With less than one hour before the deadline, House and Senate lawmakers have agreed on a plan to fund education.
Critics charge that under the new law, the state would shift education costs to local communities.
But supporters hail the new system as a more fair and equitable distribution of state money.
New Hampshire Public Radio's Dan Gorenstein reports.
The House and Senate lawmakers on the Education Conference Committee hammered out a compromise that borrows elements from both plans.
Next year, the state will follow the House plan, and lower the statewide property tax to $4.92 per $1000.
That helps offset the recent increase in property value across New Hampshire.
The bill also takes 10 million dollars from the general fund and targets it to the state's poorest communities.
And funding growth is capped to a consumer price index and student enrollment.
Senator Ted Gatsas says it's an effective compromise.
"The compromise we've come up with does what the governor said he wanted to do, sending out the same amount of grants in '04 as in '03. Reducing the property tax. Targeting. And finding a new solution to education funding."
That new solution to education funding is a reference to Gatsas's own plan that passed the Senate last month.
The Conference Committee agreed to adopt the Manchester Republican's plan in 2005.
But details of the Senate plan remain vague.
What is clear is that in 2005 the statewide property tax will drop to be $3.24 per $1000.
Donor towns, the property wealthy communities that currently subsidize poor communities, will no longer do that.
And the measure calls for the state to total all property in the state and divide that by the number of students in the state.
That produces a state average spending per pupil over 12 years in the ballpark of $535,000 dollars.
If a community falls below that number, the state will provide funding.
If a given community is above the average they won't see any state assistance.
Many observers agree the state's poorest and wealthiest communities benefit most from the Senate plan.
One sticking point during negotiations between the House and Senate was over how the Senate plan distributed money.
The Senate, however, conceded to a committee that will study and possibly tweak the way money would be distributed.
Representative David Hess, who authored the House plan, says the distribution patterns can be improved.
"I can't tell you specifically. I think we could make a better decision on how that money gets distributed. I can't give you specifics because if I could give you specifics, we probably would have solved the problem."
It seems like few in the statehouse can provide specifics of the Senate plan.
One state official muttered that it's impossible to explain the Senate plan in 2 sentences or 20 minutes.
Democratic House leader, Peter Burling, says it's hard to understand because it doesn't follow an education funding formula.
"It's really about the politics of enough votes to pass it. The winners in the G. plan are communities are votes that have to be acquired. So there are some communities that win, some that do very badly."
Burling warns that the Senate plan will increasingly shift education costs to local taxpayers.
And on top of that, he argues, there won't be sufficient money to fund the plan.
Republican Senator Chuck Morse, couldn't disagree more.
He supported the Senate plan he says because it helps those communities that need it most.
"I think this is a huge step forward for the state of New Hampshire. '05 is a dramatic change in education policy, or funding, and that is a great step. We are going to lower funding, and this pitting of towns, with donor towns is almost going to go away."
Before the education funding plan becomes law, it must pass both the House and Senate and receive approval from the Governor.
For NHPR News, I'm DG.
