Beyond the ballot: Understanding the election’s impact

For the last few months, we’ve all been caught up in the election campaigns at both the state and federal levels. But now the election is over, and we know who won and who lost. But what do the results mean and what can we expect in the coming months? Joining us on this episode of “The State We’re In,” are veteran reporter Ethan DeWitt of the New Hampshire Bulletin and Anna Brown, executive director of Citizens Count, and executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership, and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law.

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

Melanie Plenda:

First, let’s talk about the election results. As veterans of New Hampshire politics, were you surprised by the results?

Ethan DeWitt:

To be honest, not really. I think when you look at the top of the ticket results, the challenge for Kelly Ayotte was to outperform Kamala Harris. Polls were showing that Kamala Harris had an advantage, as Democrats have in this state since 2000 in the presidential race. But as we've seen from Governor Sununu, simply because the state elects a Democrat for president doesn't mean that they won't elect a Republican for governor. 

So at the top of the ticket, I was not too surprised. In terms of the legislative races. I think that they largely followed the top of the ticket in some ways, but also I think the House we've seen realigns itself to how it has looked in past cycles. None of this kind of one- or two-vote advantage, but a more sizable majority for the Republican Party.

Anna Brown:

Like Ethan, I wasn't surprised by these election results in New Hampshire. I think the last poll that I saw the day before the election was very telling. It showed that about 10% of voters who had voted for Biden in the last election cycle were planning on voting for Kelly Ayotte for governor. That's very consistent with New Hampshire's recent history and even longer history of ticket-splitting. It is also worth noting that in the Executive Council and Senate, the way the districts are drawn, it's very hard for Democrats to win in a majority of these districts. So going in, I was already sort of expecting the votes to go that way. I think the House of Representatives ultimately can be the least predictable and oftentimes, for me, the most interesting results. That's really where we really did see that Republican advantage in New Hampshire, which I think was probably driven by their anti-tax messaging that, once again, was sort of Kelly Ayotte coattails.

Melanie Plenda:

Anna, you and your organization have been surveying voters. Why do you think voters made the choices they did? 

Anna Brown:

As I mentioned in the New Hampshire state races, tax and budget issues are really what end up, I think, driving a lot of voters to the polls. Other issues — such as the abortion issue, for example —I think have played out in previous elections. But the Republican candidates in New Hampshire had a very unified message this time — that we are not looking to change New Hampshire abortion law as it currently stands. That obviously resonated with voters.

I think Joyce Craig and other Democrats were pointing out Kelly Ayotte's history with certain corporate boards and saying we should be taxing the rich and looking at the interest and dividends tax maybe. That did not ultimately succeed with voters. I think that Kelly Ayotte's message of ‘don't mess up New Hampshire’, was a very successful message. So I think that the Democrats sort of failed to rally around a clear issue that resonated with voters in the same way as the simplistic message that the Republicans really hit a home run with.

Melanie Plenda:

Several state races were also decided. Let’s talk about the Executive Council first. Anna, first, explain what the council does and then tell us your thoughts? 

Anna Brown:

The New Hampshire Executive Council is uniquely powerful in the United States. They approve governor-appointed contracts over $10,000, so the governor actually kind of needs to have the Executive Council on their side to implement their vision for state government for all of those appointments, including judicial appointments. We know that state courts, state supreme courts, in particular, are going to become increasingly important as the U.S. Supreme Court is sending issues back to the states, such as the abortion issue. So I think that the Executive Council is going to definitely be an ally to Governor Ayotte. We've had a 4-1 Republican majority, and I'm not expecting any great battles there. 

Melanie Plenda:

Next, let’s talk about the state senate. Republicans expanded their majority there. What does that mean for the next cycle?

Ethan DeWitt:

Again, this expanded from a 14/-10 Republican advantage to a 16-8 Republican advantage. That is a veto-proof majority. I'm unsure at the moment what issues there might be in which a Republican Senate would want to override a veto by a Governor-elect Ayotte. But that is the most apparent transformation of the Senate.

Other than that, I think it’s, just like with the council, going to give her a lot of padding. Especially with the House, which has traditionally leaned more libertarian, and that has caused problems for more moderate Republicans like Governor Sununu. Sununu throughout his time as governor, kind of used the Senate as sort of a backstop to some of the budgets that the House would put forward. Because the House gets to draft a budget before the Senate does, and the House drafted something that's deemed too conservative, he, would call on the Senate to kind of “fix it.” So this might be a tool for Ayotte, especially with the wide majorities now in the Senate. She may be able to use that, but it kind of depends on how the Senate is run.

Melanie Plenda:

Republicans also expanded their majority in the House of Representatives. What impact will that have?

Anna Brown:

I think that the biggest impact this will have is on a few issues that Republicans tried to get over the finish line last year and the year before  and didn't quite have the votes with that very tight Democrat-Republican split.

Probably the first one that leapt to mind, as soon as I saw the results come in, was some version of a parental bill of rights. There were many versions of those bills, but basically, think about — What do schools have to disclose to parents? What do schools have to get permission from parents, whether we're talking about student pronoun use, student names, books in the classroom, books in the library, different curriculum choices. So what exact form does that bill take? Yet to be seen, but it’s absolutely an issue that many Republicans are passionate about,

Ethan DeWitt:

I have heard from top Republicans that there is a bill that was filed ahead of the election that got a lot of attention. It would create a deportation task force in the state. The bill does not define that, because we don't have the text of the bill, but I've already heard from top Republicans who are also in leadership, who say they don't support that. So I think that's going to be an interesting wedge issue. 

The other thing I would point to with this increased majority, in addition to the parental Bill of Rights, is an expansion of Education Freedom Accounts. There was a push, including by Governor-elect Ayotte, to try to make those universal. But again, that comes against the backdrop of this budget and potentially having to tighten it. If you make that program universal, then the budget for that program could, theoretically, increase quite a lot.

I think that looking at the budget generally is going to be really interesting to see. When you looked at the budget two years ago under a very, very closely divided almost 200-200 House The majority Republicans did something I thought was pretty remarkable and surprising. They decided to cut a deal with Democrats. Despite a lot of them having come up the ranks from the libertarian side, including House Majority Leader Jason Osborne, they cut a deal with Democrats. A lot of the people on their side didn't like that. Now they've got a lot more security in numbers and they will try to forge ahead with a more conservative budget.

Melanie Plenda:

Now that these elections are over, things will be gearing up soon for the next election in New Hampshire, which is related to Town Meeting. These elections don’t get the same turnout, but they can have a big impact on voters’ lives. Ethan and Anna, explain why these matter and what you’ll be following. 

Ethan DeWitt:

Obviously this is the most local format to make your voice known when it comes to your own town's budget, so town meeting season is always important.

I think a few things will be interesting. There is a new voting law that will be in place that requires voter ID. There is also a new law that requires that there be accessible voting machines provided by the state to towns. I think that will be in place as well. I think that there will be some questions about special education funding. I've heard this week that the Department of Education sent out a letter to school districts saying that this state is facing a shortfall of special education funding and that towns will have to make up more of that budget expense, and I think that'll be interesting to watch as it pertains to school district budgets.

Anna Brown:

I was actually already going to be watching special education funding- related issues because we saw that to be a real problem in some towns and districts this past year as well, because the number of students in these programs has been increasing and some of that also carries increased staff costs. We've also seen health care costs for schools go up quite a bit. So Pembroke, for example, I know, had almost a crisis situation with their school funding at their local meetings last year.

So if you're in a tough budget year as well, there's going to be a lag before the state implements its budget changes, and those would filter down to the local level. But I wouldn't be surprised if those conversations do happen at the local level already, because all of these problems are going to be compounded going forward, and we haven’t talked about what’s going on with school-funding lawsuits in the state. That’s another big question mark.

Melanie Plenda:

That was fascinating. Thanks to veteran reporter Ethan DeWitt from the New Hampshire Bulletin and Anna Brown, executive director of Citizens Count, for sharing your thoughts.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org

Bridging the divide: Tackling America's post-election ‘perception gap’

The 2024 presidential election results are in, and it seems like Americans are more polarized than ever. For years, we’ve seemed to live in an increasingly polarized society of Democrats and Republicans, red states and blue states, liberals and conservatives. But how divided is our society? And is that perception truly the reality? On this episode of “The State We’re In,” More in Common Executive Director Jason Mangone discusses the organization’s research into the “perception gap” and its efforts to unite increasingly divided societies. 

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Rosemary Ford:

First, tell us more about More in Common, and what you do. 

Jason Mangone:

More in Common is a nonpartisan research organization that tries to reduce the harmful aspects of polarization. That means that we try to understand the forces driving us apart, see common ground and bring Americans together to tackle our shared challenges as a practical matter. That means we release dozens of studies and polls every year, and the punchline of a lot of our work is sort of in the name. We think that Americans have way more in common than we think we do.

Rosemary Ford:

Tell us about the perception gap study. How did that come about? How was it conducted? 

Jason Mangone:

To begin with, it's probably worth defining what we mean by perception gap. So a perception gap is the difference between what someone thinks their political opponent feels about an issue and what their political opponent actually feels about an issue. It’s implicit in the idea that we have more in common than we think we do. There's some sort of fundamental misunderstanding going on that we don't really get one another — particularly in the arena of politics. That's because we think politics is a really poor lens for understanding someone in general. 

We wanted to look into these ideas, which is sort of the inspiration study. We released our first perception gap study in 2019, and we've been releasing various perception gaps ever since. To give an example of how we conduct these studies, let's say that we wanted to gauge Democrats' perception gaps on a particular issue. We begin by asking thousands of Republicans whether they agree with something. So, for example, we've asked thousands of Republicans, “Do you agree that Americans have a responsibility to learn from our past and fix our mistakes?” Turns out, about 93% of Republicans agree with this statement. We then asked thousands of Democrats, “What percentage of Republicans do you think agree with that statement?” It turns out that all Democrats estimate that only about 35% of Republicans would agree with the statement. That means that, on the issue, “Do you agree that Americans have a responsibility to learn from our past and fix their mistakes?” there's a 58% perception gap — 93% of Republicans agree with that statement, but only 35% of Democrats think Republicans would agree with that.

Rosemary Ford:

What were the key findings of the study? 

Jason Mangone:

One in particular, I think, is the idea of patriotism, love of country and understanding of our history that's been cycling through our politics for the last eight or 10 years. I think there's a stereotype where we think that Republicans think that American history is perfect, that we've done no wrong, and we stereotype Democrats as classifying our entire history as sort of sinful. 

I've already highlighted an example of the Democrat perception gap here, but Republicans estimate that only 45% of Democrats agree with this statement. In other words, we think that our political opponents either love our history and our country blindly, or they want to dismiss our history completely. In truth, an overwhelming majority of Americans agree with the idea that our country has both achieved great things and also made some harmful mistakes along the way, and that both of these things are true at the same time. So all that is to say, our ideas of our sense of history and our ideas of patriotism are much more aligned than we think they are. We have a ton of perception gaps. 

In addition to the idea of patriotism, I also wanted to highlight one around immigration. It turns out that over 85% of Republicans agree that properly controlled immigration can be good for America. Democrats estimate that only around half of Republicans agree with this statement, so they underestimated by about 35%. On the same issue, around 75% of Democrats disagree with the idea that we should have open borders, but Republicans estimate that only around 40% of Democrats hold this view, meaning there's a 35% perception gap.

All that is to say, as it turns out, is that most Americans want a secure system of legalized immigration and most Americans want both order and compassion for immigrants. Obviously, that's not how we talk about it in the political arena.

Rosemary Ford:

How expected were these findings? 

Jason Mangone:

We knew that there would be gaps in people's understanding, particularly when the lens through which you're looking at those gaps is politics. We do a really, really bad job of understanding who people are and who are political opponents. So that wasn't altogether surprising. 

What was most surprising to me was some of the drivers of these gaps. Anytime that More in Common does a study, we break the American population down into seven segments that we think are much more representative about how people view themselves in the world than sheer red or blue demography. The farthest left and the farthest right are referred to as the wings.Those groups in the middle are referred to as the exhausted majority. So it goes from progressive activists, traditional liberals, passive liberals, the politically disengaged, the moderates, traditional conservatives and devoted conservatives.

The most surprising thing to me, pretty much, anytime we do a perception gap study is that if you look at the rates of perception gaps, it's almost a perfect V shape, which is to say the perception gaps are perception gaps are greatest among those people on the wings of politics, and they’re lowest among the politically disengaged, right in the middle. The surprising thing there is that the people that are the most politically disengaged have the best understanding of what their political opponents actually think about various political issues.

Rosemary Ford:

What role is social media playing in all of this? How does that influence the perception gap or influence it?

Jason Mangone:

First off, I never like to come across as completely anti-social media. I think that it's given people freedom to express ideas, which is vital and important. I also think that it's a relatively new technology, and we're figuring out how to fit it in to our day-to-day lives right now.

With that being said, when it comes to politics, most of the algorithms in social media are driven by engagement, and the most engaging content tends to be divisive. It's also true that the people who are likely to share political views on social media are progressive activists on one wing and devoted conservatives on the other. So I wouldn't say that it's entirely social media's fault. I would say that progressive activists and devoted conservatives tend to be the most active on social media. Those algorithms tend to highlight the most divisive views because they tend to be the most engaging. It's what we want to consume.

As a result, a lot of our political discourse becomes driven by people on the wings. I think the important distinction there is that it's not entirely the social media companies’ fault. A lot of it is who's actually willing to get out there and share political views on social media. It turns out that it’s the people who are most politically engaged, who frame things primarily through the lens of politics, and those people in general tend to be people on the wings.

Rosemary Ford:

Why should the average person be concerned about the perception gap? 

Jason Mangone:

I think it's really a call to have some political humility. Don't think about people as entirely political animals. One of the implicit ideas in perception gaps is that you could look at perception gaps between any two out groups — Democrats-Republicans, Yankees fans-Red Sox fans, and I'm sure that there are misunderstandings among a lot of them. The point is that when we look at things through a primarily political lens, we tend to misunderstand, because politics is a really, really bad lens for understanding a human being. I think how the average person should react to it and why they should be concerned by it is that, because politics shapes so much of our culture and so much of how we think about ourselves nowadays, it's a call that we're really misunderstanding one another.

Rosemary Ford:

In light of the election, what do you expect to see with the perception gap?

Jason Mangone:

I will caveat what I’m about to say by saying that we have a poll hitting the field where we ask a number of perception gap questions, because whatever is in the media tends to have the highest perception gaps. I would guess that the largest perception gaps are going to be around issues associated with the biggest news, and today it's the fact that former President Trump won not just the Electoral College, but the national popular vote. So I would imagine that the largest perception gaps will be around people's perspectives on Trump, not just as a political figure, but as a human being. 

Rosemary Ford:

Do you have suggestions for bridging this divide? 

Jason Mangone:

I'll start with what the worst idea is. The worst idea is to say, “We're going to get a bunch of us together and we're going to talk about politics, because we all disagree with each other.” We need to talk, that's fine, but an example is the holidays. Around my dinner table, around the holidays, there's some Trump voters and there's some Harris voters, there's some Republicans, there's some Democrats, there's some upper-middle-class folks, there's some working-class folks. We don't go to that holiday dinner saying, “We're gonna get together and talk about our political differences.” No, we get together because we're a family. We share our common values and traditions, and the food's really good, and all the other stuff might come up as a result. But the point is, we see one another in our common humanity, because the thing that got us there is much more important than sheer demography that's ultimately colored blue or red. 

So that's a really long way of saying, get involved in your community in ways that have nothing to do with politics. Join a club, join the board of your local Little League, become a volunteer firefighter — there's a million things that you can do. But the point is, get together, where people across the political spectrum might be getting together for reasons that have nothing to do with politics.

Rosemary Ford:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. 

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Survey reliability: How much do polls affect elections?

With the 2024 election behind us, the seemingly daily reports on new polls have ended for now. But what do polls really mean? How accurate are they? What impact do they have on voters and elections? University of New Hampshire Professor Andrew Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center, talks with host Melanie Plenda about just that.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Where do polls come from and how long have we been using them to analyze political races?

Dr. Andrew Smith:

Polls have been around for an awfully long time. The oldest one that we've been able to identify in the United States is in the 1824 election. They were referred to as straw polls back then, but they were started by a newspaper, the Harrisburg Pennsylvanian, and it was done to, frankly, increase the number of people who bought the newspaper at that time and to help inform readers as to what people in the Harrisburg, area thought about the 1824 election. Throughout the 1800s, we saw an expansion of these, particularly in the later half of the 1800s as the penny press really developed in the United States.

By the turn of the century, there were quite a few national straw polls and well over 100 individual local area straw polls. So it's not a new thing, but it's really important to remember that the reason that the media got into the polling business was to sell newspapers. I think that's a critical thing to remember, because the reason that sells more newspapers is that people are always interested in what is going to happen. I think it sold newspapers then, and it's kind of clickbait for the press now to run polls. 

Melanie Plenda:

That leads to my next question – what sort of an impact do they have on races and voters? 

Dr. Andrew Smith:

There's very little research that shows that polls have much of an impact one way or the other on elections. There's always a fear that a poll showing one candidate leading by a large amount will either lead the supporters of a candidate who's losing supporters to give up and stay home, or maybe cause the supporters of a candidate who's leading to say that they have already won and don't have to bother to go to the polls. But there's very, very little evidence that supports any of that.

The only real data that I've been able to identify that shows that polls had an impact was in the 1980 presidential election. What happened that year was that the exit polls were released early. This was the Carter v. Reagan election, and Jimmy Carter actually conceded defeat before the polls in California closed, and some Democratic congressmen in California asserted that they lost because many people that were going to go vote after work decided, “What’s the point? The election is already over.” So that's really the only evidence that we have. 

Melanie Plenda:

How has polling evolved in the past decades? I would imagine technology and changing social demographics have changed things.

Dr. Andrew Smith:

The polling industry is in the midst of a paradigm shift, and it's similar to what happened in the 1960s and 1970s, when polls moved from in-person surveys to telephone surveys. The technology for telephones improved, the coverage of telephones improved, so most households in the country had a telephone by the late 1960s. But it took a long time for researchers to come up with the best practices, the methodological strategies, in order to use this new technology. 

It's important to remember that the big driver of that methodological change in the 1960s and 1970s telephone surveys was the cost, because in-person surveys were an order of magnitude more expensive than telephone surveys and  harder to manage, and then organizing the data and analyzing it. So the time frame was worse. Telephones made that much shorter. 

Now, with web surveys and the development of the internet and the expansion of coverage of the internet to most households in the country or the internet plus a cell phone — we can kind of call that the quasi-internet — we changed how we can go at people because of the cost. It costs far less with an internet- or a web-based poll, because you don't have to have an interviewer. We're seeing the industry move to that, and the clients as well. The development of the internet, the development of cell phones, and the declining response rates, I think, are the biggest drivers of this change in methodology. 

So we're in this process where economics are driving us to change the way we do survey research, and we haven't developed the best practices as an industry yet to say this is how you should do it, this is the more accurate way, these are the procedures that lead to more accurate predictions in polling, and it's going to take several years before we're out of the woods with that. So I'm very cautious about it.

Melanie Plenda:

Let’s dig a little deeper. How can the average person tell a “good” from a “bad” poll?

Dr. Andrew Smith:

The human instinct is to trust the polls that show us the outcome that we prefer and say that the other one must have serious methodological flaws. But I think that's a bad way to approach it.

What I would trust is surveys more that start with a random sample — a probability-based survey. So if you see the word “probability” in the methodology section of the survey, which I would encourage everybody to read, I’d give that more weight.  If it makes no mention of probability, that probably means that there is no random sampling going on. 

The second thing that I would do is look for something called a transparency initiative stamp, or a logo on that survey, or an indication that this organization is showing their work. APOR, the  American Association of Public Opinion Research, recognizes that there are a lot of different methodologies out there and asks, “The best thing we can do is ask survey research to show us what they did. How did they draw their sample? Where did they get the sample from? How were the surveys collected? When were the surveys collected? Who's paying for the surveys?” All of those sorts of things you need to take into account.  If a survey does not have that transparency initiative seal approval, I would be less willing to accept the results of that because it shows they are less willing to show their work. 

Melanie Plenda:

So talk to us a little bit more about why a sample group and the makeup of that sample group is so important.

Dr. Andrew Smith:

Well, what we try to do in surveys is draw a sample from the population that is representative of the population. And by doing that at random, we can use the central limit theorem to say that the estimates that we get from our sample are within this range of where the actual population number would be if we could go out and interview everyone in the population. Even with a random sample, you don't necessarily have one that's completely representative of the population. In fact, it's pretty much impossible to do that, but you want to be pretty close, and the central limit theorem at least allows us to say within a range of how close we think our estimate is from the overall population. 

Melanie Plenda:

That’s fascinating. Thank you for joining us and talking about the polls.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

How to learn about local candidates for office, the people who can impact you directly

While national or statewide candidates get lots of coverage, and voters likely know their stances on the issues, local candidates are often unfamiliar to voters. But local politics directly touches our daily lives and families. Who is making policies and how do we choose them? In New Hampshire, that can be a daunting process, thanks to the large citizen legislature. However, there are tools out there to help research the candidates and decide who meets your needs and priorities. On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Anna Brown, executive director of Citizens Count, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating voters about the political process, as well as executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law, discusses these tools.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Anna, with elections on the horizon, can you tell us about some of the tools Citizens Count offers to voters?

Anna Brown:

There are 400 state representatives, which means there's roughly 900 candidates that are going to be on your ballot. So probably the tool we're best known for is our candidate profiles, where we provide background, issue positions, and so on. We offer other tools for voters as well.  If you look up your town, we can show your polling location and your clerk info. We have a section called “Prepare to Vote” under our advocacy toolkit that offers information about what to bring to the polls, registering, and absentee ballots. We also have other tutorials on what to do after the election. How do I contact an elected official? How do I advocate for my cause? Then finally, we also offer a candidate comparison tool that lets voters see, “OK just for the candidates on my ballot, where do they stand on certain issues?”

Melanie Plenda:

Why are these tools necessary?

Anna Brown:

I've been covering New Hampshire elections for a while now, and every single election I have seen there are races that come down to less than half a dozen votes. There are multiple recounts, and when you're talking about a recount in New Hampshire, it's literally paper ballots, the secretary of state's office inspecting them one by one, with observers in place. In the primaries, when there's a tie it’s not uncommon enough that they actually have official dice to help settle ties. 

So I always tell voters in New Hampshire that your vote counts. It isn't just a feel-good statement. There's all these candidates, roughly 900. It can be really hard to find information about those folks. Some of them don't have email addresses or websites, so that's where Citizens Count comes in, and we're trying to fill that gap. Because the other thing that's true, they don't always fall on party lines. In New Hampshire, you will find Democrats who are against gun laws. You will find Republicans who favor more lenient laws related to abortion than what is currently on the books. So I always encourage people to check out those individual candidates and don't just rely on the “D” or the
“R” next to someone's name.

Melanie Plenda:

How do you compile this information? Can you describe the process?

Anna Brown:

Our best tool is our candidate survey. We will contact them by email, snail mail, phone, follow up again for the folks that we can't find. I reach out to local parties and county parties sometimes, and we do get over half of candidates to respond to our survey. So most of our background information and issue positions are straight from their own mouth, and that's very important to us. We don't want to have any spin on our issue positions. 

Melanie Plenda:

How much work does that take to put all this together?

Anna Brown:

There's three of us full time, some part time, and every election we also get an elections intern. Shout out to our current elections intern, Anna Steele, who has been incredible this year. It is a lot of hounding candidates, a lot of phone calls, a lot of stuffing envelopes. We also really are trying to hold each other to that rigorous standard of staying nonpartisan and engaging with candidates. When candidates come back to us and they say, “I don't like how that question was worded, or it was biased, or I just want to submit a statement,” we want to work with them. If anybody ever comes to us, including many candidates, and says, “Where are you getting your money from? What is your real agenda? Who's on your board?” These are all questions that we want to be completely transparent about, and so we do a lot of engagement there as well.

Melanie Plenda:

There’s also a constitutional amendment on the ballot related to the ages of judges in the state. Can you tell us about that? 

Anna Brown: 

Many people may not know that the New Hampshire Constitution requires judges and sheriffs to retire at the age of 70. This is a huge contrast to the U.S. Supreme Court, where we have seen, on many occasions, people simply pass away before they retire, and it can have a huge impact on rulings. 

New Hampshire originally included this in the Constitution because they were concerned about the cognitive abilities, potentially, of judges and sheriffs. But that being said, when the Constitution was written, age expectancy was different. So now there is a proposal on the ballot, an amendment to our Constitution, that would raise the age of retirement to 75. This was actually sponsored by a member of the N.H. Supreme Court who was forced to retire at age 70 and is now serving in the House of Representatives. So that is going to be one of the questions on the ballot that you will see. It does require a super majority of voters, in order to change our Constitution. That's a kind of high threshold, but every now and then we do pass constitutional amendments. For example, in 2018 there was a new constitutional amendment that creates a right to privacy. If you do want to dig more into this, we do also have a link on our elections page, again, on https://www.citizenscount.org/ that includes a brief article on the pros and cons on that amendment.

Melanie Plenda:

Can you share a few of those pros and cons with this?

Anna Brown:

We do have some concern about what is going on with people as they are getting older. Is there perhaps some cognitive decline? That's a huge conversation that has happened with President Biden, with former President Trump, and it continues to this day. Another pro is that it actually ensures that you have sort of that fresh issue perspective coming onto the courts. So it's not so much as whether they're cognitively there, but also are they in tune with your average voter? Certainly, we know that demographics change based on what age group you're in, how you feel about certain issues. For example, we think about generational changes, things such as interracial marriage and gay marriage — there were sometimes very big gaps in terms of how younger people felt and how older people felt about the same issue. 

We also have that higher age that people are living, thriving, even working, and especially in New Hampshire we have one of the oldest states on average in the nation. And we're seeing folks who may be past traditional retirement age, say Social Security retirement age, who are still interested in working, are still vibrant, and indeed bring a lot of experience and knowledge to their jobs. The same thing is very much true for judges. The more experience you have on the bench, the more connections you have with lawyers and prosecutors and defenders, and so on. You might be able to have a more efficient court, a more knowledgeable court, as opposed to constantly bringing in new people and just giving up all of that knowledge and experience when there really isn't a reason to boot it out. I will say five years is not a huge change. We're not getting rid of the age limit entirely with this proposal. We're just saying, instead of 70 it’s 75. This also would not affect sheriffs, because there are some arguments, of course, that a law enforcement position is a little bit different. This part of the amendment would only impact the age limit for judges.

Melanie Plenda:

And, as awesome as Citizens Count is, there are also other ways to scope out the candidates. What do you recommend Anna?

Anna Brown:

Definitely, if you can find some local candidate events, parades, at town hall forums, public libraries, sometimes at your local school. There are going to be these events where the candidates are on hand. The audience is probably similar to what you might see at your town meeting. And they'll interact with you. You can get a really good sense of a person, what they'll be like as a legislator, if you have that conversation with them.

I talked about how we call a lot of these candidates and have conversations with them. The vast, vast majority are interested in engaging in that conversation. Because, realistically, these people are volunteers. They get paid $100 a year plus mileage. They're doing this because they are deeply passionate about it. Every now and then you are going to find someone who is contrary and doesn't like to talk to people. But in a House full of 400 representatives, there's always going to be that small margin. Overall, I have such positive experiences, and I hear that from other people too. However, if you're an introvert and you don't want to go out and talk to candidates, your local newspaper is often a wonderful resource in terms of finding these issue positions. They’ll do candidate profiles, have interviews. That's not something you're going to get from national news coverage, and that's one reason why local news sources are so important. You can also go directly to the candidate websites or other interest groups. Just be aware that how certain issue positions are phrased may be intended to lead you in a certain direction, or may be a little general. So if someone says, “I support veterans,” try to dig a little deeper and say, “What does that really mean?”

Melanie Plenda:

Anna Brown is the executive director of Citizens Count, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating voters about the political process. She is also the executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership, and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law. Thank you for joining us. 

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

How the Civic Health Index sheds light on community trust and how to build it

The University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy released its 2024 Civic Health Index this month. The report examines several aspects of public life, including how much people trust each other and government institutions, attend public meetings, vote, and help their neighbors. On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Carsey School of Public Policy Interim Associate Director Michele Holt-Shannon and the report’s author, Quixada Moore-Vissing, founder of Public Engagement Partners discuss the findings.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Michele, can you tell us more about the background of the Civic Health Index? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

A lot has happened — not just the pandemic, a lot of just increasing division in our country. We had the Jan. 6 incident at the Capitol building, the murder of George Floyd, the response to that, and certainly that experience of the pandemic that really varied for people across the country, depending on their job and where they lived. We had questions around connecting with neighbors, volunteering, helping each other, feeling like you matter and belong. So there's, there's some data to look at today and to discuss and help us think about what we can do in the future.

Melanie Plenda:

Quixada, how was the data gathered for this report and how long did it take? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

We really wanted to understand how the pandemic and these other events of 2020 actually impact civic health in New Hampshire. Did it impact civic health? That was one of our big questions. So we looked at both pre-pandemic data, pandemic-level data, and then post-pandemic-level data to just kind of see what the changes are. Are there impacts during this point in time?

We used two data sources for the report. One so is the U.S. Census, and it has a civic engagement and volunteering supplement and a voting supplement. We pulled from both of those census supplements, but we also ran our own survey through the Granite State Poll, and we had used the Granite State Poll in the past, so we were able to make some longitudinal comparisons there as well. 

Melanie Plenda:

What were some of the report’s key findings? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

One of the big things that we found that was a surprise is that New Hampshire residents are feeling they matter less to their communities than they did in 2019. In 2019, we were at 76% of New Hampshire residents felt like they matter to their communities, and that fell to 43%. That's a 30 percentage point decrease. 

Connected to that, we also learned that we're generally connecting a bit less with others than we were before the pandemic. New Hampshire residents who do favors for their neighbors, helping someone, loan a lawnmower, or move an air conditioner — that fell from 11% to 5%. In  terms of people working to do positive things for their community, that fell from 27% in 2019 to 21% in 2021. Granite Staters are also hearing from or spending less time with their family and friends, from 85% to 81% — that data point is all 2021 data. So it'll be interesting to see in the next census data pool, if some of that rebounds, or if it stays the same. 

Some of the other things we found are that New Hampshire residents are attending public meetings less, so that that fell from 19% in 2019 to 12% in 2021. We also found that New Hampshire residents have a slight majority engaging across race, ethnicity, or culture that's different from their own. So that was another finding. 

In terms of voting — which I know is everyone's top of mind right now with the election coming up — we found that in the 2020 election there was record voter turnout across the nation. New Hampshire mirrored that trend, both in 2020 and in the midterm elections. In 2022, we had surges in voter turnout. We were above the rest of the country in that, but we kind of sort of mirrored that national trend. But one of the concerning things we saw about voting is that urban residents actually were voting less than suburban or rural residents in that election. 76% of rural people voted, for instance, in the 2020 election, compared with 57% of urban residents. 

We never measured belonging before in New Hampshire. What we found, in general, is that about half of New Hampshire residents are feeling like they belong to their local communities, but about half are feeling that they don't. So 49% of New Hampshire residents share that they belong in their local community; 59% felt comfortable expressing their opinions in their local community. About 55% felt satisfied with their relationships with others in the local community, and 62% felt connected to their local community. So, it depends how you slice the cake, right?  We could see this as a positive that we've got slight majorities feeling like they belong, but you could also say that there's about 50% of people in a lot of these outcomes that aren't feeling like they belong. 

Then the last thing that I wanted to mention, which is a big one, is that our trust in government in New Hampshire has dropped significantly since 2001 — that's trust both in national and local government. The trust in the national government is a more severe plummet. In 2001, about 31% of New Hampshire residents felt trust in the national government. It's now down to 17%, but actually only 1% of New Hampshire residents trust the national government all of the time, and about 49% almost never, trust the national government. Trust from 2019 to 2024 in the national government stayed about the same. So it was low in 2019 and just kind of stayed low. 

Trust in local government also fell from 2001 so we saw it fall from 53% to 36%, and then it stayed about the same from 2019 to 2024. So, interestingly, we're not seeing huge drops in trust in government from pre- and post-pandemic, but we are just seeing a general decline in trusting in both national and local governments since 2001.

Melanie Plenda:

Let’s explore some of those findings a bit more. Michele. When residents say they matter less and engage less, what does that mean and why should we all be concerned about that? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

The mattering question is compelling, because people interpret it and answer the question differently. I'll note that some of the folks watching this may be familiar with the Youth Risk Behavior Survey that's done in schools. One of the questions on that survey a few years ago was whether or not young people feel like they matter to their community. The question wasn't there for a couple of years, and it's back now. I think it is an interesting one to think about, because I have a reaction that I hope people feel like they matter. When that number is low, it is concerning, and it says something about the state of community, of connectedness — of civic health, broadly. I think it can be a red flag when mattering numbers are low, when fewer people feel like they matter to a community. So it's a way of giving us a chance to say, we want that number to be higher. We want that number to be higher for young people, we want that number to be higher for everyone — that people would feel like they can engage, share their opinions and influence the community where they live.

Melanie Plenda:

Quixada, trust in local and national government is at an all-time low. Why is that, and what does that mean for the community? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

One of the frustrations about survey research is, we ask a question, such as how much do you trust the government? How much do you trust the national government? How much do you trust the local government? And people pick an option. I trust the government a lot or I trust the government not so much. What we don't know is the story behind that. What is behind the lack or loss of trust? 

But I can make some guesses. I think the one thing that's going on with trust nationally is that we've become such a polarized country, and that polarization at the national level is trickling down to the state level and is trickling down to local communities and public meetings. The fact is that whoever is elected, whatever party, there will be some people who are alienated by that leadership simply because of the party identity and how they conceptualize that now. I do think it's possible for a Democratic leader to try to really be inclusive of a lot of Republican ideas or a Republican leader to be inclusive of a lot of Democratic ideas, especially at the local level, and really, really listen to those points of view. 

The other thing that I think has been really difficult for trust in government is the amount of misinformation that we have right now, where it's very hard to know what is truth and what is something that has been fictionalized to try to sort of influence people towards a certain policy outcome. I think that's a big reason why we need lots of media literacy in our K-12 education to try to help prepare the next generations of Americans to be able to sort of make those judgments based on facts. 

I think there’s also a lot that government can do, particularly at the local level to try to build up trust. I would say some local governments are pretty good at these things, and some local governments aren’t. These are things like just being transparent about your processes. How do you make decisions? Why did you make a decision? Being inclusive about your processes. Did you really hear from everybody in the community? Did you go out of your way to hold a meeting at a time that would work for folks who were at work, or different kinds of populations in the community? Then also demonstrating responsiveness and following through when there's lots of people in the community asking about something or expressing concerns. If you gather the community and ask for their opinion, you actually follow through and tell them how their opinions were used to make a decision. 

Melanie Plenda:

Michele, now that this report is completed, what happens next? How can this information be used? What needs further study? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

We hope people will certainly read this report and think about how it applies to their own work and community. One of the things that we're thinking about is voting. It is top of mind right now with the election coming up, and we are curious about some of those patterns. Are there linkages in terms of mattering and voting, and are there linkages across political identity and voting, and certainly digging into that urban-rural-suburban connection. We work with schools and towns and government commissions and nonprofits and help them think about how more people and more organizations are trying to engage the public or engage people in their community. How can they do that in ways that build trust, that are authentic?

I think we also are looking forward to understanding, as New Hampshire's diversity grows, what are the ways that we can foster belonging across differences in lots of different ways — racial, political, economic, and so on. Are we living in very isolated groupings, and are there ways to foster people coming together across different groups that help people feel connected to their community and interacting with people who are different from themselves, which is something that is helpful for us to do.

We all have biases. We all have experiences that you know can be limiting, and then we don't know what we don't know. Until we meet other people.  So talking across politics, I will say, is one thing that it actually can help us feel better and more hopeful about the direction of the country. If we get into a place where we're not talking with people who vote differently than us, then if I do that for too long, I'm starting to make up stories about the people who vote differently from me, and I need to interact. And for me, those people are in my family, and so I especially want to interact and save those relationships. So I think there's lots to think about personally in reading this — like, what do I want to do more of? And then also, as someone who works with communities, how do we help communities engage authentically, foster trust and enfranchise their community members?

Melanie Plenda:

This question is for both of you — what is the major takeaway for New Hampshire residents about this report, and what do you advise them to do about it?

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

We’ve presented some research findings to viewers of this show, and I hope that you can take action. The point of doing these reports is to actually inform some interventions around civic health that you build and can move positive outcomes forward and in the state. So that would be one thing. 

The other, I would say, is I think a lot of us are feeling pretty powerless when we look at national democracy and civic health right now. There's a lot going on nationally, and it can feel like you can’t even make a difference with the complexity of what's happening. The fact is, it's going to be hard to impact national policy sitting from our homes in New Hampshire, but what we can do is act locally and try to strengthen civic health at the local level.

For some of you, this may be work that you take on through an organization that you work with, that you volunteer with, but this can also be very individual behavior. Small acts, like showing someone in your community that they matter to you who might not know that. Some other things that can be done is that institutions, like local government, public schools, nonprofits, can try to brainstorm, “What are three ways this year that we can build community trust, and let's do that as part of our strategic plan.” I really encourage that at every level. I hope that we can take action around civic health. I am an idealist, but I do believe that if a lot of people are influencing their direct spheres of reference, that it can be a ripple effect, and that change can happen. So I hope to see that positive change in New Hampshire.

Michele Holt-Shannon:

I have to double down on local because it's where most of us have a stronger tie. We have relationships locally that start to be more distant the further away they are geographically. That's a place where I think you can think small but still have a big outcome, you can go out and meet more of your neighbors or go join a group in the community. From an individual level to all the things that you can do at your job, your organization, and a community group that you're a part of — I think little things pay off.

Melanie Plenda:

Thank you for joining us, Carsey School of Public Policy Interim Associate Director Michele Holt-Shannon and report author and founder of Public Engagement Partners Quixada Moore-Vissing.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Critics blast adequacy of PragerU online personal finance course

The online course consists of 15 educational videos, averaging five minutes apiece

By: Patrick Adrian - Granite State News Collaborative

CONCORD — The state Department of Education is drawing criticism again from educators and some lawmakers for renewing its partnership with PragerU, a conservative media nonprofit, to provide online instruction to students for high school credit. 

In addition to concerns about the organization’s right-wing political agenda and often-skewed educational content, education advocates said the approved financial literacy course is inadequate in content and quantity of instruction to qualify as a for-credit course. 

Megan Tuttle, president of the National Education Association New Hampshire chapter testifying against a bill earlier this year. (Post on X)

“Throughout his tenure, Commissioner (Frank) Edelblut’s agenda has been focused on weakening public schools, which are attended by nearly 90% of Granite State students,” said Megan Tuttle, president of the National Education Association New Hampshire chapter, in an email. 

“The renewal of a contract with an ideological profit-based entity to serve as a replacement for in-classroom financial literacy instruction is just another example of the Edelblut agenda that illustrates what’s at stake in the elections this fall,” Tuttle wrote. 

On Sept. 16, the State Board of Education voted unanimously to approve a five-year renewal with PragerU Kids to offer its online personal finance course, titled Cash Course, as part of the state’s Learn Everywhere program, which allows students to earn high school credits through state-approved extracurricular programs. 

The renewal extends a partnership that the board initially approved in September 2023 with PragerU for one year.

Crash Course is intended to be an alternative approach to traditional classroom learning, which is not effective with some students, a Department of Education spokesperson said. 

The online course consists of 15 videos, averaging five minutes apiece, on topics that include employment wages and benefits, budgeting, income taxes, types of investment accounts and managing credit and debt.  

A 32-question summative assessment is taken at the end of the course, according to PragerU’s renewal application to the board. A student must answer at least 26 questions correctly to receive a certificate of completion, which may be redeemed for academic credit. 

“The commissioner of education, for the last eight years, has been focused on creating quality opportunities for students to have bright futures,” the education department spokesperson explained in an email. 

‘There is a huge difference’

But many educators and lawmakers question whether Prager’s online course provides enough information and instruction to constitute a sufficient education in personal finance — or to merit half an academic credit, which is typically earned by completing a semester-long course. 

“There is a huge difference between a 60-hour semester-long course on financial literacy and 75 minutes of videos,” said John Pelletier, director of the Center of Financial Literacy at Champlain College in Burlington, Vt. 

John Pelletier Courtesy Champlain College Website

“Would (the New Hampshire Board of Education) call 75 minutes of videos an adequate course for driver’s education?” Pelletier asked. 

The State Board of Education also received strong pushback last year from educators, parents and other members of the public due largely to PragerU’s other video content. The organization, co-founded by conservative pundit Dennis Prager, frequently produces videos for children and adults that feature right-leaning viewpoints on topics that include climate change, LGBTQ and immigration. 

Educators and lawmakers said they do not object to the Cash Course content, which provides accurate information in an objective and straightforward manner. 

But five-minute videos on complex topics such as investing and retirement planning are, at best, supplemental learning materials, as opposed to a replacement for a substantive, semester-long course, Pelletier said. 

“For the (Board of Education) to say that these two are equivalent is an insult to the state legislators, the governor and to educators all across the country,” Pelletier said. 

A growing need for financial literacy

New Hampshire is one of 26 states in the country that are on track to require schools to provide instruction in personal finance literacy by 2031, said Pelletier, whose center provides resources to help educators nationwide create financial literacy programs. 

New Hampshire lawmakers passed a bill in 2022, HB 1263, making personal finance literacy a requirement in school curricula. The law took effect last school year. 

Rep. Rick Ladd, R-Haverhill, chairman of the House Education Committee, said too many New Hampshire students are graduating without a basic understanding of essential personal finances, from budgeting to balancing a checkbook.

“Too many students coming out of high school do not have an awareness of what they will face financially in the real world,” Ladd said in an interview. 

The law gives schools flexibility to decide how to deliver this instruction, which could include creating a self-contained personal finance course or embedding the curriculum into other courses, such as math or an economics elective, Ladd explained. 

Under House Bill 1263, each school district must develop competencies and curriculum for personal finance literacy that align the state’s academic standards. The State Board of Education approved a set of standards for financial literacy at its meeting in September. 

These standards must receive approval next from the Legislative Oversight Committee, which was scheduled to review them, along with new proposed educational rule changes, on Oct. 17. 

‘Turning it into a nothing-burger’

Some lawmakers worry that the board acted prematurely by extending the PragerU course before academic standards are finalized. 

“Public schools haven’t been able to use the course for long enough to provide (adequate) feedback on it,” said Rep. David Luneau, D-Hopkinton, a member of the House Education Committee and Joint Legislative Oversight Committee. 

At a Monday meeting, members of the Manchester Board of School Committee peppered N.H. Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut at a meeting of the Manchester Board of School Committee earlier this year.. Andrew Sylvia—Manchester Ink Link

Members of the education committee are also concerned that Commissioner Edelblut’s proposed rule changes would make personal finance literacy a graduation requirement, which goes against the law passed by the legislature, Luneau said in an interview. 

School districts that are already financially stretched might feel compelled to enroll students in the PragerU course, which is free, rather than increase their budgets to staff a course in-house, Luneau said. 

“Watching videos online is clearly not education,” Luneau said. “It’s not even close to the rigor (and content) that a public school course would offer.”

The national standards for financial literacy, developed jointly by the Council for Economic Education and Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, spans over 40 pages and provides academic standards and learning outcomes for students in grades 4 through 12. Pelletier, who cited this as an example of an ideal curriculum model for finance literacy, said 75 minutes of videos is about 4% of the instructional time that a semester-long course would provide. 

“It feels as if the Board of Education is trying to take a substantial educational requirement (by the Legislature) and are turning it into a nothing-burger,” Pelletier said. 

‘Positive feedback’

The Department of Education said the PragerU partnership is intended to expand learning opportunities in financial literacy, not to undermine the Legislature’s goal. 

“PragerU Kids Cash Course, as one of those very successful alternative educational opportunities, has received positive feedback from its Learn Everywhere participants,” the department spokesperson said. “Financial literacy is a crucial life skill (and) students with the tools to manage their finances early helps them to become financially successful adults.”

As of last month, 37 students in New Hampshire had enrolled in Cash Course, including 11 who have passed the course, 23 who are in progress toward completion and three who have dropped the course, Dzana Homan, director of education and education outreach at PragerU Kids, told the board at its meeting Sept. 16. 

Seven of nine students who participated in a post-course survey said that they found the course an effective way to learn and that they were satisfied with the content. 

In survey comments, two students suggested updating the curricular content to show how changing economic conditions are impacting young adults or the ways that people make personal finance decisions. 

New Hampshire is one of several states that have approved PragerU as an education program vendor. Other states include Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma and Texas.

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Funding concerns weigh heavily on state’s public charter schools

Amid pending lawsuits, they seek a seat at the table over any changes in the system

By Susan Geier-Granite State News Collaborative 

Amid lawsuits over how New Hampshire funds its public schools, the level of scrutiny into how those taxpayer dollars are used remains hotly debated among educators and policymakers. 

And while proponents of so-called “school choice” say it’s good for families to have options beyond traditional public schools, those options aren’t held to the same standards. 

Outside of traditional public schools, the state will spend $60 million on public charter schools and nearly $28 million for 5,321 school vouchers in the 2024-25 school year. The vouchers are used to pay for homeschooling, private or religious education expenses to qualifying families. 

Advocates of charter schools emphasize that they are public schools monitored by the state and held to the same financial and academic standards as traditional schools, unlike non-public schools and homeschools in the Education Freedom Account program, which are not.

The EFA program is managed through a contracted third party, the Children’s Scholarship Fund, but much of the data on the program is not publicly available. 

“There is no accountability at all” for the EFA program, said Jodi Adams, executive director of the N.H. Alliance for Public Charter Schools. “Charter schools have the same type of paperwork as traditional public schools do. We have to follow the same rules.”

The state’s Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant, which is responsible for conducting a performance audit of the EFA, said during a recent meeting of the Joint Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee that most documents pertaining to the EFA program are missing due to the “lack of access to primary program data and information.” 

Since EFA’s inception in 2021, vouchers have accounted for more than $73 million from public education funding.

The state’s 32 charter schools serve 6,015 students at a cost of about $60 million this school year. They are funded directly by the state at approximately $9,000 per student ($4,100 in state adequacy aid plus a $4,900 additional grant). That is considerably less than the statewide average cost of $20,000 per traditional public school student, according to state data.

Charter schools also receive differentiated aid for certain individual factors, such as English language learners, free and reduced lunch, and students with special needs. They must fundraise to cover the rest of their costs — such as renting space at market rates, and buying materials and equipment. 

While the primary focus of two pending school-funding lawsuits  – Contoocook Valley School District et al. v. State of New Hampshire and Steven Rand et al. v. State of New Hampshire –  is “traditional public-school funding … we want to make sure charter school advocates are at the table and involved,” says Jodi Adams, executive director of the N.H. Alliance for Public Charter Schools. (Courtesy photo)

“The primary focus of those (school funding) lawsuits are traditional public-school funding, but we want to make sure charter school advocates are at the table and involved,” said Adams, whose own child attended a charter school. “If there's anything that comes out of the lawsuit(s) that looks at redoing funding or making over how public schools are funded in the state, charter schools want to be part of the conversation. We don’t want to get lost in the shuffle.”

Becoming a charter school

A proposal for a new charter school must go through several steps once an application is filed, according to the N.H. Department of Education. There is a legal review of the application, a peer review, a commissioner review, then a state board review for approval. 

Once in operation, charter schools undergo reviews and site visits in the first and third years, followed by a five- year charter renewal review and site visit. Additionally, charters pay for an external audit, submit an annual accountability report, and file an annual financial report — something all public schools must do, and which are available online. 

Still, charter schools struggle with enrollment and financial issues, or worse. For example, Lionheart Classical Academy in Peterborough, which opened in 2022, is under scrutiny for its governance and financial practices. Eleven charter schools have closed since the first one opened in 2004. Most recently, LEAF Chartered Public School in Alstead filed for bankruptcy and shut its doors in April after seven years. Coastal Waters School in Exeter closed earlier this year in the face of alleged embezzlement and fraud after just two years of operation.

“There are some nefarious actors out there,” Adams said. “But our position is that N.H. DOE has safeguards in place so that these things are found out and people are monitored and audited.” 

The N.H. Department of Education’s Bureau of Federal Compliance conducts an annual risk assessment of traditional and charter schools. It oversees activities of federal grant programs to determine whether organizations are following federal fiscal requirements.

According to the bureau, risk assessment is used to determine the likelihood that a school may fail to comply with applicable rules. A high-risk level doesn’t indicate failure to comply nor does a low-risk level indicate the school is compliant. 

During the 2023-24 school year, the bureau found 19 high-risk traditional districts and five high-risk charter schools after conducting site monitoring visits. The bureau looks at a variety of things, including policies and procedures, cash management and use of money.

Adams was on the board of Making Community Connections, which had a school in Keene and one in Manchester. The Keene school was thriving, but Manchester’s was not.

“We had more at-risk students (in Manchester), and once COVID hit, we had a struggle to get these kids to continue,” Adams said. “We would try different ways to engage them, but it was hard for them to come back.”

Many students were unsheltered, worked full time, or had families with substance abuse issues. With a drop in enrollment, the school closed at the end of the 2021 school year. 

‘Public funds to support private schools’

Meryl Levin, director of Mill Falls Charter School, deliberately chose to be in Manchester. Mill Falls was opened in 2011 through a group of parents who wanted a Montessori education beyond preschool. Today, it has a freestanding kindergarten and serves students through sixth grade as the state’s only public charter Montessori school. 

It provides special education services and is reimbursed by the local school district.

“We share students,” Levin said of the school’s relationship with the local district, adding the majority of them are from Manchester, but there are students from other towns, selected through a public lottery. “We are leaning into the public piece. I am a product of public schools. More than a third of our students live below the poverty line. It is baked into our mission to be here. “

Levin has strong feelings when it comes to the EFA program.

“It’s using public funds to support private schools,” she said. “It doesn’t just affect charter public schools, but all public schools. The state doesn’t put enough money into education. They need to invest in its future so that there are more teachers, cops and firefighters, lawyers and managers.” 

To Levin, it’s not about traditional public versus charter schools, but the entire education ecosystem. 

“I don’t differentiate between charter and traditional public in terms of funding, because as a state we have not made the best choices what schools need,” she said.

She noted that, for kids who require special education and related services, such as physical and occupational therapies, there is a shortage of funds and practitioners, especially in rural areas. Only students enrolled in public schools or placed in a private school by the district have a right to comprehensive special education services. 

Emily Whelan is executive director of the Next charter school in Derry, which serves at-risk high school students. The school is capped at 80 students and is located inside the Gilbert H. Hood Middle School in Derry. About 10 percent of its students come from outside of Derry, but the majority are tuition students from Derry.

“The idea of the school came from the district,” Whelan said. “The superintendent said, ‘There are students who are not finishing high school,’ and came to us with a solution to offer those students a different kind of education.” 

The school receives federal Title I, II, VI funding to support its students, and Whelan supplements that money by lining up grants. She said slow, intentional growth has been key to the school’s success over the 11 years since it opened with the help with a federal charter school startup grant. 

When it comes to oversight, Whelan said no one on the board has access to money or students. There is a double signature policy in place — only the board president or treasurer can sign a check with Whelan. 

She declined to comment about the EFA program and its effect on public schools. 

Whelan did question how feasible it will be to continue to increase the number of charter schools, since they must raise so much money to stay in operation. 

“New Hampshire is not a young and vibrant state. School enrollment across the state is decreasing,” she said. “I don’t see charter schools popping up all over the place.” 

Two new charter schools, Synergy in Concord and Seacoast Classical in Newton, opened this school year. Four are set to open next year: Cornerstone in the Mount Washington Valley, Wellheart in Milford, Northstar in Ossipee and New Hampshire Career Academy (which will have multiple sites in partnership with the Community College System). 

Decreasing enrollment

Charter schools have reported a steady increase in enrollment, while homeschooling attendance has dropped since the height of the pandemic, according to a 2023 Reaching Higher NH report. Private school enrollment has dipped slightly. 

News reports have touted that public school attendance has been in a steady decline, but that tracks with the fact that there are fewer school-age children. The state experienced the largest percentage reduction in people under age 18 (about 10.5 percent) of any state from 2010 to 2020, according to the N.H. Fiscal Policy Institute. 

For Levin, the greatest challenge for charter schools is funding. She said she is fortunate to have dedicated staff members, but cannot offer them the kind of retirement and health care packages available in traditional districts.

Plus, there are the lingering effects of COVID. 

“It’s hard to find people to volunteer their time,” she said. “COVID is still clearly in play. It is not in the rearview mirror. The mindset of the community has shifted.” 

Levin said Mill Falls had a robust after-school program, but since COVID there has been a lack of participation. 

“People are slow to volunteer and come to things. It impacts funding,” she said. 

That is why the fate of public school funding is so important, said Christina Pretorius, public policy director of Reaching Higher NH, a nonprofit public education policy organization. 

“Every dollar spent on vouchers is money that is not being spent in district schools and public charter schools,” Pretorius said, referring to the EFA program. “Year after year, we have bills to do things like increase special education funding that don’t succeed … but we have $28 million (this year) to give to school vouchers?” 

Reaching Higher, Pretorius said, doesn’t support or oppose any specific legislation but it does want to shed light on the voucher program. 

“We are not unique in this trend here in New Hampshire,” she said. “We are seeing across the country that wealthier families are receiving them, and there is a real lack of transparency and accountability on how they are being used. “

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

How the ‘Counting the Vote’ special on PBS debunks concerns about the election process

On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Melanie Plenda talks with Margaret Hoover, host of PBS’s “Firing Line” about the show’s recent one-hour special, “Counting the Vote.”  It contains fascinating sections about election procedures and all things that, perhaps in the past, people didn't think about much, but today have become embroiled in controversy.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda: 

When you were conceiving the special with your team, what went into it? What was it like putting this show together? 

Margaret Hoover:

I’m glad to help shine a light on what I think is ultimately one of the most important functions of democracy, which is how we administer a vote in a way that engenders confidence with the electorate. After 18 months of conceiving of this project and bringing it to air, I have concluded, and I hope viewers will conclude, that there is a very, very good case to be made that elections in the United States are safe, secure, transparent and trustworthy. They are not only those four things – they are the most safe, the most secure, the most transparent and the most trustworthy in the world by a lot, and probably in the course of human history. We have a lot to be confident about, but we also need to shine a light on how we do it, so that we can demystify and answer some of the conspiracy theories and doubts that circulate, so that people will have confidence in the integrity of our elections.

What went into it was simply traveling and talking to people and doing the research. We don't have one election for president in this country on Nov. 5, 2024. We have 50 state elections for electors, and those 50 states administer the elections in 10,000-plus jurisdictions across the country, and in a way that federalism really protects the security of our elections. There's no way to rig the presidential election in this country, which is a wonderful sort of innovation of the founding fathers that is embedded in the Constitution. Every state gets to choose how to administer its votes. What it also means is, when there are states that are incredibly close, one has to really understand how that state chooses to administer its elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

As you went through this process and conducted these interviews what surprised you?

Margaret Hoover:

One of the things that surprised me is that you hear as you evaluate — and we all hear some of the doubts and concerns that are circulated on the Internet amongst our friends and neighbors — one you hear frequently is, “Well, we should just all have paper ballots” because there's this concern or fear that some of the election machinery might be susceptible to being hacked or manipulated. People suggest that perhaps the algorithms can be changed, or we don't know what they are. Actually, as it turns out, about 98% of the ballots in the United States have a paper trail. In other words, you count on a machine, but there is an actual paper ballot correlated to each individual's vote. So we do have a way of checking. There is no way of hacking or manipulating the election machinery or the algorithms or the computers to change the votes because we have a process for hand-counting ballots in certain states just to ensure that they work. Also, many states implement automatic audits, where you audit the vote almost immediately following the vote itself, just to ensure the integrity of the vote. 

The other thing that was really wonderful to see, particularly in the battleground states we visited, but also in the states that are deep red — states like Utah, that administers 100% mail-in voting. The election boards love to have people come and watch. They have basically created facilities where journalists, media, civic groups — any kind of group — can come and visit and see how elections are administered. 

I really encourage anyone who has concern about how your local elections are administered to get in touch with your local election board and see if you can set up a visit or volunteer, because there is, first of all, a real dearth of people who are wanting to volunteer because there have been so many threats leveled at individuals who volunteer. These are volunteers in a service that is critically necessary for representative democracy, that depends on ensuring that we have a stable and confident vote amongst our people in order to secure our elected representatives. Go volunteer and take a look around, because those folks are doing really great work. They're fastidious in every single state about how they count the ballots, secure the ballots, process the ballots, and are doing really good work on behalf of all of us.

Melanie Plenda:

Which states do you think might face some challenges? 

Margaret Hoover:

The first time we saw real challenges to the counting in many, many states, which led to the challenging of accepting the slates of electors at the counting of the electoral ballots last Jan. 6, 2020. The states that were questioned last time are still of concern this time maybe perhaps with the exception of Michigan. But I think Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia are all states that are going to be very, very close, but they have done different things in each state to prepare. 

So Georgia, for example, passed an election law which actually led to more people voting in 2022 than had ever voted in the state of Georgia before. They've really done a number of things to increase the transparency, security, trustworthiness and integrity of the elections in Georgia. 

On the other hand, Pennsylvania we know will be very, very close. The legislature tried to consider several bills, but they just could never get anything passed in order to lock down any of these standards of election integrity or apply any of these new standards of election integrity.

You'll see in the film a very frustrated election commissioner from Philadelphia, who actually was the only Republican from Philadelphia Election Commission to stand up — well, not the only one, but one of the ones who stood up — and said, “In fact, I've counted and I've recounted and we've re-audited, and I can confirm that Joe Biden won Philadelphia and won Pennsylvania,” to much criticism, frankly, and direct threats by the Republican Party and Donald Trump. But still, Pennsylvania has not taken the steps it needs to pre-process ballots, and so it will take longer for them to process and get a result in Pennsylvania — in particular the Philadelphia area, because in Philadelphia, they cannot start opening ballots and counting ballots until 7 p.m. on Election Day.

Melanie Plenda:

We recently had state primaries for congressional districts and governor. New Hampshire officials have always talked about how secure our elections are — even before 2020, that was really a point of pride for our former secretary of state. What struck me when I listened to the most recent slate of candidates was the number of them who didn’t outright deny the election results, but said, “they had questions” or thought there were “irregularities.” What is the advantage for candidates to say this? You would think in some respects it would depress turnout because they are essentially saying the process might be rigged. What do you think the political calculus is there?

Margaret Hoover:

Well, there isn't a sensible one, honestly. Arizona is a great example actually, where people would say, “Maybe there were some uncertainties or problems in Arizona.” Except Republicans won all down the ballot in Arizona in 2020, but Donald Trump didn't win the state. What happened, as election officials and also former state representatives and electors in Arizona explained, is that many, many Republicans — as many as 12,000 — left the top of the ballot blank, didn't vote for Donald Trump and then voted for Republicans all down ballot. So it's hard if you're a Republican in Arizona to say there was election fraud because you got elected as a Republican, even though Donald Trump didn't. 

I say this as a Republican who has observed what has happened in the Republican Party and the realignment. There has been, I've observed, a shift in how we talk about elections. I think it's so important to shine a light on this issue because, for certain Republicans, it has become a litmus test to suggest there might be something untoward about elections, and if New Hampshire Republicans say the election was great in New Hampshire, it's just somewhere else that there might have been trouble they’re contributing to this sowing of doubt because we have audited elections in all four of the states that were challenged in for the Electoral College in 2020 on January 6. Those ballots have been counted and recounted. They have been audited. They have been viewed by outside groups. You can go look at all of the information and all of the theories, and that's why administration officials from the Trump administration, in the Department of Justice, in the Department of Homeland Security, in the Department of Defense have all said that 2020, was actually the most secure election in American history. 

This is about politics, not about how well we administer our elections, and I think as long as we can point that out to people and people can recognize or actually just ask themselves, if they're hearing some kind of uncertainty around the elections, is this a political point or is this actually about the transparency and the integrity of how my local elections are being administered? 

Because one of the other things that we see recently in the news is that many people believe that their state and their locality does a good job administering elections, but they worry about other states. I think that's another piece of this too, that transparency helps shine a light on how every state does this, and how we can improve the functioning of the election administration in each state. It's up to each state legislature and each secretary of state and governor to get that done in their state. But, I think, too often casting doubt on the integrity of our elections has become a political talking point on the right that actually undermines the public's confidence in our elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

What are you working on now for “Firing Line?” What’s coming up in the next few weeks? 

Margaret Hoover:

I think I can tease that we’re planning to have Gen. H.R. McMaster on the program in the coming weeks. I also plan to have some election administration officials on the program to talk about what has been happening in some of these key swing states that are likely to be states that we're talking about on election night and election week that take a little bit of time to vote. 

An election official from Arizona will be on along with an election official from Michigan, and a Republican election lawyer, will also be on. We're going to just spend some time making sure that the public is aware that we're probably not going to know the answer of who won the election on Nov. 5. It's going to take several days, maybe even a week or two, to ensure that all the ballots are counted, especially with the tragic and really cataclysmic storms that have hit Florida and North Carolina that will just inevitably slow down the process. We want to make sure we count every ballot and ensure that it is secure and transparent and trustworthy and fair.

Melanie Plenda:

Margaret Hoover, host of “Firing Line,” thank you so much for joining us. 

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Fostering civic engagement: New Hampshire's initiative to strengthen voter education

Pretty much everyone agrees — civic education is important. But why? And what exactly does that entail? On this episode of “The State We’re In,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan and Lily Woo, the state’s Civic and Voter Education Coordinator talk about a new initiative to foster civic education in the state.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity. 

Melanie Plenda:

First, let’s talk about civics. Secretary Scanlan, how would you define what that is and why it’s important? 

David Scanlan:

Well, civics is a basic understanding of our government, and from my perspective, state government is just very, very important. Every citizen of New Hampshire has the opportunity to participate in their government, and they do that through their right to vote, and if they are a registered voter, then they also have the right to run for office. That process is integral, integral to our society and the way that it operates. So it is really, really important that that system function very, very well.

Melanie Plenda:

Tell us about the role of the civic and voter education coordinator and what you hope comes from it. 

David Scanlan:

In my experience in government, which has spanned over several decades in a number of different areas, there just seems to be a general decline in confidence that voters have when they go to the voting booths. Along with that comes a lot of misinformation and disinformation that is out there flowing around, and it is becoming more and more prevalent through the use of social media and the sophisticated and technical ways that we have to communicate today, as opposed to the way we communicated 20 years ago. That coincides with a decline in the knowledge that voters have about how their electoral system works.

While I have spent a lot of time over the last 20 years helping to educate poll workers and individuals that are engaged in the actual process of conducting elections, I find now that it is really important that we reach out to voters and educate in those processes as well. 

Most voters, when they go to their polling place, they check in, they receive a ballot, they mark the ballot, and they turn it into the moderator, and then they leave the polling place. What they may not be aware of when they go through that process is the many checks and balances that are built into our system that help guarantee and make sure that their votes are accurately counted and that the process is working properly. We have to take the time to help our voters understand that, and the way we do it is to be more transparent and educate the voting public — not only when they go through the polling place, but at every opportunity that we have when they engage in their civic government. 

So that's why I believe it's important that we have this position now of civics and voter education outreach coordinator, so that we can be proactive in reaching out to students and groups and everyday citizens about how our governmental system works, and why it is important that they understand that process and participate in it.

Melanie Plenda:

Lily, I'd love to know how you are finding the role, and tell us more about what you've been up to.

Lily Woo:

First of all, not having a blueprint has been a bit challenging. I think the atmosphere is very fraught right now with misinformation, disinformation, and that is challenging. But I think with all of these challenges, there comes excitement for the opportunity to be part of a team that works hard to be proactive and that combats the misinformation, the disinformation.

I think, as a former teacher, it's ironic to me that we teach our students to hand in work that is theirs. We teach our students to do the right thing when nobody's watching. So the excitement of this position is to be part of a team that combats the misinformation, the disinformation and the artificial intelligence that's out there. I think that's pretty common with challenges and opportunities. 

One of the things that I really enjoyed was being part of the election training and talking to the election officials out there and hearing from them what they're seeing in the public, and eventually putting together a curriculum that will address the issues that the election officials are bringing up.

Melanie Plenda:

What are they seeing in the public? What are the issues?

Lily Woo:

They are issues that can be as foundational as, what do you need to register to vote? I think there can be issues that are more complex, like, what are you allowed to wear in a polling station to, when can I change my party affiliation? There's a primary election, there's a general election, and the rules are different — or at least to a certain extent — not vastly different, but there are things that are different. So I think there are issues that certainly we can help to educate the public on that will help election officials be able to concentrate on having a polling station that is run efficiently and eliminate all of those layers of having to repeat the answer to the same questions.

Melanie Plenda:

Lily, you mentioned the curriculum. What are your goals for developing a curriculum about civics? 

Lily Woo:

Anytime you develop a curriculum, you always have to begin with the end in mind. In this case, you begin with an end in mind of two pillars. The one pillar being the foundational elements of civics, which is individual rights, the rights guaranteed in the Constitution, the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The other pillar is civic responsibility. 

So if you begin with that end in mind, the other piece you need is the why. If you can get to the foundational elements of “what does it mean to be a citizen with individual rights?” you can start to give students the tools to combat the misinformation, the disinformation. If you can give students a sound relation to what it means to be civically responsible. Well, then you give them a tool to be good citizens in society, and then ultimately that's going to hopefully build trust in foundational systems that have been the bedrock of communities and this country.

Melanie Plenda:

This question is for both of you. How will this help educators? Lily, let's start with you.

Lily Woo:

Being an educator myself, I think it's not just about handing the school a curriculum and saying, “have at it.” I think there are a lot of factors that go into being in front of a body of students, whether it's 15, 25, 35. So I think knowing classroom teachers have a resource here, knowing that I understand what it is like to be in a classroom, I hope is helpful to educators.

David Scanlan:

This is really a multi-stage program, and the curriculum part of it is the long-term planning. How do we get a program, a solid program, that school districts can use around the state to teach students in the classroom? But beyond that, there are other groups out there that are important to this process, and it’s important that we reach out to them as well.

So we have some initiatives going where we've been working with veterans’ groups to try and get out and communicate with veterans.They already know about civics because they have sacrificed for our country in different ways, and we want to pull from that experience that they've had and the respect that they have in their own communities and try and engage them to become participants in the election process in terms of helping at polls and other things.

We had a great “I Voted” sticker contest that was in the school system. That's something that we can continue as a program. That's kind of a short-term initiative, but it generates tremendous interest and gets students engaged at a very early level. There may be other things that we can do, like essay contests in the higher grades. There are some awards that we can issue that are sponsored by national organizations, like the National Association of Secretaries of State, to young adults — whether they're high school seniors or college students or even slightly beyond that — to recognize individuals for their efforts in the community that have engaged in a civic way. 

Melanie Plenda:

That leads to our next question for the both of you: How will this help students and/or the general public?

David Scanlan:

The idea is just to help students and the general public understand things about the election process that they might not know. And if they do know, we'll give them confidence that we have a great system in New Hampshire, and that because of that, you should have confidence in the results of the elections. And to let them know that the opportunity is certainly there for them to become active participants in that process, so they can see firsthand and experience firsthand how these systems work and understand the checks and balances that are at play.

If we can encourage adults and voters to do that, then I think the misinformation part is going to take care of itself. When people become aware and knowledgeable, it is less easy to fall victim to incorrect facts out there about the election process itself. 

Lily Woo:

One of the things that I know about this office, and I know the secretary is very keyed in on, is recognizing and acknowledging when students or when the public is engaged in the civic process. If we can continue building the foundation for students and creating civically literate graduates who enter into this world, hopefully that spirit of engagement will continue and will carry on for a lifetime — whether it is volunteering at the polls on Election Day or whether it is continuing to look out for neighbors, be part of the community, that everyone's moving in the same direction toward the public good. When everybody's rowing in the same direction, good things are going to happen.

Melanie Plenda:

Here’s another question for the both of you: As we approach the election, what would you like people to know about the process as it stands right now? 

David Scanlan:

Well, New Hampshire has a unique system in terms of its elections, and what makes it unique is the fact that we elect our local election officials at the local level, so people's neighbors, their peers, family and friends, are actually the ones that are running the election — the polling place that voters will go to in that community. Those individuals are elected because people have faith in their ability, they believe in their integrity and their honesty, and that goes a long way in giving them some confidence. 

We have a very human process too, and errors can be made. I mean, people can make an error in adding numbers together when they're reporting final results, but our system is built to withstand that because it is easy to request a recount in the state. We now perform audits of ballot counting devices and things like that. So while the system was not designed to be perfect, it was built to accurately reflect who won an election when the dust settles, and New Hampshire does a great job. 

I mentioned that there are checks and balances at play in the polling place, and some of those involve the political parties themselves. They are allowed to make appointments of participants in the polling place, and the best example of that are the inspectors of election, which are more commonly known as the ballot clerks. Those individuals are the ones that hand a ballot to the voter when they're checking in, while the other individual crosses the name of the voter off the checklist. That's usually a Republican and a Democrat sitting side by side, engaging in that process. So not only can they keep an eye on each other, but they can also see what is going on in the polling place itself — and it's those checks and balances that are really important to just making sure that the system works properly. 

At the end of the night, when the moderator announces the results, the ballots are all packaged up and placed in boxes with security tape. There's a seal that is placed over those boxes that has to be signed by the selectmen in the town, and those seals are not broken unless there is a request for a recount or a court orders a ballot box be opened up for some reason. So those are the things that we need voters to understand and become aware of, and that's part of the importance of the program that Lily is engaging in right now. 

It’s also important for voters to understand the three different branches of government and the role that each plays in the process of elections. That's something that people are becoming less and less knowledgeable about, and it's time that we reverse that trend and make sure that people understand that the judicial branch of government, the executive branch of government and the legislative branch of government all have really important roles to play in our democratic process.

Lily Woo:

Having gone with the election trainers from this office and meeting with the election officials in the different towns across the state, what I would want the public to know is, as the secretary said, these people are your friends and your neighbors, and they are the ones that are making the process as efficient and as comfortable as possible for everyone. I think the public needs to know that.

As somebody said to me in one of the training sessions, “New Hampshire is working hard to do it right.” I think that is something that is a credit to the office here that is training the officials. I think it's a credit to the election officials, and I think it's a credit to the patience of the public — that if something is not going right at the polls, well, it's time to find the moderator and to ask the moderator questions about what is going on. But I think, as the secretary said, there are checks and balances built into the process. I think certainly voters should go in confident that New Hampshire is getting it right.

Melanie Plenda:

Well, you two have a lot on your plate, especially in the coming weeks. Good luck with these endeavors. Thank you for joining us, Secretary of State David Scanlan and Lily Woo, the state’s civic and voter education coordinator

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visitcollaborativenh.org. “The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members.

Percentage of low-income families receiving school vouchers has dropped significantly since start of EFA program

Analysis of state numbers shows proportion has dropped from 54% to 37% since 2021

By Susan Geier-Granite State News Collaborative

More New Hampshire families that don’t qualify as low-income are receiving publicly funded school vouchers to pay for private, religious and homeschooling expenses through the state’s Education Freedom Account program.

The information, based on data from the New Hampshire Department of Education, shows enrollment in the school voucher program grew 25 percent since last school year. The state will now fund 5,321 school vouchers in the 2024-2025 school year, for a total estimated cost of $27.7 million for the year, according to an analysis by Reaching Higher NH, the nonprofit that studies education and education policy.

It's striking that the data shows proportionally fewer students receiving the vouchers are low-income, said Christina Pretorius, Reaching Higher’s public policy director. 

In 2021, nearly 54 percent of the total student enrollment were low-income (879 students out of 1,635), Reaching Higher found. This year, 37 percent of students, or 1,974 out of 5,321 students, were low-income.

In its analysis, Reaching Higher measured low-income students as those eligible for participation in the Free and Reduced Price Meals Program.

The vouchers are given through the state’s Education Freedom Account program and funded through the state’s Education Trust Fund.  To qualify for EFA money, a family household income may not exceed 300 percent of the poverty level. In 2021, that was $79,500 for a family of four, and now it is $93,600.

After that first year, families are not required to prove income eligibility while the child is in school up to the age of 20.

The EFA program has been subject to a strong partisan divide since a sole-source contract to manage the program and distribute the money was awarded to the New York-based Children’s Scholarship Fund in 2021. Democrats and others say it diverts essential public school funds, while Republicans and program supporters say it gives parents education choice.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund and details of the EFA program are not subject to the same level of accountability – financially and academically – as traditional public schools and public charter schools in the state. 

“Every dollar spent on vouchers is money that is not being spent in district schools and public charter schools,” Pretorius said in an interview. “Year after year, we have bills to do things like increase special education funding that don’t succeed … but we have $28 million (this year) to give to school vouchers.” 

Reaching Higher noted by the end of this school year, $73 million in school vouchers will have been distributed through the EFA program.

Gov. Chris Sununu and EFA proponents say the money is justified to give parents options beyond traditional public schools. 

But, Pretorius said, other public programs, like Medicaid, WIC (the Women’s, Infants and Children food nutrition program), fuel assistance and free and reduced lunch, require annual income verification and are subject to public scrutiny. Recipients of EFA funds aren’t.

Sununu has said it would be disruptive if a family had to change schools because of a change in income, adding that public school students are not means-tested.

Pretorius also questioned whether families would actually withdraw from private, religious or homeschooling if their family went over the income limit. 

“Between 70 and 80 percent of these (EFA) students had already been enrolled in homeschooling or private schools,” she said. “What we are seeing is the subsidizing of choices that were already made.”

Reaching Higher, Pretorius said, doesn’t support or oppose legislation and is focused on tracking public education policy and sharing how vouchers are being used in New Hampshire. 

“We are not unique in this trend here in New Hampshire,” she said. “We are seeing across the country that wealthier families are receiving them, and there is a real lack of transparency and accountability on how they are being used.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Improving small-town life: How Radically Rural brings communities together to share ideas

The popular Radically Rural summit grew out of a desire to connect people who are passionate about small-town life with those who are pioneering interesting solutions to common problems. The summit — held every year in Keene — returns Sept. 24, with a new slate of sessions and solutions. Here to discuss what’s in store for this year's conference is Radically Rural Director Julianna Dodson.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Julianna, can you give us a brief history of Radically Rural, how it came to be, and who is the summit for?

Julianna Dodson:

Whether you're in a rural or urban setting, or somewhere in-between, how people, culture and a society evolve is typically a whole tapestry of things. So you might have one person that starts an initiative, another person who carries it forward, someone who kind of iterates or evolves it, and before long you kind of just completely lose track of the threads and where they started and where they stopped.

Radically Rural was kind of like that, where it was this natural evolution of so many different efforts that had evolved over time, starting with the Hannah Grimes Center for Entrepreneurship back in 1997, where our founder and executive director, Marianne Christensen, started a marketplace for locally made goods and locally grown goods, because there wasn't anything like that around here at the time. And over time, we just kind of kept encountering new challenges and found creative ways to solve them. So as the marketplace was being run, we realized we needed business skills, our makers and growers need business skills. Let's start some programming to help them. As we go along, we realized we need to advocate for the needs of small businesses. We need to advocate for the needs of rural communities. It just kind of kept going and kept going.

We have an amazing relationship with our local newspaper, The Keene Sentinel, and in 2017 we had been running an annual event called Connect, which brought people from all over the region together to shape and share ideas. That was going so well for us, and we thought, “Can we do that on a national scale?” 

So here comes another thread. We have a company in our region called Badger, which makes skincare products that was started right here in Gilsum, and the owner, Bill Whyte, uses a particular method of developing ideas. So the Sentinel, Hannah Grimes, and Bill got together, and they kind of figured out how they could take these seeds of ideas to something real. That's when Radically Rural was born. 

Melanie Plenda:

What do you think makes Radically Rural unique? 

Julianna Dodson:

What I think makes it unique is that I don’t know of another summit in America that focuses on rural issues that is not also more specifically focused on one particular sector or one particular area or one political party constituency. So what I love about Radically Rural is that we are free to be responsive. We are free to meet the needs of our national rural community because we aren't kind of restricted to any one of those things.

I was actually just writing my opening comments to the summit today and really just inspiring myself while I did it. I was just kind of describing how we all in our lives have the things that we think, “If everyone could just blank” or “if the world would just blank” — everything would be better. We all have our things right? Whether it's local news and local media or whether it's education or health, or whatever it might be. We all have that thing that we think is the key to thriving communities. And that's the point — that we need all of it. 

These are all puzzle pieces that come together and fit together. So what I think makes Radically Rural unique is that we are a place, a primary place, where rural communities can bring these puzzle pieces together and fit them together. When we do that, we really weave a beautiful tapestry. I think what that does is it helps us to serve our local communities better when we can do that.

As an example, I was just speaking to one of our local Rotary Clubs, and I was describing how this platform can benefit our local region, even though we have people from all over North America who come. One of our local business owners came up to me afterward, and he said, “We really should use this platform to bring some people together who have gone through a big infrastructure overhaul in their downtown, because Keene is about to embark on a three-year infrastructure project, and the downtown businesses are nervous about being able to stay in business during that time.”

This is what this platform is for. We can put it out there to our national network and say, who's gone through something like this before. What did you do? Bring all your ideas. We don't need to re-create the wheel. We can pull those ideas and resources and connections together to then be a part of the solution, because everything that we're doing well in our region, we can share. 

Melanie Plenda:

How has Radically Rural grown over the years? And what do you attribute that growth to? 

Julianna Dodson:

It has grown to some extent, in numbers, although we've stayed pretty consistently between 500 and 600 attendees every year. It's grown in the sense that the number of states represented each year and the length that people are traveling to get here. But, in my opinion, the growth that we're aiming for — because we're really not aiming for exponential growth in numbers — is the growth in how the event is cultivated, the intention that's put into it, the quality of the programming, the quality of the outcomes and the impacts that this makes in our world. That’s the growth that’s most important to me, and in that way, our growth is off the charts, because every single year we hear more about what this is doing for folks and their communities, and it's getting to the point where it's impossible to even trace the threads and find out how it's impacted. 

We have a lot of folks that have made connections that have really benefited their work. They've gotten ideas that have started entire initiatives in their regions, including our region too. We have, for example, hosted several social practice artists in our region because of a session that was done on social practice art. And this year, in one of our art sessions, we are literally making a quilt together and talking about social practice art. So that quilt is sort of going to be a representation of our theme this year, which is “reweaving the social fabric.” The more we can find ways to bridge, the more we can find ways to come together, the better off we all are. 

Melanie Plenda:

Can you tell us about some of the highlights of the different tracks? Who are your speakers and what will they be talking about?

Julianna Dodson:

It is very difficult for me to just pick a couple of things.

One is a shameless plug, one that Hannah Grimes is going to be leading, and it is in the entrepreneurship track called “Can You Create a New Economic Sector? Lessons Learned from Trying.” Essentially, in the evolution of Radically Rural, we've continued to add different aspects of our programming. We've launched something called “Radically Rural Biotech.” It comes from that same natural evolution that I mentioned at the beginning of this call, where we decide, “This is bothering us. What can we do about it?” And what was kind of bothering us was like, rural communities don't exist only to be extracted from. They are generative. We have brilliant people living in our communities that can create, that can grow new things, so we started thinking about it, and because of some connections we had in our world, we realized that rural areas are actually perfect places to host biotech. And biotech is such a sector that is needed for now and for our future. But what we're discovering as we've tried to cultivate that sector locally is there are some missing pieces of the puzzle. There's funding gaps. Yes, there’s wealth in rural communities, but how are we going to get those investors comfortable with investing in something like biotech?

It's not just about biotech. It's about an experiment of whether this model can work for other things too. One of our sessions is about that, and I think it's going to be really, really interesting and highly relevant to every rural community or small community. 

I guess another one I will pull out that's been really popular is we have one in our Main Street track about attracting, retaining and engaging young people in your community. We have a wild number of people wanting to attend that session because that’s so important for small communities. The goal isn’t just “to grow up and just get out.” There is such a high level of value to a rural place, and what can we do to cultivate and engage young people in a way that causes them to want to stay or maybe move back some day. It’s sort of  a bit of changing the narrative that you’re not failing if you stay.

Melanie Plenda:

Julianna, to sum everything up — why should people go to Radically Rural? What can they get from it?

Julianna Dodson:

I think everyone would have their own answer to that. Mine would be how people feel when they leave is one of the most important things. For all of us, no matter what industry we're working in, no matter what our jobs are, the pace can be relentless in modern-day life. I think a lot of people are really burned out, and they're like,” I just can't fit one more thing in my schedule, like that just seems impossible.” To me, Radically Rural when you go, when you experience it beginning to end, how you feel when you leave is inspired, joyful, hopeful, connected. You have tools and resources at your disposal, and I really feel like it's so much wind in your sails so that you can do whatever you're doing better.

I'd say anyone in the state of New Hampshire should come really. I would highly recommend it to anyone who wants to just be given an injection of new ideas, new energy, inspiration and joy.

Melanie Plenda:

Thank you for joining us Radically Rural Director Julianna Dodson and good luck with the summit.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Audit of N.H. school voucher program to begin, but key information will be off limits

‘Most documents pertaining’ to Education Freedom Accounts won’t be available during process

By Susan Geier, Granite State News Collaborative

Sometime next spring, the public will get to see a performance audit of the N.H. Department of Education’s oversight of the Education Freedom Account program, which gives millions of tax dollars to eligible families to spend on private, parochial and home school expenses. 

But the audit will be missing “most documents pertaining to the EFA program” due to the “lack of access to primary program data and information,” according to the Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant, which is responsible for conducting the audit.

The scope of the audit was approved with noted limitations at the Aug. 27 meeting of the Joint Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee, which oversees the LBA. What can be included in the audit has been subject to months of meetings and disagreement among the LBA, committee members, the education department, and the N.H. Department of Justice over who owns the Education Freedom Account program information.

House Bill 1135, which was signed into law by Gov. Chris Sununu in July 2022, requires the LBA to complete a performance audit of the N.H. Department of Education’s operation of the program, which a third party runs through a contract signed with the department.

Under the bill, which went into effect in October 2023, the audit is supposed to include a review of the eligibility of participants, expenditures of the program and identification and recovery of possible ineligible reimbursements. Also to be audited would be the “procedures and controls” involved in disbursing the funds to the Children’s Scholarship Fund as well as demographic and geographic data about students taking part in the program in the 2020-21 school year. The New York-based Children’s Scholarship Fund (CSF) is the third-party contractor that administers the EFA.

In its audit scope statement, the LBA wrote, “most documents pertaining to the EFA program are solely in the possession of (the Children’s Scholarship Fund). For example, NHED does not currently possess policies, procedures, internal memoranda, or internal guidance developed by CSF to implement the program … or documents associated with initial EFA applications, documents used for determining eligibility for differentiated aid or annually verifying residency, or specific items purchased by each student with EFA funds.”

The Education Freedom Account has been subject to a partisan divide since a sole-source contract  (see PDF attached) to manage the program and distribute the money was awarded to the Children’s Scholarship Fund. Democrats and others say it diverts essential public school funds, while Republicans and program supporters say it gives parents education choice.

Since its inception in 2021, the taxpayer-funded voucher-like program has distributed almost $45 million to families sending their children to private schools and other alternatives to their local public schools.

Debate over access

Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut — backed by Christopher Bond, general counsel for the state Department of Justice — said the state isn’t compelled to ask for those documents, and asking the Children’s Scholarship Fund for the items violates the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. Edelblut also admonished the LBA for reaching out directly to the scholarship fund for information. 

State Rep. Lucy Weber, D-Walpole, a member of the committee, said the separation of powers argument makes no sense.

“The Legislative Budget Assistant audits executive branch actions. That’s what they do,” she said. “The purpose of the LBA is to ensure the executive branch is carrying out its duties in accordance with statues.”

The education department said chapter laws only give the LBA the authority to audit the department’s oversight of the program, and not the documents and other materials it says are the property of the Children’s Scholarship Fund — not the state. 

In its scope statement, the LBA also noted the education department and justice department interpretation of the state’s standard contract — which is required to be used by all state agencies when contracting for services — does not consider data collected or generated by the contractor to be the property of the state.

But Weber and other Democratic committee members remain unconvinced.

State Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D-Nashua) has criticized the decision to limit auditor access to Education Freedom Account information, saying that, despite Department of Education claims, the program ‘is not unique.’ (Courtesy photo)

State Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D-Nashua) has criticized the decision to limit auditor access to Education Freedom Account information, saying that, despite Department of Education claims, the program ‘is not unique.’ (Courtesy photo)

The committee’s chair, state Sen. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua, said every state contract with another entity uses the same “boilerplate” property ownership/disclosure language that’s in the Children’s Scholarship Fund contract. 

“Look at the Medicaid program,” Rosenwald said at the August meeting. “The state really owns all the data even though most of Medicaid is managed by private entities. This is not unique.”

The property ownership/disclosure provision, for example, is in the sole-source contracts the N.H. Department of Energy has with the five community action agencies, which operate and deliver weatherization services across the state. The program helps low-income households reduce energy costs and is funded through grants from the U.S. Departments of Energy and Health and Human Services. 

In its 2023 performance audit of the weatherization program, the LBA interviewed the state program manager, other department management and staff, and community action weatherization representatives. 

Additionally, auditors viewed documentation for each of the agencies generated from the five on-site monitoring visits. They looked at a variety of program documents, including monthly expenditure, status and production reports that were submitted by the community action agencies to the state. The status reports, for example, include program highlights, problems, production issues, and deviations from the work plan. The monthly expenditure reports contain year-to-date expenditures, budgeted amounts, and details like job cost sheets.

But state Rep. Kenneth Erf, R-Weare, a committee member, said in an interview that program audits may not always be consistent in how they are handled. In an interview, a fellow committee member, Rep. Kenneth Weyler, R-Kingston, agreed with Erf: “I’ve been reading audits for 30 years. None of these things are straightforward and none of these things are easy to do.”

Rep. Kenneth Weyler (R-Kingston) defended the limited Education Freedom Account audit. ‘I’ve been reading audits for 30 years. None of these things are straightforward and none of these things are easy to do,’ he said. (Screenshot)

Both men, however, said questions about the ownership of documents and the Education Freedom Account program are just more partisan attacks by Democrats trying to kill education choice. Democrats on the committee, such as Weber and Rosenwald, also agreed the situation is political, but they charge the education department is trying to obscure how the program is being run.

A matter of interpretation

At the August meeting, Sen. Howard Pearl, R-Loudon, did ask if the LBA had ever run into this issue before. 

 “I don’t recall ever running into an issue of this magnitude,” Christine Young, LBA’s director of audits, testified. “This is a little different, with the program being established in the chapter law and directing us to do an audit through the chapter law versus this committee directing us to do an audit.”

Jay Henry, LBA’s audit supervisor, specifically mentioned auditing other contractors, adding it’s possible those contracts have different or stronger language that allow access to program data. 

“To me, it's an interpretation of the state contract,” Henry testified. “We're abiding by their interpretation of how the contract and the law is. I think we’re still going to get a good audit out of it. It just won't be as thorough as it normally would have.”

The original contract with the Children’s Scholarship Fund was approved by the Executive Council Aug. 4, 2021. Councilor Cinde Warmington, D-Concord, cast the lone dissenting vote. She expressed concern that taxpayer money would be used to pay for private schools and that families don’t have to prove they meet the income eligibility criteria after the first year. 

To qualify for Education Freedom Account money, a family household income may not exceed 300 percent of the poverty level. In 2021, that was $79,500 for a family of four, and now it is $93,600. 

Once a family has been means-tested, it doesn't have to prove income while the child is in school up to age 20.

At that 2021 meeting, Gov. Chris Sununu said that it would be disruptive if a family had to change schools because of a change in income and that students in the public education system aren’t means-tested. The focus of the Education Freedom Account, he said, is providing another educational pathway for New Hampshire students.

In an email statement about the EFA audit, Young wrote, “We know in some cases the data and related materials were regularly collected by the state agency and were therefore easily accessed by us for audit purposes,” adding LBA staff have interviewed representatives of contractors to help them understand how a state program is performing. 

Bond, the Department of Justice counsel, said at the March 18 committee meeting and reiterated in an email to the Granite State News Collaborative that the chapter law around the Education Freedom Account doesn’t mean the state could never look at the contested information, and there could be other avenues, “including a direct audit of the scholarship organization.”

“The ultimate issue could be the language of the law, which focuses the audit process on the Department of Education but not on the scholarship organization itself,” Bond testified. 

He added:  "I don't think the program is un-auditable, but we don't think this chapter law gets to the scholarship organization through the vehicle of this vendor contract.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visitcollaborativenh.org.

Post-primary push: Anna Brown discusses the road to the November general election

The 2024 primary election in the Granite State is over, but candidates are already stumping for the November general election. On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Melanie Plenda discusses vetting candidates and the New Hampshire political scene with Anna Brown, director of Citizens Count, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating voters about the political process. 

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity. 

Melanie Plenda:

What’s your take on what happened in the primary? Any surprises in the wins or losses? 

Anna Brown:

In most cases, the better-funded candidate did end up winning the day. For example, Kelly Ayotte, an early favorite among Republicans, handily won over Chuck Morse, so she'll be moving on to the race for governor. Maggie Goodlander, who came in with a very impressive national network of fundraisers, defeated Colin Van Ostern in the 2nd Congressional District Democratic primary. 

On the 1st Congressional District side, it was an open field of Republicans, and it seemed like it was anyone's race, but ultimately, Russell Prescott did have the edge, and he also had, once again, the money edge. The 2nd Congressional District Republican primary was the exception — it was a little bit of a surprise. Lily Tong Williams raised less than both Bill Hamlin and Vikram Mansharamani, the other Republican candidates there, but was able to win the primary thanks in large part to a really good ground game. 

I did notice that this was a different story than in 2022. In 2022, a lot of the primaries, more of those farther-right, liberty-leaning Republicans, maybe Trump-oriented Republicans, had a lot of success in the primaries, but this time, at the federal and trickling down to the state level, I saw more of those institutional, maybe more moderate Republicans carry the day.

Melanie Plenda:

Before the primary, Citizens Count surveyed the candidates and posted that information for voters. Can you tell us a bit about those surveys? What did they entail? 

Anna Brown:

We survey the roughly 900 candidates for state and federal office in New Hampshire — state representative on up. We email, snail-mail, and follow up with phone calls.

The questions we asked are based on interviews with groups on both sides of the aisle, different advocacy groups. We also research campaign and party platforms, look at the biggest bills and solicit public input as well. So we come up with a list of about 20 questions, and we're looking for candidates to say are they for or against? Are they undecided? Do they have some other position that they'd like to share? 

I think that it's a really great resource for voters, because a lot of these state representative candidates, in particular — the public have no idea who they are. They might not have a website. Yes, they're local races, so maybe you do know their name from the PTA or just running into them at school sports or at the grocery store or the gas station. But it's really important to learn where these candidates stand, especially when they differ from their party, which happens a fair amount when you go down to that really local level.

Melanie Plenda:

What trends did you see in the survey data? 

Anna Brown: 

One thing that's interesting is there's not really consensus in the Republican Party right now about where they want to go on abortion policy.

Based on our research and survey results, about one-fourth of Republicans that are running for the state Legislature favor a first trimester ban on abortion, over one-third favor a second trimester ban, and a third also favor guaranteeing the right to abortion before 24 weeks. A lot of the survey responses we've gotten have also just said they’re not taking a stand on any particular theoretical ban, but just saying “I'm not looking to change the law, I want it to stand as it is now.” So there's not a majority of Republicans that would come in, it seems, looking to add new abortion laws. But it is interesting that the party as a whole doesn't seem to have one clear message on abortion. 

Also interesting, there's a certain percentage of Republicans, around 16%, based on our research and surveys, that are open to expanding net metering. That's a bit of a niche issue, but basically think of it as larger solar panel projects could get some benefits that would allow them to develop and move forward. So I think that there might be room for bipartisan agreement on that in the coming legislative session. 

Lastly — kind of interesting — over half of Democrats are open to some form of a capital gains tax. Now, over half of Democrats is still not enough to be a majority in the Legislature, because you'd need the Democrats to get a majority, and then you'd need most of them to be on board. So I'm not saying a capital gains tax is likely to come next year, but I do think it's an interesting change over time, because we are entering what is probably going to be a tough budget year. The federal money is going to be gone, so we're losing out on interest on that. The [interest and dividends] tax will have been phased out by then. There are big lawsuits coming related to school funding and the Sununu Youth Services Center. So I think that Democrats are looking at, OK, what other revenue source can we have? I've got some interesting survey responses too, saying, how about a capital gains tax on second homes that you sell, or something like that? So there may be some interesting tax ideas that come up next year.

Melanie Plenda:

What about voters? What issues are on their minds? 

Anna Brown:

Hate to be a broken record — abortion. We'll just throw that one out there and move on. 

One thing that we noticed when we were putting together our survey, immigration is definitely an issue that comes up a lot in national debates, but when we were asking voters for their input on the state level, it wasn't necessarily bubbling up as something that was really driving their vote. I think that's because most of New Hampshire — you’re not really seeing the impacts of immigration. We're very far away from the southern border, and while the northern border is a debate, I wouldn't say that we're experiencing anything close to what happens on the southern border. I think that's a pretty fair statement, regardless of how you feel about the exact numbers and what's coming in. So I wonder if Republicans are going to keep sort of trying that with voters, or if at the state level they might sort of move on. 

Then there's the issue of Trump. Quite frankly, Trump is just the one name that is absolutely on a lot of voters' minds. A lot of Republican challengers, I noticed in the primary, were saying, “I am a Trump candidate, I am aligned with Trump, and that didn't play as well in 2024 as it did in 2022. For example, even in the Congressional race in district 1, Joe Kelly Levasseur really branded himself as “I'm the only Trump candidate,” and he did not succeed. Whereas Karoline Leavitt really rode that to victory in 2022.

I think it'll be a similar tricky navigation. Voters care about it ,but is it a pro or a con? At this point, it definitely seems like in New Hampshire  anyway, you have to be careful about getting branded as too, dare I say, “Trumpy.”

Melanie Plenda:

During the general election, things can be simpler, in terms of fewer candidates. But it can still be challenging, especially in local races, to find out who to vote for. Do you have any tips or tricks for quickly and easily researching candidates? 

Anna Brown:

Shameless plug here for the Citizens Count website citizenscount.org. As I said, we survey all of these candidates, put any responses, they give us up on our website, and we will research those candidates who don't respond, looking at voting records and website statements, other media interviews and so on. 

But there are other places — you can go check out your local newspapers. Those are often great for those local races and local events as well. Events are a great time to meet these people and talk to them, because I think it's also true that the temperament of a person when you meet them can really come across differently than if you're just reading statements online.

Candidates do have websites, by the way. You can always go to a candidate's website, but be careful — there's a lot of really general statements in there, such as, “I support veterans” or “I support children.” What does that really mean? It's almost, I think, becoming coded for partisan signals, which at that point just look at the “R” or “D” next to their name. So I encourage voters to look deeper, especially on issues like marijuana legalization, which might not necessarily fall on party lines exactly.

Melanie Plenda:

For voting newbies here in the Granite State, what should they bring to the polls, and what can’t they bring into the voting booth? 

Anna Brown:

If you are 18 years old, you're a U.S. citizen, and you live in New Hampshire, you're allowed to vote. Now, if you show up without any documentation, there is going to be more paperwork for you, so if you don't want to fill out the extra paperwork and go through that, you're going to need proof of your identity, proof that you live in New Hampshire, and proof of your U.S. citizenship. So in a lot of cases, you're thinking about bringing your driver's license and your birth certificate or a passport.  You can also use, for example, leases and utility bills. If you're a student, some student IDs can also prove your identity, but keep in mind it does need to have an expiration date on it. So this is information we have on our website. It's also information you can find on the Secretary of State's website, and that's for people who are registering to vote.

If you are already registered, you should bring an ID. They do ask to see your ID. Once again, you will have options. If you don't have an ID, it will require more paperwork and follow up, but it's easiest to bring your ID, and for most people, that's probably a driver's license, although there are other options. 

In terms of what you bring into the voting booth, there are restrictions on quote, unquote electioneering. So basically, you can't walk into a polling place and then start handing out flyers for your favorite candidates. It has to stay neutral, but if you want to bring in a cheat sheet of who you want to vote for, that is totally fine. You can also open up your phone while you're in there and go to the Citizens Count website or whatever you want to do to help you make those decisions.

Melanie Plenda:

And finally, I’m sure you watched the recent presidential debate. What did you think? What were your takeaways? 

Anna Brown:

I think that Kamala Harris did a very good job with sticking to her message of “we're not going back.” And saying, “this is what I am going to do going forward” and talking about specific policy proposals. And I think Donald Trump was responding a lot to what she said, instead of offering his specific policy proposals, talking a lot about “we had the greatest economy,” so once again, that's sort of looking back.

I think that that's going to be a challenge for his campaign going forward, because realistically, Kamala Harris has positioned herself as “I'm the younger candidate, I'm more vital, I'm exciting, I'm going to do new, fresh things. We don't want to go back to chaos.” She was very clear on that message, even when you looked at their closing statements. Donald Trump had a lot of criticism. 

It certainly wasn't like the debate we saw for Trump versus Biden. Trump is a little bit rambly, if we'll be honest — I think that's his style. He sort of interrupts himself a lot and will go down a little tangent. But there wasn't any sort of sign that we saw with Biden where, I think, people are going to react and say, “He's just too old to do this.” But I do think, as I said, that Kamala Harris did come across as a little more collected in this debate.

Melanie Plenda:

Thank you for joining us Anna Brown, director of Citizens Count and executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

The legacy and impact of Nashua's The Youth Council

The nonprofit closed after 50 years as a source of support and guidance for area youth, but others have stepped in to fill the gap

By Elaina Bedio-Granite State News Collaborative

Editor’s note: This is another installment in our Nashua Nonprofit Spotlight Series highlighting some of  the Greater Nashua area’s approximately 365 nonprofit organizations and the meaningful work and crucial services they provide. Each article in this series features a different Nashua nonprofit.

On June 30, The Youth Council of Nashua permanently closed its doors after 50 years of serving as a resource for school-aged minors, with programs focused on youth guidance, counseling and intervention.

The nonprofit organization placed student assistance program counselors in Nashua's middle schools and high schools as well as at Fairgrounds Elementary School in Nashua and Merrimack High School – six area schools in total. The goal was to ensure that students had access to mental health resources and professional counseling. Additionally, its Project Succeed program provided behavioral health and counseling services for students who were either suspended or facing suspension.

The other important service of the organization was its juvenile court diversion program, one of 18 similar accredited programs in the state. These programs offer minors an alternative to formal court proceedings for minor offenses through a program of services. Research shows that juveniles who have successfully completed a diversion program have decreased rates of recidivism.

“The agency has been longstanding and has had a significant impact on the community in a variety of programs,” said Casey Caster, former executive director of The Youth Council.  “But we faced a lot of financial sustainability issues, which have also led to staffing capacity issues.” By that point, the writing seemed to be on the wall and the difficult decision was made to develop a strategy for the organization's closing. 

Caster said it was decided that ending operations at the end of June would make the most sense. “The majority of the work that we do is tied to the schools, within the school year. We looked at planning, giving ourselves time to transition programs into, hopefully, other schools, other locations. We really wanted to make sure that we were able to do that and have our programs last through the end of the school year,” she said.

Contination of crucial services

The Youth Council is moving through the necessary administrative requirements to dissolve the agency. However, a major point of focus for organizational leadership was to ensure that the crucial services it provided did not simply disappear. To them, it was imperative that the area's youth would continue to have access to these programs, said Caster.

“The board and I really looked at what was most important and it was very clear that continuing the programs was the top priority. Our hope in doing this in a proactive way was to look closely at who in the community might be able to take on these programs,” she said.

State grant funding will allow the Nashua and Merrimack school districts to hire the Youth Council's student assistance program counselors as school district staff. This means that students previously receiving The Youth Council's counseling services in school, will not experience any significant change in those services. But, due to a lack of funding, the Project Succeed program, which was only in its second year, will no longer be available.

The Youth Council has been supporting area young people for 50 years, and in that time it has had a significant impact on the community, says Casey Caster, former executive director of the organization. (Courtesy photo)

The Youth Council has been supporting area young people for 50 years, and in that time it has had a significant impact on the community, says Casey Caster, former executive director of the organization. (Courtesy photo)

The court diversion program, however, will continue to operate under a new organization, the Nashua Police Athletic League.

At the time the decision to close was made, said Caster, “we immediately met with the director of the Juvenile Court Diversion Network, which is a statewide network that accredits all the programs, and talked through some options. Then we approached a few community organizations to discuss whether or not it would be a good fit for them to take it on after we close, and the Nashua PAL stepped up. It took over operations on July 1.” The program is “based out of their agency and with our staff,” Caster added. “We have one full-time staff member who runs that program, and she'll be able to go right to that agency and it will still be supported by all of the grant funding that we've had in the past.”

And Caster herself continues to serve and advocate for the state's youth in her new role as director of resource development at the Bedford-based Granite State Children's Alliance.

The Youth Council's sustainability issue is by no means unique. Nonprofits are struggling across the board. The fate of The Youth Council should serve as an example as to why it is important to support local charities that provide much-needed services in the community. They cannot survive on service fees and grants alone. 

The Youth Council's leadership showed how to handle a most unfortunate circumstance. They sought guidance, spoke to their employees before the decision was made public, and secured new homes for the services they provided so as not to leave a gap in resource availability. For 50 years, they put people and mission first and the fact that the programs will continue to benefit the area's youth in the absence of the organization itself is The Youth Council's legacy. 

Even with The Youth Council gone, there are several Nashua organizations that continue to support at-risk youth and intervention in the area. Besides Nashua PAL, there are the YMCA of Greater Nashua, Waypoint, Girls Inc. and Boys & Girls Club of Greater Nashua.

This article was produced in partnership with Nashua Digital and Nashua Ink Link and is being shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

The power of youth: Will Gen Z voters have an impact on the 2024 elections?

A new wave of young voters will enter the electorate this fall. In this year’s presidential election, over 40 million members of Gen Z — the generation of people born in the late 1990s and early 2000s — will be eligible to vote. These voters could have a large impact on what happens at the ballot box. It’s no wonder candidates are courting this influential segment of society. Here to discuss how Gen Z’s influence may shape the 2024 election is Dante Scala, professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Dante, your research, published in January by UNH’s Carsey School of Public Policy, discussed the large pool of new voters entering the New Hampshire electorate. More than one-fifth of potential voters in the 2024 New Hampshire primary were new, either because they moved from elsewhere or because they reached voting age. Is that a typical number of new potential voters? How could that change things?

Dante Scala:

It is typical. My colleagues Ken Johnson, Andrew Smith and I have been running these numbers dating back now about 15 to 20 years, and reliably every four years the number of people new to the New Hampshire electorate is in that range of 15 to 20%, so we're talking one out of five, one out of six voters who are new to New Hampshire elections. Now, of that slice of the electorate, that new slice, most of those people are, in fact, not necessarily young, but they're migrants to the state, right? They've moved to the state over the last several years, and now they're getting ready to vote for the first time. The smaller slice are those younger voters. For instance, in 2024 we found 22% were new since 2020; 16% of those were migrants, and the other 6% were young people.

Melanie Plenda:

How uniform are the political beliefs of these young voters? Do they differ from older voters?

Dante Scala:

They do seem to be more liberal and less conservative. But it's interesting — I was watching the Democratic convention and looking at Barack Obama and thinking to myself, “I haven’t aged, but Obama's aged a bit.” You think back to that time period and his appeal to younger voters, and it was relatively uniform — roughly equal percentages of young men and young women were supportive of Obama. 

Nowadays, you see a good amount of division among young voters — especially the gender gap is quite clear between young women, who are definitely trending Democratic, and young men who have more conservative beliefs. So there's that split going on. But even among those young people who describe themselves as Democrats, they're what the Pew Research Center calls “outside left voters.” So they don't like Republicans very much, but they're a little suspicious, and they're not very patient with conventional establishment Democrats. 

Melanie Plenda:

Every new generation entering the electorate brings its own unique concerns. What are some of the key issues for Gen Z voters in this election cycle?

Dante Scala:

I would start with concerns that are not unique and kind of general to the population, which is the economy and inflation, which affects young people in all sorts of ways. College tuition, housing — young people are trying to get their first apartment, moving out of their parents homes. There are bread-and-butter issues, like the economy, health care, housing and the job market, which has been good until lately, but we've seen signs of it slowing down that could affect young people. 

Beyond that, this is a generation that's been raised and educated about climate change. They're quite ready to believe that we are in the midst of not just climate change, but a climate crisis. So that gets beyond traditional economic issues.

Abortion is clearly, for many young women, a front-burner issue, and I think that will certainly persist, especially in this presidential election, where Kamala Harris really has grounded herself and is very clear, sharp and to the point on reproductive rights, especially compared to Joe Biden, who, even though he was pro choice in his language, would express some ambivalence. That really dates back to the earlier parts of his political career and his own Catholicism. So you've got a candidate who kind of meets the moment with young female voters on an issue that has taken on such importance with the overturn of Roe.

Melanie Plenda:

After replacing Biden as the Democratic nominee, Harris has been seen front and center in the social media feeds of young voters through memes and edits featuring her speeches. Donald Trump also saw a surge of social media buzz after the assassination attempt. How will candidates’ social media content influence young voters' decisions to go to the polls in November?

Dante Scala:

I think the amount of time that young people spend on TikTok is a key point, and the ability to keep them engaged from minute to minute — just the amount of time young people, all of us, really, spend on their phones. I'm curious to see over the next nine to 10 weeks, what the novelty is on both sides to keep the ball rolling, so to speak, for these younger people. 

Debates – are they going to watch for 90 minutes? I don't think so. Are they going to watch for 30 seconds? It used to be that you could rely on people watching maybe debate clips of four or five minutes on the news. Now we're going to be taking those 90 minutes of debate and perhaps slicing it into 10 to 15 seconds. And we see this happening around the world, how politicians, even older politicians, are trying to learn to use TikTok to present images of themselves that appeal to younger people.

Melanie Plenda:

As the presidential election approaches, Democrats and Republicans will be making the final push to secure the support of young voters. What do you think both candidates will need to do to win the youth vote?

Dante Scala:

Social media is all well and good for engagement, attraction and so forth, but I still think you need people on the ground where young people are. Physically on the ground, — on college campuses, such as University of New Hampshire, St. Anselm College, Franklin Pierce and so on — that will engage with people, get them enrolled and get them to the polls. Sure, that some of that can be done via social media, no question. But it's the ability to create networks, social networks of engagement, that are going to be the key test, I think, for how these campaigns blend social media with kind of old-fashioned getting people to sign up for things.

Melanie Plenda:

Finally, to sum up, what kind of an impact do you think Gen Z voters will have in this election cycle? 

Dante Scala:

I really think it is interesting to watch, kind of mind the gaps among young people. I mean, we talked about the gender gap, we talked about possible enthusiasm gaps, identity gaps. Kamala Harris as a black South Asian woman will become a role model, a leader in particular for certain groups of voters. So I'm kind of watching for not just overall turnout, but the enthusiasm gaps — the young people getting to the polls, and will that happen evenly, or will, for young, say more conservative male voters, will Trump be seen as a figure of the past? That doesn't necessarily mean they'll go and vote for Harris, but will they show up for Donald Trump, or will they start to see him as kind of a figure who is receding from the present and someone who doesn't excite perhaps the way he excited a previous generation,

Melanie Plenda:

Dante Scala, professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire. Thank you so much for joining me here on The State We're In today.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visitcollaborativenh.org.

State Corrections Department appeals reinstatement of officer in use-of-force case

Commissioner objects to finding on alleged use of chokehold

By Pat Grossmith-Granite State News Collaborative

The N.H. Department of Corrections is asking the state Supreme Court to order a new hearing after an appeals board ordered reinstatement of a corrections officer.

The officer was fired for allegedly using excessive force on a cuffed and shackled inmate who said he was suicidal.

Thomas Macholl was a longtime Connecticut state trooper before being hired in New Hampshire in 2016 as a corrections officer. He had never faced disciplinary action until April 27, 2023, when he was fired before being reinstated by the state Personnel Appeals Board. The state Corrections Department is currently appealing that reinstatement. (SEIU 1984 photo)

The corrections department contends the Personnel Appeals Board erred when it denied it a full evidentiary hearing in the termination of Lt. Thomas Macholl.

“I do disagree with the finding,” said Corrections Commissioner Helen Hanks. She said it is important for residents of the prison — she does not describe those incarcerated as inmates or prisoners — to be treated with dignity and respect. “In this particular instance, it did not exist,” she said.

However, the Personnel Appeals Board — a panel appointed by the governor whose four members include two attorneys —  found that “no reasonable factfinder could determine that Lt. Macholl had used inappropriate or excessive force on the inmate.”

The board ruled that Macholl was terminated unjustly and ordered the corrections department to reinstate him. Macholl had worked at the state prison for seven years. The appeals board said that until April 27, 2023, Macholl had an exemplary record and had been regularly promoted. 

The appeals board didn’t let Macholl off the hook entirely. It ordered that he be suspended without pay for 20 days for failing to comply with the corrections department’s Suicide Prevention Policy. To terminate him for violating that policy would be “an unjust result,” according to the board’s order on Macholl’s motion for summary judgment dated March 27, 2024.

Macholl was a longtime Connecticut state trooper before being hired in New Hampshire in 2016 as a corrections officer. He had never faced disciplinary action until April 27, 2023, when he was fired.

The corrections department asked for a rehearing on the appeals board decision, but the board rejected the request on May 21, 2024. A month later, the corrections department filed its appeal to the state Supreme Court.

"While the Department of Corrections has appealed this matter to the Supreme Court, we remain confident that the Personnel Appeals Board reached the correct and lawful decision when it concluded that Lt. Macholl used appropriate force for a lawful purpose and overturned his termination,” said Gary Snyder, the State Employees Association attorney who represented Macholl, in an email statement. “We are confident the Supreme Court will uphold the Board's decision on appeal and hope that the Department will recognize its error and return Lt. Macholl to his position in accordance with the Board's order." 

Hanks said the appeals board did not allow the corrections department to present evidence, including interviews or video recordings of the incident, to the board. She said the board relied on paper filings and an investigative report from the N.H. Attorney General’s Public Integrity Unit, which reviewed the corrections department’s videos and its investigative file of the incident.

The public integrity unit concluded there was insufficient evidence to show, under a probable cause standard, that Macholl “was outside the bounds of permissible force when he detained J.M. (the prisoner). Accordingly, this Office will take no further action and this matter is now closed,” wrote Senior Assistant Attorney General Dan Jimenez in a letter Dec. 22, 2023, to attorney Stacie Moeser of the N.H. Police Standards and Training Council.

The incident unfolds

The Granite State News Collaborative obtained videos of the incident from the corrections department. The videos have no sound. In them, the inmate’s face is obscured, and his identity is blacked out in the investigative report that the collaborative obtained from the Public Integrity Unit. He is not identified in any of the documents, including in the Personnel Appeals Board decision.

Jane Graham, strategic communications administrator for the N.H. Department of Corrections, said the agency checked with the attorney general’s office on requirements in the state’s right-to-know law, and got clearance on a privacy basis to withhold the prisoner’s identity and to blur his face.

According to the records obtained by the news collaborative, on April 27, 2023, the prisoner was involved in what the corrections department calls a “use of force incident” at the Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility in Berlin. According to the corrections department, that morning Macholl arrived early to assist transport officers because he anticipated issues with a particular inmate. Three days earlier, the transport officers had attempted to take the same man to the New Hampshire State Prison in Concord, but he told them he was suicidal.

Macholl followed corrections department protocol that day, notifying medical personnel of the man’s suicidal ideations and waiting for them to make an assessment. The inmate was evaluated, determined not to be suicidal, and ordered to be transferred again to the Concord prison. 

He was being sent back to the prison because on April 10, 2023 — the day he arrived in Berlin — he beat up his cellmate, according to the investigative report. He was to be placed in the secured housing unit — what’s known as solitary confinement, or “the hole” — on his arrival at the Concord prison.

The morning of the second attempt to transport the man, the inmate again said he was suicidal, screaming it repeatedly. That time, Macholl did not notify medical staff. Instead, he told the man he would be evaluated in Concord, and with the help of two other correctional officers proceeded to drag the man, who passively resisted by going limp, from the cell, down a hallway and into the transport van.

Hanks said while the public integrity unit determined Macholl did not use an illegal chokehold under the law, it did not address or exonerate Macholl for violating the department’s internal use-of-force policy and procedure directives.

“It took three correctional officers to drag the resident down the hallway and forcibly place him in the transport van,” according to the appeal filed by Senior Assistant Attorney General Mary A. Triick.

Once in the van, which is not equipped with cameras, the man continued to say he was suicidal and began banging his head against the plexiglass divider, according to the documents.

According to a narrative of the incident, Macholl grabbed the man and applied a mandibular pressure point technique (applying pressure to a spot directly below the ear lobe) to the right side of the inmate’s head. Once he pulled the man out of the van, cameras recorded Macholl with his left arm around the area of the man’s throat while applying the mandibular pressure point to the right side of his head.

Macholl continued to apply the pressure to the inmate as he pulled him from the van and took him back to a cell. 

According to Commissioner Hanks, video shows Macholl lifting up the man, who is cuffed and shackled; at one point, his toes are not touching the ground.

When interviewed by Dan Hammer and Yail Balderrama, investigators with the Department of Corrections, the inmate described what happened from the time he was removed from the “tank” (the holding cell), taken to the transport van and then brought back.

While in the tank, the inmate said in the interview, he looked at the monitoring camera, put the “slice to my throat” and repeatedly screamed "I'm suicidal” while banging on the door. Eventually, Macholl and two other correctional officers came into the cell and cuffed him. Continuing to scream “I’m suicidal,” the inmate said, “Macholl starts dragging me down to the van.”

He said he was “really, really scared. I thought I was going to get my ass whooped at the car.”

Two inmates were already in the van when he reached it, he said. 

“They are dragging me to the van, and we are basically fighting,” the inmate told the investigators. “He dragged me, threw me on it, and I was like trying to pull my face out as he was trying to bump me up and he was trying grip me, and that's when he went underneath and started choking me, and I was screaming too when he choked me and he cut me off. Yo, I thought I was gonna die.”
The inmate told investigators that inside the van, Macholl “was choking me, I started blacking out, he was choking me. All of a sudden he let go and I breathed for air, and when I went down I breathed for air and I was like buckle, buckle, I unbuckled myself. I was like ‘Help! I'm suicidal, help!’ And he was like,’Oh, he unbuckled it,’ so that's when I started banging my head on the window, and it wasn't because I was screaming ‘suicidal’ that handlebar (the corrections officer who was the driver) said this, because he should of said this in the beginning, it’s because I believe that in all my heart he didn't want to die on the way over. He didn't want to mess up, turn the wheel back, get distracted, get into a car crash and die himself because he didn't care. At that point, he didn't care about the inmates in the car or me, He cared about his own life. Cuz that's when he said, ‘I can't transport.’ That's when Lt. Macholl rough-handled me, grabbed me out and started dragging me when I was in that road right there with no camera. He stuck something right here, in my neck, and it was bleeding a little bit.”

A Public Integrity Unit photograph of the unnamed inmate’s neck taken the day of the  use-of-force incident shows a mark underneath his right ear. The photo is included in the use-of-force report investigating the incident.

What the inmate described is the mandibular pressure point technique. A video of corrections department Capt. Scott Towers demonstrating the technique (Insert link to video demonstration) on a mannequin was made as part of the investigation and released to the Granite State News Collaborative. A photograph taken the day of the incident of the inmate’s neck and released by the Public Integrity Unit shows a mark underneath his right ear.

In his interview with investigators, the inmate said Macholl pressed some sort of object into his neck — not a finger. “It's not the first time I have had someone put something to my throat, do you know what I am saying? That was not a finger.” Macholl’s other hand, he told the investigators, was around his throat. 

The inmate said that he could breathe. After Macholl told him to walk, the inmate said, he began to shuffle a bit, and “it hurt, it hurt.” Hammer asked what it felt like. The inmate said, “A lot of pain and I could honestly feel the cut, feel like it went in and it felt like a lot of pain, a lot of pain.”

Macholl didn’t release the pressure until the inmate was back in the holding tank, according to the appeal.

The inmate said his voice was “croaky” afterward, but he didn’t know if that was because of the chokehold or because he had been screaming. 

“I was screaming, I might have lost my voice. I know it was hard for me to speak, and I tried to speak. It was hard for me to speak. I didn't have a lot of air in me. Could have been from me holding my breath, I don't know. On camera it might show that he was choking me. I really don't know, it happened like this (snaps fingers),” he said. 

The two inmates who also were in the van were interviewed as well. One said the lieutenant did not use a chokehold while the other said he used a “loose chokehold.” Both said Macholl did not use excessive force. Their names were not released.

Once the inmate was back in the holding cell, “it was only at this point, after force had been used to move the resident out of his cell and the resident had escalated from suicidal ideations to self-harming behavior, that Lt. Macholl notified medical personnel and called for backup officers to respond,” Senior Assistant AG Triick wrote in the appeal.

After he was put into the holding cell, someone brought in a camera to record what was happening. That should have been done when the incident first began, Commissioner Hanks said.

At that time of the incident, Hanks said, “unfortunately” corrections officers did not have body-worn cameras. Since July 2023, however, all of the state’s over 360 officers are fitted with a camera.

Macholl was fired for violations of multiple corrections department policies, including the use-of-force policy and the suicide prevention and intervention policy.

In its decision ordering reinstatement of Macholl, the Personnel Appeals Board said the Public Integrity Unit (PIU) noted in its report that Capt. Scott Towers, who is considered the most knowledgeable and qualified corrections department employee to analyze use-of-force incidents, was asked by Assistant Corrections Commissioner Paul D. Raymond Jr. for his expert opinion on the matter.

“Captain Towers was shown two out of four video angles of the incident and concluded that neither view supported a conclusion that Lt. Macholl had used inappropriate or excessive force. The Assistant Commissioner specifically told Captain Towers not to document his opinion on the matter. When he was interviewed by the PIU, Captain Towers was able to review two other video angles, which led him to state with even more conviction that Lt. Macholl did not use excessive force or an illegal chokehold,” according to the appeals board.

The appeals board concluded that “no reasonable factfinder would conclude that Lt. Macholl had used unlawful or excessive force to gain the inmates’ compliance. All the witnesses who were actually present, with the exception of the inmate on whom the pain compliance technique was used, agreed that Lt. Macholl had not used a chokehold or other excessive force.”

The board also said the video evidence was “deemed generally unreliable to reach the conclusions reached by the NHDOC to determine that Lt. Macholl had acted inappropriately.”

Hanks said board members never viewed the videos themselves but relied on the Public Integrity Unit’s report to reach its decision. In a statement, the Personnel Appeals Board said it “does not provide comment on cases” and couldn’t confirm or deny whether its members viewed the actual videos.

According to Graham, the strategic communications administrator, very few disputes from the corrections department wind up in front of the Personnel Appeals Board — normally one a year, at most. This year has been an exception: Two cases went through the appeals process.

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org. 

State Board of Education gets halfway through updating its minimum standards for schools

The board has not yet tackled key issues that have drawn sharp criticism

By Rhianwen Watkins-Granite State News Collaborative

The N.H. Board of Education voted Wednesday morning to approve the first half of a new set of minimum standards for schools, a document which has gone through several rewrites and drawn sharp criticism from educators and the public.

The board has yet to approve the second half of the revised standards - the half which includes the majority of educators’ concerns about the revisions, including a change in wording from “shall” to “may” for many curriculum requirements. 

When the board invited the public to comment on its proposal to revise the standards, opinion ran 200-1 against the proposed changes.

Once the board signs off on the revised standards, the proposal goes to the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, which will ultimately decide if the proposal, as a whole, is adopted, based on whether it complies with state law. 

JLCAR is scheduled to review the proposal on Sept. 19, and the education nonprofit Reaching Higher said in a press release that JLCAR could “approve them, send them back to the (education department) for changes, or issue a preliminary objection, which would pause the process.”

By law, the education minimum standards must be updated every 10 years, and the current update effort has been led by Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut. The entire process has faced overwhelming criticism from school superintendents, teachers, teachers union members, parents and lawmakers. 

The state Department of Education has introduced multiple drafts of an update, and educators have raised concerns over key elements, such as replacement of the word “courses” with “learning opportunities,” which educators say is too vague.

A key issue is a wording change in the second half of the standards, from “shall” to “may” when referring to curriculum components. Educators say “may” makes these components optional, and could remove the state’s responsibility to adequately fund education. Educators say that will cause further division and worsen a lack of equity among school districts.

Another concern on part of educators, in prior drafts of the proposal, was the removal of class size requirements. However, Kimberley Houghton, communications administrator for the N.H. Department of Education, said the board reinstated maximum class sizes for different grade levels, in response to educators’ requests. 

Educators have voiced their mounting concerns throughout the four-year process, hoping for changes in the final proposal.

Christine Downing, director of curriculum, instruction and assessment for the Cornish, Grantham and Plainfield school districts, and state Rep. David Luneau, D-Hopkinton, were both at Wednesday’s meeting. In written testimony, Downing offered a list of specific changes she wanted to see before the final proposal is approved. Items on the list were discussed extensively among Luneau, Downing and the board. 

Though some minor changes were made, Christina Pretorius of Reaching Higher said  “the changes that they made weren't the substantive ones that we have been seeing concerns about.” Those are in the second half of the proposal, which board has yet to approve.

After the discussion on standards, educators voiced their opinions.

“Public schools are the great equalizer — and the 306 Rules are intended to hold our state to that,” said Megan Tuttle, president of NEA-New Hampshire, in a statement after the vote. “Educators fought for a seat at the table in the public school standards revision process to share our experience and expertise. Unfortunately, not all of our concerns have been addressed. … As the 306 Rules revision process continues, public education leaders will continue to hold lawmakers accountable and work to ensure New Hampshire maintains strong standards for strong public schools because our students deserve it.”

Deb Howes, president of AFT-New Hampshire, had similar criticisms.

“It is really problematic that our State Board is attempting to vastly reshape public education through rulemaking in ways they couldn't get lawmakers to do over the past two years,” Howes said. 

“The State Board has already been alerted that this rules proposal conflicts with existing state law in many ways,” she said. Board members “should have taken more time and carefully considered the mountain of feedback they have already received from Granite Staters who value robust public schools for all before plowing ahead and voting to approve this proposal.” 

The N.H. Attorney General’s office raised concerns in May about the constitutionality of a former version of the education 306s, and many of those concerns have not been addressed yet. 

Past versions of the proposal have also been criticized by Andru Volinsky, lead lawyer on the Claremont Supreme Court ruling that set requirements for access to equal education in New Hampshire. Volinsky said proposals to revise the 306 rules did not uphold those laws because of wording changes, elimination of class size requirements, and other revisions that have faced backlash from the public.

Nicole Heimark, executive director at Reaching Higher, focused on how the new standards might affect the quality of education in New Hampshire.

“New Hampshire’s public schools have long been the pride of our communities and held to high standards that have resulted in rigorous, meaningful educational opportunities for all of our students,” she said in the organization’s press release. “This proposal could put our public schools on a very different path, one with lower expectations for students and public schools. Granite State students, families, and educators deserve standards that reflect the very best of us, but there are a lot of open questions and concerns with this proposal that we’ll be watching as the rules go to the next phase of the process.”

These articles are being shared by partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. For more information visit collaborativenh.org. 

CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect that, at Wednesday’s meeting, the state board had approved only the first half of the minimum standards document that was under consideration. Action has not yet been taken on the second half, which includes the majority of educators’ concerns about the revisions, including a change in wording from “shall” to “may” for many education requirements. Kimberley Houghton, communications administrator for the N.H. Department of Education, also clarified that standards for maximum class sizes, which had been softened in a prior draft of the document, have been reinstated into the proposal in response to educators’ requests. The original version incorrectly stated this information. We regret the error.

Lack of audit for state’s Education Freedom Account program raises concerns

Despite law requiring legislative review, Department of Education has erected roadblocks

By Sarah Donovan, Granite State News Collaborative

New Hampshire legislators and public education advocates say they’re increasingly concerned that financial information about the state’s Education Freedom Account program is being hidden from public view.

Since its inception in 2021, the taxpayer-funded voucher-like program has distributed $44,918,979 to families sending their children to private schools and other alternatives to their local public schools.

A bill signed into law by Gov. Chris Sununu in July 2022 (House Bill 1135) requires the Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant — an arm of the state Legislature — to complete a performance audit of the N.H. Department of Education’s operation around the program, which a third party runs through a contract signed with the education department. 

Under the bill, which took effect in October 2023, the audit is supposed to review the eligibility of participants and the program’s expenditures program, and to identify and recover possible ineligible reimbursements. Also to be audited are the “procedures and controls” for disbursing the money to the Children’s Scholarship Fund, and demographic and geographic data about students who were in the program in the 2020-21 school year. The New York-based Children’s Scholarship Fund is the third-party contractor that administers the Freedom Accounts.

Legislators on the House-Senate Joint Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee, meeting March 18, voiced frustration with the lack of an audit. At the meeting, officials of the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant notified the panel that they’d been unable to obtain the information needed to complete the audit that the law requires. 

At the meeting, as reported by New Hampshire Bulletin, the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant said it reached out to the education department in January to begin the audit process. However, the department said it did not have access to the data needed for the audit, because the Children’s Scholarship Fund is a private contractor, not a public agency. That opinion was backed by a ruling from the state attorney general’s office.

The legislative budget agency said it then reached out independently to the Children’s Scholarship Fund without consulting the education department, and the fund’s officials said that they could hand over the data after receiving approval from the education department. Shortly after that, the Children’s Scholarship Fund sent a follow-up letter to the budget agency, stating it could not share the data the agency had requested, New Hampshire Bulletin reported. 

State Sen. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua — a member of the larger Joint Legislative Fiscal Committee, which oversees the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant and has discretion to investigate any matters that relate to state expenditures — said Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut told the legislative budget assistant it was unconstitutional for it to reach out to the Children’s Scholarship Fund, because the agency is connected to the Legislature and lacks authority to do so. Edelblut’s opinion was backed up by an opinion issued by the attorney general’s office.

Nevertheless, Kimberly Houghton, the education department’s communications administrator, told the Granite State News Collaborative, “The New Hampshire Department of Education continues to cooperate with the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant as it proceeds with the audit of the Children’s Scholarship Fund. Our agency welcomes the ongoing process to provide accountability and transparency for Education Freedom Accounts.”

Houghton did not clarify what the budget office can audit in regard to the education department, or how the audit would violate student privacy laws, cited among the reasons the information could not be provided to the budget office.

Christine Young, director of audits for the budget office, stated in an email that “in accordance with longstanding practice, our Office does not comment on ongoing audits.”

‘Defying the Legislature’

The failure to get a complete financial picture of the Education Freedom Accounts program has frustrated some lawmakers, including Sen. Debra Altschiller, D-Portsmouth.

“The commissioner of education …  is defying the Legislature. That’s what's happening,” Altschiller said.

’The commissioner of education …  is defying the Legislature,’ says state Sen. Debra Altschiller, D-Portsmouth, a member of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee, about the slow-moving Education Freedom Account program audit process. (Courtesy)

Like Rosenwald, Altschiller is a member of the Joint Legislative Oversight Committee, and at several meetings of that committee, she has questioned the operation of the Education Freedom Accounts program, including the sudden disappearance of financial information on the state education department website that was once public. The information included a report listing how much money each vendor involved in the program has received. 

At an April 15 meeting of the committee, Altschiller asked Caitlin Davis of the education department why the information was removed from the agency’s website.

Davis replied, “The CSF is not required to provide that to the Department of Education, and while we’ve had it on the Department of Education in the past, it is not specific Department of Education data, and so we removed that from our website because of the number of informational requests we get about that that we don’t have additional information we can provide.” 

Davis said that if people have questions, they can contact the Children’s Scholarship Fund. 
Also at the meeting, Altschiller asked why the Children’s Scholarship Fund contract differs from contracts with other state departments. 

For example, she said, the Department of Health and Human Services —  the largest department in state government — “hires a plethora of third-party contractors,” Altschiller said, and information about those contracts is available. 

In an interview with the Granite State News Collaborative, Altschiller specifically cited Waypoint, a nonprofit organization that provides a range of social services through Health and Human Services. The nonprofit deals with highly sensitive information but can satisfy the requirements of an audit, she said, and it is not unreasonable to require an audit for a state contract that shows where the money is being spent and if it is being used effectively. 

She said she has received no answers to the questions she’s asked at Joint Legislative Oversight Committee meetings — answers she was told would be provided at further meetings but still has not been provided. Altschiller said that she anticipates as much obfuscation at future meetings.

“The only people asking questions are people in the Joint Legislative [Oversight] Committee,” she said, and they are not getting adequate answers.  “The EFAs are a black hole. They’re not required to give us any information, and don’t,” Altschiller said.

Some information available

Some information is available to the public on the Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire website, including the gender demographic of students in the program, a breakdown of the number of students by grade level, the number of graduates from the program, other “exits” from the program and public school re-enrollments. Financial information is also available on the website — expenditure reports, an independent audit, and a parent handbook that outlines qualifications for the program, among other data. Also provided is the number of “switchers,” students who previously went to public school and are now in the EFA program. 

All of that general information can be found on the 2023 Education Freedom Account Financial Fact Sheet, as well as under the EFA Reporting and Fact Sheets on the Children’s Scholarship Fund NH website.

What is not included is the number of “non-switchers” taking part since the program's inception. “Non-switchers” are students who were already in a private school and are now receiving Education Freedom Account grants.

The program is open to any student who is a New Hampshire resident and is eligible for enrollment in a public elementary or secondary school, and whose annual family income is at or below 350% of the federal poverty level, or about $109,000 for a family of four.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund’s NH website also contains a 2022-23 EFA Vendor & Category Spending Data report that includes an itemized list of the amounts each private school and other vendors received during the 2022-23 school year. 

Who has access to the data?

Since certain information is contained on those websites, it’s unclear why the education department has not given the Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant the information it is seeking.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund 2024 contract with the state says it “shall provide available information in the form of data, reports and written and verbal testimony as requested by Education Freedom Savings Account Legislative Oversight Committee, State Board of Education, the NHED, or Parent and Education Service Provider Advisory Commission within 45 days of the request.”

The contract states that this requirement corresponds with governing federal and state laws regarding student data privacy. 

Kate Baker Demers, executive director of the Children’s Scholarship Fund NH, said the budget agency was seeking personally identifiable information and the education committee told the agency it wouldn’t provide families’ tax returns.

“They [the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant] were still working on the scope of the audit during that time of discussion when the commissioner told them they couldn’t have a piece of this from us — the tax returns,” said Baker Demers. “And so people took that to mean they couldn’t audit the program, which is not true. 

“One, we already audit the program. And two, they can definitely audit the Department of Ed’s part of the program. And then if the Department of Ed needs something, they can tell us to give it to them. 

“But for example, if we had to give them tax returns, they’d have to be redacted, because there’s privacy laws that tell me I have to do things with people’s private information, right? For example, I can’t give you a list of students that has their names on it, right? The student privacy laws would prohibit me from doing that,” said Baker Demers. 

‘The public has a right to know’

However, Gregory Sullivan — an attorney who specializes in media law, is president of the Manchester-based law firm Malloy & Sullivan, and is president of the New England First Amendment Coalition — said that he’s never seen a case similar to the Children’s Scholarship Fund audit argument. He’s been in the legal field for 46 years.

“From a legal point of view, this Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire is subject to the Right-to-Know law, chapter 91-A,” Sullivan said. “So never mind a legislative budget assistant — any person should be able to request and receive specific information from CSF. It’s that simple.”

“If you’re a private organization, but you are dealing with taxpayers’ money, then the public has a right to know everything there is to know about those finances,” Sullivan said.

State Rep. Rick Ladd, R-Haverhill, right, chair of the House Education Committee and vocal supporter of the Education Freedom Account Program, says that, while he’s not familiar enough with the EFA audit process, he adds ‘the LBA is asking for the information.’ He’s shown here at the N.H. Department of Education’s 2024 Excellence in Education Awards with Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut, left. (Screenshot from the commissioner’s official account on X, formerly Twitter)

While it’s not clear what, if any, information the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant has received so far, it is putting together a “scope statement” for an audit — a statement that defines what the audit will examine, the time frame involved and what the audit’s objectives are. That statement is expected to be presented to the Joint Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee when it meets Aug. 27.

While it’s a sign that the audit process might be getting underway, Sen. Rosenwald is not hopeful. “[There’s a] serious lack of accountability. There’s really no transparency in this program because there’s no data,” Rosenwald said.

She said lack of transparency about the Education Freedom Account data “makes you wonder what they’re afraid of” revealing.

But state Rep. Rick Ladd, R-Haverhill, chair of the House Education Committee, sees the Education Freedom Account program in a more positive light because, he said, it gives children an educational opportunity they may otherwise not have.

“The program is aimed at providing the best option for students,” said Ladd, adding that he’s “all on board for increasing the income eligibility.” An effort to raise the income eligibility limits to as high as 500% of the poverty level, or $158,000 for a family of four, failed in the last legislative session after the House and Senate couldn’t reach a compromise. In 2023, the median household income for a family of four in New Hampshire was $151,546, according to U.S. Census Bureau data analyzed by the U.S. Justice Department.

Asked if he was concerned about lack of program oversight, Ladd said he was not familiar enough with the audit process to comment on it, but does know that “the LBA is asking for the information.” 

“I’m looking forward to seeing any report come out of the Legislative Budget Office,” Ladd said.

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

With deadline looming, debate and concern over school minimum standards continue

An update to the 306s is meant to be completed by September, but the State Board of Education hasn’t even begun discussing the second half of the document and critics remain worried about lack of transparency in the process. 

By Kelly Burch, Granite State News Collaborative

With a September deadline looming, the State Board of Education has not finished updating the first half of the minimum standards for public school approval — which are reviewed every 10 years — and has not even begun considering the “back half” of the document. 

At a July 11 meeting of the board, there was “no vote, and no indication of when they'd take it up,” said Christina Pretorius, policy director for Reaching Higher NH, a nonpartisan nonprofit focused on education in the Granite State. The board will not meet again until Aug.14, the last scheduled meeting prior to a Sept. 10 deadline. 

Under state law, rule updates like those to the minimum standards, known as the 306s, must be submitted to the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules — JLCAR — six months after a draft proposal is filed with the state. Based on that, the 306s have a Sept. 10 deadline for the “front half” of the document, which deals with operational essentials like class size, and a Sept. 17 deadline for the “back half,” which deals with specifics of the curriculum. 

The Department of Education has divided the lengthy document into two sections to streamline revisions. 

Policymakers watching the process are concerned that, after more than a year of public commentary and a behind-the-scenes consulting process that started in 2020, the state is approaching the deadline with a 306 document that reduces standards, removes equity protections, and opens the door to privatization of public schooling. 

They’re also still concerned that many changes to the draft documents are happening out of public view. 

“The central, key questions about how public schools are going to be operating from here on out haven’t been addressed yet,” Pretorius said. “The department and state board haven’t addressed the meatiest pieces of [the 306s] — the big questions around weakening requirements, class sizes, and replacing ‘shall’ with ‘may.’”

The Department of Education “currently expects to meet the … deadlines, but if not, it will seek an extension,” said Kimberly Houghton, spokesperson for the department. 

Christie Downing, a curriculum director who has worked extensively on the 306 revision but is no longer formally involved, would like the board to seek an extension so it can better integrate feedback from teachers and administrators. 

“Let’s not rush it for the sake of … an arbitrary deadline,” she said. 

Continued concerns about transparency

There are continued concerns about the transparency of the process and the ability for public input, issues that critics have pointed out for more than a year. Many changes in the draft document are made out of public view. 

“One trend that we’re seeing is there is a lot of work being done behind the scenes” by board Chairman Drew Cline and Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut, Pretorius said.

The department releases an updated draft to state board members prior to each meeting, Houghton said, but that document is not made public until after the meeting. That has made it difficult for members of the public — even those most involved with the process — to submit their input. 

“I’m struggling right now to even keep up with what they are looking at,” said Downing. “When I provide feedback, it’s like they’ve already moved on from that. I don’t think I’m the only one who's experiencing that.”

At the July 11 meeting, some board members expressed confusion about the document that the board was considering, the changes that had been made, and even whether they had the most up-to-date document. (Listen to a recording of the meeting here).

Even for people who are familiar with the education system, understanding the changes between drafts can be “like drinking from a firehose,” Pretorius said.

A focus on the ‘front half’

After the July meeting, the education department released yet another side-by-side document detailing changes to the front half of the 306s. Many of the updates are on “the periphery,” Pretorius said, and don’t address more than 200 comments from the public, all but one of which was in opposition to the current draft. In addition, the changes did not address language that Statehouse lawyers flagged as possibly unconstitutional. 

"One of the things that’s really striking is they’re having these really technical conversations … but there’s nobody in the room who’s an expert on these issues to help shed light and guide them through that process,” Pretorius said. 

Fred Bramante, president of the Durham-based National Center for Competency-Based Learning, was hired to facilitate the revisions in part based on his expertise about competency-based education, yet he said that his team is “largely sitting on the sidelines right now.”

“I did talk to the commissioner. I got the impression that they’ve resolved pretty much all of the issues,” he said. 

One concern that remains outstanding, Bramante said, is the debate over shifting the word “shall,” which is legally binding, to “may,” which is not. Bramante said he believes the department will take up that issue in the future.

“They’re not going to do it in this round,” he said. “They’re going to have to open up rulemaking again. That’s what I think.”

According to the July 10 draft, students can advance in their education when they’ve demonstrated “proficiency” in a subject. Current 306 regulations don’t outline when a student can advance, but a previous draft of the revisions, introduced by Bramante’s group, required students to show “mastery” of a subject. Critics have said that using the word “proficiency” instead allows students to advance without fully grasping a subject. 

“Someone could make a case that that’s lowering the standards,” Bramante said. 

Although the mastery-vs.-proficiency debate has received attention, Bramante said that educators he spoke to didn’t have a strong opinion about the word choice. 

“I asked every single time there was a superintendent in the room and none of them cared,” he said. 

Bramante did not know how the department planned to address ongoing concerns about class size. 

More time for the second half of the document?

With a focus on the front half of the document, the state board has not even begun discussing the back half of the 306s yet, and there’s no set timeline for doing so. 

“Once the work on the front half is complete, efforts will then be focused on the back half,” said Houghton, the department spokesperson.

The rules outlined in the 306s are effective for 10 years from the time they are adopted. Currently, “there are sections in the 306s that have already expired,” Pretorius said, while other sections have been updated recently and won’t expire for seven years or more. 

In the back half of the document, five of 19 sections expired in March 2024, according to Downing’s written testimony. The remaining sections will expire between 2026 and 2032.  

Rather than “rushing some things … when in reality you don’t need to rush them,” Downing said, she would like to see the board take this year to be “more thoughtful" the second half of the 306 revision process.. 

At the July board meeting, Downing submitted a proposal to have teacher working groups assist the board in updating the back half of the 306s. The process would extend through November, according to her plan, which she first shared with the board in April. 

Although she was formally involved with the revisions between October 2023 and January 2024, Downing no longer has an open dialogue with the department, and said she doesn’t know whether it is considering her suggestion. 

Legislative efforts to change the 306 process

Meanwhile, the Legislature has passed two measures that could impact the 306 update, either during this round or in the future. House Bill 1163, which was signed into law on July 3, authorizes the Legislative Oversight Committee on Educational Improvement and Assessment to review and make recommendations about the 306s. The law takes effect 60 days after signing, so it’s unclear whether it will impact this 306 revision, but it will impact future efforts. 

“The department and state board will have to be more responsive to the Legislature with what they are proposing,” Pretorius said.

House Bill 1622, which has passed both houses but not yet been signed into law, would require agencies to report how they incorporated public feedback into the rulemaking process. It also takes effect 60 days after signing. 

“That would be very consequential for this process in particular, because the state board received so much feedback,” Pretorius said. “It would significantly change the way the board needs to talk about the public comment they’ve received.”

Whether or not the State Board of Education meets the September deadline or continues working on the 306s, those watching the process are frustrated with what feels like an ineffective approach to the revision. 

“We’ve been on this journey for three years,” said Downing. “Why are these questions just coming up now?”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visitcollaborativenh.org

What’s behind the demise of work release programs in New Hampshire jails?

COVID and changes in incarceration rates have led to phaseout of programs, but they’re still operating at state prisons 

By Rhianwen Watkins-Granite State News Collaborative

Work release programs have been phased out at New Hampshire's county jails, the result of a shift in the criminal justice system that has reduced the number of eligible prisoners.

As incarceration rates for lower-level offenses have dwindled, jails lack the numbers of inmates needed to continue their work release programs.

When those programs were up and running, jail attendants say, they helped inmates transition back into life after their sentences more easily. They gained job experience, time management skills, meaningful social interactions, improved mental health, and employers whom they worked for even offered them jobs after their sentences ended.

Work release programs give inmates the opportunity to work both within the facility and out in the community under supervised conditions. The opportunity to take part must always be granted by the court, and typically inmates become eligible after a specific amount of time in the facility.

Sometimes work release takes the form of an inmate going back to a job they previously held before incarceration, but often it entails helping out in the community in other ways.

The Rockingham County Correctional Facility in Brentwood had a work release program in operation in the past, said Superintendent Jason Henry. The program typically involved work for municipalities and nonprofits, doing jobs such as painting, fixing roofs, assisting with construction projects, cleaning recycling centers and cemeteries, among many similar jobs.

‘COVID took a big bite out of’ work release programs ‘because of the risk of inmates day after day coming in and out of the facility, especially during the first year to 18 months of the pandemic.’ , says Douglas Iosue, Cheshire County’s jail superintendent. (Keene Sentinel file photo by Hannah Schroeder)

Henry said 14 days has been the typical period used to assess readiness to go out into the community.

So what led to the decline in the work release programs?

“COVID took a big bite out of it, because of the risk of inmates day after day coming in and out of the facility, especially during the first year to 18 months of the pandemic,” said Superintendent Douglas Iosue of the Cheshire County Correctional Facility in Keene. “One thing that changed was eligibility for work release was temporarily suspended, and it's not really caught back on.”

Beyond that, most of the people held in New Hampshire's county jails were awaiting trial, and and due to a shift in how courts are operating, inmates have either been receiving shorter sentences or are not sentenced at all for lower level-offenses, such as petty theft and minor drug offenses. This leaves fewer and smaller jail populations to run work release programs.

In addition, New Hampshire has increasingly turned to alternatives to incarceration, including enactment of its bail reform laws of 2018, which required judges and bail commissioners to determine someone’s safety to the community before placing them in jail before trial and requiring bail. 

The purpose was to reduce the number of people in jail before actually being convicted of crime. Many were not a danger to the community and were being held in jail without the financial means to pay bail or have someone pay it on their behalf, wrote Frank Knaack, policy director of the American Civil Liberties Union New Hampshire, in an April 2023 article advocating for bail reforms.

There were other changes to the court system too —  including the increased use of drug and mental health courts, according to Anthony Naro, senior attorney with a focus on criminal defense at Bernazzani Law in Nashua.

Those courts typically apply to higher-level offenses and repeat offenders. They are three- to four-year programs that seek to focus on rehabilitative services for individuals struggling with drug addiction and more serious mental health issues. Rehabilitation includes mandatory counseling, regular drug testing and strict court supervision.

Naro said bail reform laws and alternative courts have helped lower crime rates, contrary to many beliefs, as jail time without rehabilitation often produces repeat offenders, versus treating drug and mental health disorders head-on, since they are seen as the root causes leading individuals to commit crimes in the first place.

According to data from the N.H. American Civil Liberties Union, total crimes committed statewide were 60,447 and total arrests were 33,481 in 2018, the year the first bail reform law in New Hampshire was passed. The most recent available data shows a drop in statewide crimes to 49,289 and a drop in arrests to 23,767.

Between 2018 and 2021, there was an 18.4 percent drop in crimes and a 29 percent drop in arrests. 

“The last resort should be to take away someone’s liberty,” Naro said.

But the bail reform laws have drawn criticism, particularly from law enforcement agencies. That led to the passage of House Bill 318, which Gov. Chris Sununu recently signed into law. It tightens some of the reforms contained in the 2018 law. It remains to be seen what the new law’s effects will be.

Varied opinions of work release

Many people have varied opinions about the shift away from heavy incarceration, and about work release programs by extension.  Iosue of the Keene facility thinks terminating work release has been a positive shift.

“We don't like it, not just because of COVID …. but it also is a very risky practice to allow people in and out of the jail day after day in terms of introduction of contraband into a secure correctional facility,” he said.

He favors electronic monitoring, a method jails use to monitor individuals through an ankle bracelet that tracks their location using GPS. In these circumstances, the individual lives at home and is allowed to go to a place of work as long as they are being monitored.

When asked if a monitoring bracelet could hypothetically be used for work release for individuals residing inside the facility to mitigate the instances of contraband coming into the facility, Iosue said it would not be ideal.

“I guess we could,” he said. “Part of it is the cost of ankle monitors. Part of it is having the ankle monitors in the facility ... taking it on and off each time they go in and out would be labor- and time-intensive.”

Other superintendents remain proponents of work release.

Henry said he would like to see Rockingham County’s program get up and running again, but there is a hitch.

In order to operate a work release program, says Jason Henry, superintendent of the Rockingham County jail, ‘you need robust-sentenced inmates and we just don't have that. Ninety percent of my jail is pretrial.’ (Courtesy photo)

“In order to work with this program, you need robust-sentenced inmates and we just don't have that,” said Henry. “Ninety percent of my jail is pretrial.”

He said he feels that, while once too many people were being incarcerated, the courts have swung too far in the opposite direction.

“They still committed crimes and need to be held accountable,” Henry said.

In Worcester, Mass., County Sheriff Lew Evangelidis explained that inmate populations are declining in Massachusetts as well. He feels similarly to Henry.

“I’m always very concerned about victim’s rights. I think they're being forgotten. I think unless people have been victimized by a crime, you don't understand how it impacts you, your family, your community, " said Evangelidis. “But I also believe in giving people second chances and rehabilitating people.”

But Attorney Naro has a completely different outlook.

“Science shows that more jail is not going to help,” Naro said. “I don't think you solve a problem by creating another one,” he said in reference to work release. “People who shouldn't be serving long sentences are no longer serving long sentences. That's a good thing.”

He added: “Six months to a year — that can be devastating on your life. Going to jail for 30 days can be devastating. Thirty days is long enough to get evicted from your apartment, to miss your rent, to lose your job. It’s just long enough to hurt.”

Naro said he thinks  that the need for work release is not there anymore. The focus should shift toward creating and upholding strong pretrial programs in New Hampshire county jails to further reduce sentences. 

This would include rehabilitative measures for pretrial individuals, such as mandatory counseling, regular drug testing, ankle monitoring to supervise them while they go out to look for jobs or continue to work at jobs they already hold, or attend school if enrolled. Some may reside at the jail, but the goal would be to allow them to stay at home as long as they are wearing the ankle bracelet at all times.

“If you do well on pretrial supervision, chances are that, at sentencing, you're going to have a better chance of staying out in the community,” Naro explained. “You can say to the judge, ‘look, I’ve succeeded — you can give me probation, because I can survive and succeed on supervision, because I've done it for the last six, seven, eight months.’”

Some jails in New Hampshire already have pretrial programs, including Merrimack, Rockingham and Strafford counties. 

“We conduct a lengthy evaluation process to see if they meet our requirements for participation,” Henry said about Rockingham’s pretrial program. “The person needs a job, a safe place to live, and is subject to electronic monitoring. We will do home and work checks and drug screenings.” 

In addition to the pretrial program, the Rockingham correctional facility is also creating a new community corrections complex that would accommodate a 90-day in-house treatment program. This would allow individuals who want to dedicate themselves to rehabilitation to live separately from other sentenced individuals. Henry’s goal is to include a work-release component to the treatment program, to allow the individuals to go out into the community.

The project is set to be completed around June 2025.

Programs remain in state prisons

Though work release has come to a halt in county jails, New Hampshire state prisons continue their work release program.

Nicholas Duffy, director of rehabilitative services for the state Department of Corrections, runs a work release program in the state prisons. ’ You don't get many people saying they don't want’ to participate,’ he says. ‘Most people want to engage in it because you're getting those freedoms and people want to have more control of their lives.’ (N.H. Department of Corrections photo)

That program includes three transitional housing centers and a transitional work center, said Nicholas Duffy, director of rehabilitative services for the state Department of Corrections. 

The transitional work center — the TWC — offers work release at a relatively high level of security, allowing inmates to pick up jobs within the prison facility, such as working for the facility warehouse, doing maintenance, cooking and other upkeep positions on the facility grounds. Inmates are typically allowed to go to the TWC two to three years before their minimum parole date.

The next level is allowing inmates to go out into the community to work for employers. These individuals typically reside at transitional housing centers. For some inmates, this happens after proving their readiness in the transitional housing center, or as permitted by the court after a certain period of time — typically one year before  their minimum parole date.

These workers are monitored through cellphones that the facility gives them to track their location as well as through check-ins with prison personnel throughout the day. In addition, job checks are conducted to ensure inmates are at their place of work when they are supposed to be. 

The inmates are also required to do drug testing and stay consistent with treatment programming, said Duffy.

“We're making sure that they're doing everything they need to do to be successful upon release, and some people aren't going to meet that expectation, and they're going to end up getting sent back to the prison, or TWC, depending on the level of production,” he said. “They know that they're taking a risk anytime they're not where they're supposed to be.”

Duffy said that overall, inmates respond well to work release and are enthusiastic about taking part.

“You don't get many people saying they don't want it,” said Duffy. “Most people want to engage in it because you're getting those freedoms and people want to have more control of their lives.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.