New Hampshire is spending too little on special education, a judge ruled Monday. But Superior Court Judge David Ruoff stopped short of ordering the Legislature to spend more.
This is the second court in six weeks to conclude the state is failing to adequately fund public education. In July, the state Supreme Court said the state is underspending on general education. Ruoff agreed Monday and said it’s also spending too little on special education.
But both courts left it up to the Legislature to decide how to fund schools and how much to spend on them.
Ruoff’s ruling will resonate with school districts across the state contending with increased special education costs and less state money to pay them. He said schools have to use most of the $2,100 they receive for each special education student on evaluations, leaving about $400 for education.
Ruoff wrote: “The math does not lie.”
Ruoff is the same judge who ruled in 2023 that the state is failing its constitutional duty to fund an adequate education by underpaying school districts the true cost of educating students. He ruled the state needs to increase its per pupil spending from $4,100 to at least $7,360.
The state appealed Ruoff’s order to the state Supreme Court. In a split decision, it agreed but declined to say what the state should spend.
In the case Ruoff decided Monday, a group of taxpayers around the state had challenged the tax scheme the state uses to pay for education. They also challenged the so-called additional “differentiated aid” the state sends districts for lower-income students as well as those receiving special education.
Ruoff declined to order an increase in spending on lower-income students saying the taxpayers had failed to prove the current spending – $2,300 per student – is insufficient.
Associate Attorney General Christopher Bond said in an email the office was reviewing Ruoff’s order to determine its next steps.
