Senate Republicans fast-track universal open enrollment bill to House; could become law in weeks

Sen. Tim Lang, a Sanbornton Republican, speaks in favor of a bill to create universal open enrollment in New Hampshire public schools, on Jan. 29, 2026. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt, New Hampshire Bulletin)

New Hampshire Senate Republicans fast-tracked a bill to create universal open enrollment in New Hampshire public schools Thursday, using a parliamentary maneuver to send the bill to the House without needing a hearing in either chamber.

If signed into law, the legislation would allow New Hampshire residents to enroll students in any school district in the state, regardless of where they live. 

The new legislation, added as a floor amendment to an unrelated House bill, heads next to the House, where it will receive an up-or-down vote that could send it to Gov. Kelly Ayotte’s desk within weeks. The bill passed the Senate, 16-8, along party lines. 

Because it was added as a floor amendment, the bill did not receive a hearing in a Senate committee, and if the House accedes to the changes, it would not receive a hearing there. Democrats decried the move and called for hearings; Republicans said the speed is necessary so the bill can be implemented ahead of annual school meetings in February and March. If signed by Ayotte, the bill would take effect immediately. 

The bill echoes past legislative efforts to create universal open enrollment in 2025, but has some key differences. 

Under the latest version in House Bill 751, all school districts would need to both receive students from other districts and allow their own students to attend other districts, and the district losing a student would need to pay tuition to the district receiving that student. 

But the new bill would change how those tuition payments are determined. School districts losing students would be obligated to pay the receiving district only what the sending district already spends per pupil. If the receiving district spends more per pupil than the sending district, the student’s family would need to pay the difference as tuition, under HB 751. 

Previous versions of the universal open enrollment law have not included that tuition cap. 

The new legislation also allows school districts to determine how many out-of-district students they have the capacity to accept. According to Sen. Tim Lang, the Sanbornton Republican who authored the bill, school boards could theoretically vote to set their capacity at “zero” if they did not want to accept students.

In an interview Wednesday, Lang said House Republican leaders support his version of the bill and will likely push the House Republican caucus to pass it quickly when the House next meets. The House has not scheduled its next session. 

The bill could transform New Hampshire’s public education landscape, and it inspired fierce partisan debate on the Senate floor.

Lang and other Republicans said the bill would empower parents and students to select the public school that’s right for their student, and not be constrained to the schools in their hometowns. And they said it would incentivize school districts to make improvements to attract students, allowing the successful ones to access a new revenue stream amid declining school enrollments.

Lang said he had brought the legislation forward at the request of a public school teacher whose child wanted to learn music. “She tried to get permission to move to another public school that had tuition and was denied,” she said.

By restricting families to the public schools in the districts in which they live, parents seeking other options for their children are forced to either move to a more desirable district or seek private alternatives, perhaps by using education freedom accounts, Lang said. 

More from this section

Movies and TV shows casting in Portsmouth

The 30 cities in New Hampshire where homes are selling the fastest

“This is about public school dollars staying in the public school, right?” he said in an interview. “And yet still providing educational choice to parents.” 

Lang also said the bill was necessary to clear up “chaos” caused by a 2025 state Supreme Court decision that held that the state’s present open enrollment law requires school districts to pay tuition for any students who go to an approved open-enrollment school. He pointed to the Kearsarge Regional School District’s decision Jan. 10 to adopt an open enrollment policy so that the district could restrict its own students from going to open enrollment districts at the expense of Kearsarge — a feature within the current law. HB 751 would override that benefit and require Kearsarge to allow students to go to open enrollment districts. 

But Democrats said the bill would force a system onto school districts that should be voluntary, and could siphon local taxpayer money away from less resourced school districts in favor of wealthier districts. 

Sen. Debra Altschiller, a Stratham Democrat, said the bill would “destroy local control” and force districts to take on the extra incurred costs of taking in additional students. 

“It separates where a family lives from where they attend school, and at the same time, will do nothing to change the reliance on the local taxes to fund the public schools,” Altschiller said. “So where a family lives will still be linked to where they pay taxes, but those taxes will now flow freely to other school districts.” 

Altschiller argued the bill would deprive some school districts of funding and could force some to “circle the drain” until they close. And she said the current law, which allows school boards to vote to opt into receiving out-of-district students, allows municipalities to make their own decisions. 

“Cities and towns know their capabilities best, which is why the option to be open enrollment or not must be up to our local school boards, in accordance with locally determined standards and abilities,” Altschiller said. 

Lang disagreed that the bill would hurt the schools. He noted that the new bill does not require the school district losing a student to pay any more than the amount it is already spending on that student. And he said the latest version of the bill allows the sending district to reduce that payment by as much as 20%, if they can cite a valid cost-based reason.

Lang added that while some school districts might lose students to other districts, many school districts could benefit financially if they can attract new students. 

Sen. Cindy Rosenwald, a Nashua Democrat, said the move could still be costly for some. “Wouldn’t the opposite or the corollary be true in the sending districts, that as the receiving districts are gaining revenue, the sending districts are losing state aid, therefore, shifting the burden to the property-tax payers?” she asked.

To some Republicans in support of the bill, the debate over potential district budget impacts was beside the point.

“I think it’s really, honestly, kind of ironic that we’re not talking about the student … the one who’s receiving the education,” said Senate President Sharon Carson. “Because that’s where I think our duty and our obligation lies.” 

Democrats raised concerns that the bill could affect high school sports, allowing star athletes to be recruited to better resourced school districts without needing to move. But Carson rejected that concern. 

“Would you believe that that’s already happening?” she said. “Parents will actually move into a district because of a music program, or they’ll move in because of an athletic program that their children want to participate in. Now parents won’t have to pick up and move.” 

The Senate also passed its own version of the bill, Senate Bill 101, with the exact same language. But that bill is not fast-tracked; it will need committee hearings in the House, and could become irrelevant if HB 751 passes the House and is signed by Ayotte.