH, the most pause, said Lisa Beaudoin of Temple, a member of the group.
“For New Hampshire students with disabilities, state mandates provide clarifications where [The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act] is silent,” said Beaudoin. “IDEA is designed to give states a foundation. It’s meant to be a floor, not a ceiling. It allows states to tailor as they see fit.”
Proponents of the bill argue that unfunded mandates are placing undue burden on local school districts.
“That’s beyond throwing out the baby with the bathwater,” said Beaudoin, who was repeating a sentiment she also voiced when members of ABLE traveled to Concord to speak against the bill recently. “That’s throwing the baby out because the refrigerator is broken.”
There are several points where the state’s mandates are stricter than the federal standards — or just more specific. For example, New Hampshire evaluation timeline is 45 days, where the federal is 60. New Hampshire begins transition services planning — experiences, supports, and instruction other than academic courses — at age 14, where the federal requires 16. New Hampshire sets concrete deadlines for schools to respond to incidents or requests for an Individual Education Plan (IEP) team meeting, where the federal law uses terms like “enough notice” and “reasonable time.”
“If HB 620 passes, all of the work that has been done that has led to the New Hampshire rules will be lost,” said Beaudoin. “New Hampshire has some of the highest graduation rates, post secondary attendance and employment for students with disabilities. That demonstrates that our clarifications and protections beyond IDEA are working.”
Ashley Saari can be reached at 924-7172 ext. 244 or asaari@ledgertranscript.com. She’s on Twitter @AshleySaariMLT.