Dear Chris:

Thank you for your e-mail of 12/14 and please accept my apologies for the delay in getting back to you.

I’m a little torn as to the best approach with the 406 amendment, leaving the amendment as it is to make it as likely as possible that the amendment fails or trying to fix the amendment and make sure that if it does pass then it is more technically pleasing to the home school community. Always a tough call on these matters.

Let me first give some short responses to the issues you raised:

1. Notification by the Commissioner. Although the current RSA (193-A:5 I) does say that the notification by the parent may be to either the commissioner, the local supt., or principal, that same paragraph also clearly states that it is the commissioner who acknowledges the notification. (I believe the Dept. of Ed. Rules allow the commissioner to delegate that authority downward, which is clearly what happens now). So I would contend that anyone who has received a prior acknowledgement from either the commissioner, a local superintendent, or a principal has received acknowledgement from the commissioner. However, it may not hurt to clean that up and not rely on the department’s rules to implement what we want to do.

2. “Permitted” – I understand what you’re saying here, although the only thing line 24 does is clarify that the “acknowledgement” being referred to is the same as on line 17 (which is existing law), which also calls it acknowledgement of permission. My contention would be that this adds no new burden, but just keeps the pesky word “permission” around a little longer. However, as above, I would have no objection to trying to get some alternative wording.

3. Definition – Since curriculum submission was not being totally eliminated by the amendment, then I think the definition change wasn’t included. As above, I would not oppose removing it.

So back to the quandary of what to do about this….

If you’d like, please submit me some proposed new language that addresses your concerns without undoing the intent of the amendment. As we get further along here, I’ll have a better idea of how are chances will be of passing the House bill without any amendments. If that looks like it will work, then I won’t need what you send me. However if we’re in trouble, it would be good to have it handy. (And I wouldn’t let too many people know you’re working on improving the amendment… if that word leaks out then it hurts the chances of passing the House version of 406).

So those are my thoughts… please feel free to follow up with me on this. (Oh, by the way, the floor action on HB 406 has been postponed until Jan. 18 – I asked for a delay to buy you folks some time to rally the troops).

PB

Senator Peter Bragdon
NH State Senate, District 11
271-6933 (o)
673-7135 (h)