- Expand housing and lower property taxes.
- Lower taxes and spending.
- Grow jobs and the economy.
- Empower parents in education.
- Lower energy prices.
- Decrease childcare costs.
- Reduce healthcare prices.
- Support our police and finish bail reform.
- Protect common sense abortion law.
- Stop New Hampshire from becoming a sanctuary state.
Discover more from The Sullivan County NH Republican Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Sullivan County NH Republican Committee 
To Kevin and others, I am interested in how this contract will be implemented. To lower taxes, budgets need to be trimmed, to trim budgets, expenditures need to efficient and effective. Those employed to serve the public need to be content with their wages and private citizens need to step up and do for their communities. Yesterday, I spoke with two high school student (Claremont) who were discouraged by the condition of their school. They reported there was a high degree of anxiousness in the school. I asked if part of it was because they felt they were ill-equipped to navigate the future, they said yes. They said they were treated the same as those that went before them, and that they were punished rather then having their concerns heard. They indicated they were overwhelmed by the amount of information they needed to process. At that time their state rep stopped by the table. Suggesting they go to the school board because their was a seat for a student on the board, and they could make their voice heard there ( decent suggestion). The rep proceeded to tell them, Well you know “the state” (whoever that is) doesn’t give your school enough money. Now these students had just told me it was not the amount of money received – it was they what the money was spent on. This statement did sit well, as for 30 years the “state” has been supplementing the Claremont education budget. Is it because they don’t get enough, or is it, as these students suggest, being spent on items and program that are non essential to the improvement of education and learning of the students? The reps suggestion to go to the school board was ok, but she didn’t tell them the DOE and the Gov. was going to hold the school board and administration accountable for the money they have been given for the past 30 years or more. Claremont has learned the go to excuses. “Claremont is property poor district”. No, it’s not – In the past year many property values assessments have nearly doubled and the tax rate has been halved. Perhaps COVID contributed to this reversal( let’s be thankful in all things) The people can no longer continue to blame somebody else for their inability to budget. In a word LEARN how to! Unfortunately a generation of children have been subject to a grave disservice by being taught and learning it’s someone else’s fault. To lower taxes, The local education budgets must be used for education of the public’s students. When the school boards appropriate money in support of only the public school, only those students who attend the public school are provided for. Any other student is not provided for by the district in violation of RSA 189:1 Duty to Provide. This is the current law. If the public school is failing, the district through their school board has the duty to provide for students education in an appropriate program. By not providing for all the student’s regardless of school choice they are practicing discrimination which is prohibited by [Art.] 2 in the NH Constitution. It is evident that public money for private programs is not illegal in fact it is provided for by the Legislatue and the Department of Education. Why are the school districts withholding money from nonpublic students? Taxes are generated form Budgets. Budgets need to be developed by people who are not afraid to question and cut off redundancies. I for one do not want to continue giving money to a school board that will not take care of its own, even with help. Perhaps the change is to the school boards who can not manage a budget. Perhaps “the state” needs to give these school boards less responsibility and simpler math problems. If they demand “the state” to pay for their students, then perhaps “the state” needs to take over the budgeting responsibility.”: and as my child learned, from his public school kindergarten teacher, “you get what you get and you don’t get upset” I think the students I talked to could figure it out with a bit of guidance. As a Post script, there was a couple from the Newport District, who over heard our conversation, they reported their district received a very low amount of state aid, $1500 per child, I scoffed at this as way to low. She went on to say the school did not apply for the aid available and so they didn’t receive it. Are their any requirements for running for school board? Is their any thought of for the ability to run a successful business rather then who can run their mouth? Tanya D. McIntire PO Box 85 Grantham, NH 03753 603 863-2014 wigwam735@comcast.net
>
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tanya,
I share your concern about how the contract will be implemented. I do not generally favor using the term “contract” in a political slogan. These political slogans lack many features of actual contracts, such as explicit compensation and consideration, duration, etc. Neither are they social contracts. And they do not have a great track record as political slogans. Taking it as more than a firm commitment to try and do things we find important is extending its meaning beyond the authors’ intent.
That being said, as you point out, a bottom-up commitment to actual contracts is required to address the pressing issues of our schools. To quote Thomas Sowell, “Nobody spends somebody else’s money as carefully as he spends his own. Nobody uses somebody else’s resources as carefully as he uses his own. So if you want efficiency and effectiveness, you’ve got to make sure that the people who call the shots have a personal stake in the consequences.”
Whose money is being spent? Property taxpayers. Who is getting paid? Administrators, teachers, and their unions. Who are the beneficiaries? Families with children in the school. Are they happy with the education being offered to them, ostensibly for free? No, as you relate in your comment, no one is happy. If we accept the idea that the government should pay for education and apply the wisdom of Sowell’s quote, the apparent solution is to pay the parents to have their children educated. That is a far cry from what we have today.
Getting to such an ideal state requires massive, coordinated civic engagement to change the state-wide legislative agenda on education. Given that 9% of Claremont’s electorate voted on the last school budget, I don’t see that happening in the near future.
Such a daunting task calls for the old saw, “How do you eat an elephant? One spoon at a time.” How are we going to fix the education problem? One child at a time. That’s why I support EdOpt.org. We move the needle incrementally by providing information on education alternatives directly to parents across the state, covering traditional and non-traditional education options. Meanwhile, the House Republicans must provide aircover in Concord, per points four and two of the contract.
Best regards,
Kevin
LikeLike