N.H. legislators continue to ignore three-year-old school-funding recommendations

A legislative commission’s report endorsed changes to the current system, but related bill remains sidelined

By Kelly Burch-Granite State News Collaborative

As decades of litigation centered on funding an adequate education for Granite State children linger on, New Hampshire lawmakers still have not addressed a potential solution outlined by a bipartisan commission they established over three years ago.

The New Hampshire Commission to Study Public School Funding, awarded half a million dollars to study the issue when it was created by the Legislature in 2019, spent a year exploring the state’s school-funding formula. Its recommendations appear in a report written by the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy that was released in December 2020.

Since then, none of the recommendations outlined in the 2020 report from the Carsey School has been adopted, frustrating commission members who say the study provides a framework for increasing students' achievement, easing the burden on New Hampshire’s taxpayers and providing a more equitable framework for school funding. The report and accompanying legislation have gained attention amid ongoing discussions about adequate education funding, prompted by the state’s revision of the minimum standards for public school approval, known as the 306s.

“It is the most comprehensive, most integrated, most complete plan for public education funding reform … that the Legislature has seen for a long, long time,” said Bill Ardinger, a lawyer and Gov. Chris Sununu’s appointee to the commission.

“The commission report comes to a fundamental recommendation that the most important thing for public education policy in New Hampshire is for the state to measure and make sure that every child in every community has a chance for a good, quality public education,” Ardinger said.

The New Hampshire Commission to Study Public School Funding report ‘is the most comprehensive, most integrated, most complete plan for public education funding reform … that the Legislature has seen for a long, long time,” says Bill Ardinger, Gov. Chris Sununu’s appointee to the commission. Legislation that emerged from the report remains sidelined, despite ongoing court cases related to the issue. (Courtesy photo)

Redefining an adequate education

The biggest shift in the commission’s report is a definition of adequacy as the amount of funding needed to give each student in New Hampshire “the opportunity to achieve the average statewide outcomes.”

Right now, students in districts with higher poverty rates have lower academic success than the statewide average. 

“Students educated in poorest communities [have] the poorest educational outcomes,” said Bruce Mallory, senior fellow at the Carsey School and project manager for the Commission to Study Public School Funding. 

That’s a product of the current funding system, said Rep. David Luneau (D-Hopkinton), who chaired the commission and recently introduced legislation based on its findings. “How we define adequacy is contributing to the disparities in student outcomes across the state.”

About 60% of public school funding in New Hampshire comes from local property taxes. New Hampshire ranks last in the nation for the percentage of educational funding provided by the state, according to the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute.

Commission members found this system to be “upside down,” Mallory said. The poorest districts are paying the highest rate on property taxes to fund local schools, yet still aren’t able to fully fund education because the property values in those areas are so low compared to towns with median or high property wealth, he said. 

This disparity has garnered national attention. In 2022, the New Jersey-based Educational Law Center ranked New Hampshire the second most “regressive” state in the nation when it comes to distributing school funding. 

Bruce Mallory, senior fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy, was project manager for the Commission to Study Public School Funding. (UNH photo)

The wrong question?

Debates about the state’s role in paying for public school education center on two decisions in the 1990s by the state Supreme Court in a case brought by five school districts, led by Claremont, which determined the state has a constitutional obligation to fund an “adequate education” for all students. 

Last November, a judge hearing a different lawsuit brought by the ConVal school district ruled the amount of an adequate education must be at least $7,356.01 per pupil. That’s a substantial increase over the state’s current base funding of $4,100 per pupil. 

Yet commission members feel that ruling does little to address funding inequities in New Hampshire. 

“It’s not one-size-fits-all,” Luneau said. “We’re going to have to get out of that mentality to properly funding our schools.”

Ardinger agreed.

“I’m not sure in the ConVal case they asked the right question, or answered the right question,” he said. The state’s role, he argues, “should be to provide disproportionate support to those communities of greatest need.” 

Wealthy communities like Bedford don’t need the same support from the state as high-poverty districts like Franklin or Claremont, Ardinger emphasized, and treating all communities as equal just reinforces student achievement gaps across the state. 

“The state’s role must take into account the obvious differences among local communities in terms of providing aid and support to the communities with the greatest challenges,” Ardinger said. 

There is an example for this approach to funding.

“New Hampshire is not going to be the guinea pig on this,” Luneau said. “All we have to do is look one state to the south."

Facing similar litigation around school funding, Massachusetts adopted the Foundation Budget school funding formula. Under this formula, state aid is awarded based on need. For example, Lawrence, one of the poorest districts in the state, receives more than 90% of its educational budget from the state, while Westwood, a more affluent district, receives less than 20% from state funding. 

The system is not perfect. Low-income districts like Lawrence still spend much less per pupil than more affluent districts, according to the Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research. For example, in 2018, per-pupil spending in Lawrence was about half what it was in Cambridge, an affluent community. 

To address that, Massachusetts lawmakers approved $1.5 billion in additional education spending in 2021, with the express goal of closing student achievement gaps between poor and wealthy districts. The 34 neediest districts in the state will each receive an average of $25 million in additional funding by 2028. 

To Ardinger, the Massachusetts example underscores the need for an equitable — rather than equal — approach to adequate funding. He believes the idea that the state must provide a set amount of funding to each pupil is a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to provide an adequate education. 

“To me, nothing could be worse than a rule that says the state … must provide the same amount of money per pupil in every community,” he said. “Something is terribly broken with that rule.”

Legislation based on the Commission’s report 

Although funding challenges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire have common roots, Ardinger says the Massachusetts courts explicitly called on the state to address inequities, whereas the New Hampshire courts “didn’t go that far.”

Without a clear judicial imperative, “the Legislature ended up slipping around and sliding around. It didn’t have that strong kick in the pants from the court,” he added. 

However, legislation based on the commission’s report has been introduced in the House of Representatives twice, most recently earlier this year as House Bill 1586. Representative Luneau introduced that bill, called the Foundation Opportunity Plan, and although it failed to advance, he plans to introduce it again next year.

The legislation defines adequacy in terms of student outcomes and distributes funds to ensure each district can provide equal opportunities for its students to achieve average outcomes. That means lower-income districts get more state funding. 

“That really unlocks the opportunity to have good outcomes for kids in Newport and Claremont and Pittsfield, [just] the same as in Hanover or Hopkinton,” Luneau said. “It’s breaking out of that uniform funding model and getting to a need-based funding model.”

Adopting the model faces barriers, including the stagnation of the current school funding system, reluctance from affluent communities, and the associated cost, said Dick Ames (D-Jaffrey), one of the bill’s sponsors. 

“One of the hurdles is the recognition that an adequate education is expensive,” he said. “We have to figure out how to fund it, and that is the larger challenge. I’m hopeful that we can find a way, but I’m not sure.”

More affluent communities — which generally enjoy lower property taxes — would likely see an increase in property taxes under the legislation. This includes the district that Luneau represents, but he believes that ultimately providing an adequate education to all New Hampshire students is critical for all constituents in the state. 

“At the end of the day, these are the people who drive our economy,” he said. “We need to make sure we’re doing something that’s equitable and fair for students in all these towns.”

The commission’s work was nonpartisan, Luneau said, but the recent bill was sponsored by four Democrats. Luneau hopes to work on the legislation with Republican colleagues over the summer and fall before reintroducing it next year. 

“That work will be bipartisan in nature, wiggling around some things to make sure we have strong bipartisan support,” he said. “We want something that cities and towns and school boards and families can count on for the next 20 years.”

There’s “a tremendous amount of wisdom” in the commission’s report and resulting legislation, Mallory said, adding, “I would hope all of the effort is not for naught.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

New Hampshire lags behind other states in dealing with greenhouse gases from vehicles

By Kylie Valluzzi, Granite State News Collaborative

Emissions from motor vehicles are the single largest source of greenhouse emissions in New Hampshire, according to the 2024 Priority Climate Action Plan. 

Yet New Hampshire, unlike every other New England state, has not adopted California’s low-emissions vehicle standards. Legislators rejected establishing those standards in 2023, and they show little interest in adopting them now.

Carbon dioxide makes up the majority of New Hampshire's greenhouse emissions, a primary cause of global warming. CO2 accounted for 92% of those emissions in 2019, a total of 15.8 million metric tons — and 46.5% of that came from cars and trucks. Vehicle emissions are also the biggest contributor to ground-level ozone, another greenhouse gas, which is created by a chemical reaction of nitrous oxide, volatile organic compounds and ultraviolet light, according to a report from the N.H. Department of Environmental Services. More than 63 percent of nitrous oxides and nearly one-third of volatile organic compounds are produced by vehicle emissions.

If heat-trapping emissions like those continue at the current rate, New Hampshire’s climate is likely to be more like South Carolina’s by 2050, according to The Nature Conservancy. 

Nationally in 2019, transportation accounted for 33% of greenhouse gas emissions, and so could be one of the biggest parts of the solution to the climate crisis. But while other states have acted with urgency, New Hampshire has lagged, even though 45.9% of N.H. greenhouse gases were caused by transportation.

What are California’s low-emissions vehicle standards?

California has unique authority to set its own emission standards because it adopted vehicle regulations that preceded the federal Clean Air Act of 1970, prompted by air-quality problems related largely to motor vehicles. Although states other than California are not permitted to develop their own emissions standards, Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act authorizes other states to adopt California’s standards that  are tougher than federal requirements. 

So far, 12 states have adopted California’s standards – every New England state except New Hampshire, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington.

Has NH considered adopting CALEV?

When it comes to CALEV legislation in the Northeast, “we’re the donut hole,” said state Rep. Rebecca McWilliams, D-Concord. She was the primary sponsor of House Bill 92, which last year came within 25 votes of being passed by the N.H. House of Representatives.

The bill would have set “innovative vehicle emissions standards” under Section 177 of the Clean Air Act. 

According to the introduction to HB92, vehicles sold in New Hampshire already comply with the California emissions standards because federal and California standards have been harmonized through 2025. However, consumers cannot benefit from the eight-year, 80,000-mile extended warranty provisions of the California standards because New Hampshire has not formally adopted the standards. The extended warranty would cover emissions-related component repairs — such as  catalytic converters, transmission control modules, powertrain control modules and/or engine control units — for vehicles up to eight years old or up to 80,000 miles, whichever came first. 

And, the introduction states, New Hampshire car dealers cannot obtain some types of vehicles because manufacturers allocate them only to CALEV states, thus limiting consumer choice of these vehicles. Further, the bill states, adopting California’s standards would allow New Hampshire to benefit from reduced emissions after 2025, when the federal and California emissions standards will no longer be in alignment. 

The bill, introduced in December 2022, came within 25 votes of passing in the House but met strong Republican opposition and ultimately failed, 194-171, in March 2023. Republicans made up 187 of the nays; the others were six Democrats and one independent.

House Republicans contacted for this report did not comment on their decision to turn down the bill. But in a statement issued following the March 9, 2023 vote,  Rep. Doug Thomas, R-Rockingham, called the bill “extremist legislation.” 

“We should let the free market dictate which cars consumers purchase,” he said.

During that March 9 House session, Thomas said, “We don’t need this amendment. For one thing, it’s not ready, it’s redundant; we have a lot of studies out there already to provide the same information. Please, we don’t need this amendment.”

Rep. McWilliams said members of the N.H. Automobile Dealers Association overwhelmingly want to join CALEV standards because now it’s difficult for them to get electric vehicles and hybrids to sell — those cars are going to surrounding states that have already adopted CALEV standards. Manufacturers such as Ford and General Motors are moving in the direction of EVs, and dealers want to stay abreast of market changes, she said.

However, Dan Bennett, president of the N.H. Automobile Dealers Association, wouldn’t go so far as to endorse HB92. Rather, he said, “NHADA believes that incentivizing behavior, especially given the natural market demand for hybrid and fully-electric vehicles, would be more impactful on lowering emissions without creating new government mandates.”

Beyond the ranks of car dealers, some companies already offer rebates that help make electric vehicles more affordable. The New Hampshire Electric Co-Op, for example, offers an incentive to ratepayers for installing up to two Level 2 or larger charging stations at their homes – they usually cost between $400 and $700. While the incentive is up to $300 per charging station  and $600 per customer, the installation costs can be considerably higher, depending on the age of the home, available amps and location of the charger in relation to the circuit box. 

In addition, EV buyers may qualify for a federal tax break of up to $7,500 if they buy a new, qualified plug-in EV or fuel cell electric vehicle. 

What’s going on in other states?

Nearby states that have adopted California’s regulations report economic benefits from adopting the CALEV standards.

For instance, Vermont adopted CALEV standards in 1996. According to Drive Electric Vermont, a statewide public-private partnership of policymakers, industry leaders and citizens working to accelerate transportation electrification, $1.1 billion was spent in Vermont on taxable gasoline and diesel sales in 2010. Had that travel had been  powered by electricity, the cost would have been $275 million, saving over $800 million in one year, according to the organization’s website.

“Those funds and a large portion of the electricity cost would have remained in Vermont and with consumers,” the website reads. 

Going electric also keeps money in consumers’ pockets, studies say. On average, rural Vermont drivers saved $519 in 2018 by switching from gasoline to electricity, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. And according to the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, the average total cost of ownership over 10 years for an electric all-wheel-drive SUV crossover is $3,300 cheaper than the gasoline version of the same vehicle.

As of January 2024, there were 12,754 EVs in the Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles registration database, up 44% from 2023. In 2019, there were 2,985 EVs registered in the database. 

Future of transportation emissions in New Hampshire

In another effort to encourage Granite Staters to buy electric, Rep. McWilliams introduced HB1472 in February of this year, a “cash on the hood” program that would give point-of-sale rebates to EV buyers. The bill, which would dedicate $3 million from proceeds from the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency Fund, has been postponed indefinitely.

“It’s about making the marketplace a little bit more financially viable for people who would consider switching,” she said of her proposals. “We get to decide as legislators what (the market) direction is and we get to create incentives and occasionally roadblocks, in this case mostly incentives, to direct the market.”

As for HB92, Rep. McWilliams says she will likely propose a similar bill in the future. In the meantime, she urges N.H. residents to call their representatives, call their senators, and have a conversation about where the market’s going. 

“Talk about it,” she said, “because I think a lot of times these things get swept under the rug and there are a lot of platitudes that you hear during election years — a ‘let the market decide’ attitude.”

Climate Action Plan, revisited

Last August, the N.H. Department of Environmental Services received a $3 million grant from the EPA to update the state’s 2009 Climate Action Plan. The agency plans to use the existing plan “as a framework to start and will focus on actionable measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with an eye toward desired grant opportunities,” according to the agency’s website.

On March 1, the state identified priority projects within the Climate Action Plan. Consistent with 2009 findings, the transportation sector is still the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the state, and those emissions have remained relatively constant for the past two decades. 

In its effort to reduce those emissions, New Hampshire is prioritizing the deployment of electric charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, providing incentives for consumers to buy electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and supporting expansion of public transportation options. 

Unlike the 2009 Climate Action Plan, the new plan does not mention adopting CALEV standards. 

“I don’t believe we have 10 years to wait for this transition to happen,” McWilliams said. “I think that we’re in a climate emergency now, and so these decisions that we make as policymakers need to be bold and they need to actually have impacts on our local air emissions and market direction.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.