Citizen in a RepublicNH Bill Briefing
← All bills

HCR 6 · 2025 · House · Education Policy and Administration Committee

Calling for SAU 67 superintendent's removal

AI-generated

calling for the removal of the superintendent of school administrative unit 67.

Calls for the removal of the superintendent of School Administrative Unit 67 for barring parents from wearing pink armbands in protest at school sporting events.AI-generated

Status

Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · March 6, 2025
  1. ✓Introduced
  2. ✕House
  3. Senate
  4. Adopted

Analysis

This resolution calls for removal of the superintendent of SAU 67 for actions in violation of the public trust.

From the bill's official ANALYSIS section.

Official record

Bill page — docket & status

gc.nh.gov · the authoritative source

Sponsors

Rep. Mike BelcherRPrime

Public testimony

385 signed in online · 138 wrote testimony

16% support84% oppose0% neutral

ForNo-trespass orders violated protesters' free speech rights

AgainstSuperintendent was protecting students from harassment

AI-generatedLeading arguments, summarized by the testimony tool.

Read the arguments

In their wordsVerbatim, exactly as submitted

“This matter was settled over 50 years ago in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), where three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam.…”
— Robert T. Bevill, J.D., LL.M., Merrimacksupports
“The Superintendent of Schools had no right to violate these individuals rights to wear these accouterments while peacefully watching a ball game. He violated the 1st Amendment Rights of these individuals and needs to be removed from office.”
— Paul LaFerriere, Manchestersupports
“I support this bill because I feel the parents rights were violated.”
— Tracey Stickney, Raymondsupports
“The plaintiffs were not quietly protesting, they were harrassing young adults while trying to play a high school game. They have wasted enough of the taxpayers money and time on their own agenda. The superintendent was merely trying to enforce school board regs.…”
— Lory Attalla, Bowopposes
“As a parent of Bow schools I oppose this bill. Our superintendent held persons accountable for their actions which in my opinion was necessary.”
— Michelle Lover, Bowopposes
“This flies in the face of local control of the local school board who is responsible for the hiring and firing of a school superintendent. It is a waste of time for our elected officials. Should you move forward with this bill, you are setting a very dangerous precedent.”
— Owen Harrington, Boscawenopposes

Verbatim excerpts of submitted testimony, quoted from the testimony tool.

Read the testimony · as of Aug 12, 2026

Votes

yeanay
Starting text: Bill as introduced
  • Feb 18, 2025HouseCommittee report· consent calendar: Inexpedient to Legislate18–0
    Overall
    100% yea
  • Mar 6, 2025HouseVoice voteInexpedient to Legislateadopted

Hearings and debates

  • Jan 27, 2025Public hearingHouse Education Policy and Administration1:21:48–1:24:132m 25slocated in the stream transcriptPublic Hearing; Executive Session
  • Mar 6, 2025Floor debateHouse floorWatchnot located in the transcript — opens the full streamInexpedient to Legislate — adopted, voice vote

Timestamps locate where this bill is taken up in the chamber's YouTube stream.

Legislative history

  1. Jan 9, 2025HouseIntroduced (in recess of) 01/09/2025 and referred to Education Policy and Administration HJ 3 P. 9
  2. Jan 27, 2025HousePublic Hearing: 01/27/2025 10:45 am LOB 205-207
  3. Jan 27, 2025HouseExecutive Session: 01/27/2025 01:30 pm LOB 205-207
  4. Feb 18, 2025HouseCommittee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate 02/18/2025 (Vote 18-0; CC) HC 14 P. 6
  5. Mar 6, 2025HouseInexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 03/06/2025 HJ 7 P. 7

Coverage

No reporting linked yet.

Background reading

Evergreen reading on the policy area — spanning perspectives — not coverage of this specific bill.

  • Taking the Mystery Out of Fund BalanceExplainer

    New Hampshire Municipal Association — Defines unassigned fund balance and explains how New Hampshire municipalities and districts account for year-end surpluses.AI-generated

  • Municipal Budgeting: Tackling the UnexpectedExplainer

    New Hampshire Municipal Association — Describes how reserves and fund balances function as a buffer against revenue shortfalls and emergency costs.AI-generated

  • HB 1610 (2026)NH context

    Citizens Count — A nonpartisan summary of the bill changing how New Hampshire school districts may retain year-end unassigned funds.AI-generated

  • ConVal School Board takes action against potential impact of HB 1610District flexibility

    Monadnock Ledger-Transcript — Reports on a New Hampshire district's concerns that tighter retention limits reduce budgeting flexibility.AI-generated

  • $16M back to voters from unassigned fund balanceTaxpayer return

    Eagle Tribune — Illustrates the case for returning accumulated surpluses to taxpayers rather than retaining them in district accounts.AI-generated

Documents (PDF)

Bill text & amendments link direct to gc.nh.gov; committee reports stream from the state record.