State Senate Democrats want to add more money to the 914 million dollar school funding plan they unveiled last week. Their revised proposal, which earmarks millions more for poorer towns, mostly drew praise at its first public hearing.
But as New Hampshire Public Radio's Josh Rogers reports, some questions persist. Prime among them is: where will the money come from?
Durham democrat Iris Estabrook sponsored the original measure, wrote the proposed amendment and chairs the Senate’s education committee…..And when she kicked off testimony at the plan’s first public hearing, Estabrook was also quick to concede her original plan needed to change.
“Moving from an unconstitutional system of funding based largely on property wealth, to a constitutional, school-focused system, produces some results that should not be left as is.”
To that end, Estabrook proposes sending another 48 million dollars to towns with weak tax bases and low income levels. The money would be separate from the $3450 per pupil base grant and distinct from aid targeted to schools on the basis of special education, non-English speaking students and students receiving free and reduced lunch. Estabrook says the additional money would make a huge difference.
“There is a dramatic change in the status for some communities about which we might be most concerned – Claremont jumps to mind.”
And the amended plan would improve Claremont’s lot. Under the initial proposal the city stood to lose nearly 1.7 million dollars of school aid…..It could now stand to gain an additional 2 million dollars. In fact, all of the plaintiff towns from the Claremont lawsuit that faced cuts under the original bill -- save for Pittsfield -- would gain if the amended bill passes…..But according to the Senate Majority Leader Joe Foster, that’s the wrong way to look at it. He told colleagues such comparisons are false because the current school funding scheme has been ruled illegal.
“To measure the results of the current plan to the one in place now is like comparing Barry Bonds’ batting average and home run production before and after steroid, or should I say, his alleged steroid use.”
Foster went on note that Barry Bonds had been an all-star prior to his alleged steroid use. Few have ever offered similar praise for the state’s record on education funding. But Foster says if people insist on measuring the pending proposal against the past, the best approach is to look back a full decade, prior to the Claremont lawsuit.
“When the Claremont II decision was issued, Claremont was receiving 3.8 million dollars, under this plan as amended it will receive in excess of 9 million dollars. Berlin got about 1 million dollars, and it will be receiving about 1.9 million dollars. Hinsdale received 750,000 dollars, and it will receive 3.1 million. “
But not all senators on the education committee were inclined to take the long view.
"This is just devastating for the town."
That’s Derry Republican Bob Letourneau. His community stands to lose big under the proposal – 7.5 million dollars.
“Bear in mind that we’ve already lost about 2 million dollars over the past two years, this would be ten million dollars over a three year period.”
And though Letourneau’s parochial concerns may not sway the committee, or the full senate, which will vote on the measure next week, his aren’t not the only objections. Some fault the plan for re-instating so-called donor towns. Others, like the NH-NEA and the several school superintendants chided the plan’s authors for relying on what that say are overly high student to staff ratios. They claim that move artificially drove down state costs. And while at this point finding what could amount to an extra 100 million dollars to pay for the plan isn’t on the agenda, some like Hudson Republican Bob Clegg says it should be.
“Where’s the money? Put the money in the budget --right now do a supplemental budget put the money in the budget and say, ‘here’s how much money we are going to give you in for the next school year.’ But they are not doing that, so it’s nothing more than a campaign promise that I highly doubt that come next election when they do the budget they’re actually going to come up with the money.”
The Senate education committee is slated to vote on the measure tomorow; from there it heads to the Senate finance committee. It’s scheduled for a vote by the full State Senate next week.
