| NEA-NH
Opposes Constitutional Amendment on School Funding
CACR 19 Defeated in Senate
Before making its
decision on the school funding amendment (CACR 18) proposed
by Governor Lynch and
passed by the Senate, NEA New Hampshire had discussions
with legislators and experts. The association’s executive
board listened to an extensive presentation by Governor
Lynch and asked questions of him.
Although NEA-NH has supported many
of the governor’s
initiatives, the board has voted unanimously to oppose the
constitutional amendment on school funding.
NEA-NH now calls on its members to urge the House to defeat
CACR 18.
Amending the constitution is the wrong approach.
- A constitutional amendment is a drastic step
that should never be taken as the first choice to solving
a problem.
There is no need to rush to this step, since the earliest
the voters would see the amendment on a ballot is November
of 2008.
- This amendment would diminish New
Hampshire children’s
constitutional right to an adequate education. Since the
Legislature could redefine an adequate education every
year, it is no guarantee of a constitutional right at all.
- New
Hampshire, with the 7th highest per-capita average income
in the country, currently ranks last among the states in
state funding for education.
- Although the amendment’s
proponents talk about funding 50 percent of adequacy, the
cost of adequacy, once it is
defined, is likely to be only half of the current total
expenditure. (Funding for the items required in the state
standards and
curriculum frameworks, used for the definition that has
passed the House [with the addition of half-day kindergarten],
would
cost about half the total current expenditure.)
- Half of
50 % is 25%, about the same as the state currently contributes
to the total cost of education. Under this
amendment, New Hampshire would still rank dead last in state funding
for education.
- If this amendment is approved,
all towns would get “some
aid” but an amount or proportion is not specified.
Towns could get as little as $1.
- NEA-NH acknowledges that
some towns need more school funding help than others. Some
people have argued that this amendment
is the only way to provide targeted aid. That is simply
not true. The state can target aid, as long as such aid is in
addition to, not instead of the “adequacy cost.”
- The
amendment would not provide the predictability that local
school districts need in determining their budgets, because
future Legislatures could change the definition of adequacy
and the funding formula to meet their political agendas.
- It
would do little or nothing to provide property tax relief
for the majority of New Hampshire towns.
- CACR 18 limits
court review of education funding. The courts have enforced
the constitution’ guarantee of an adequate
education, which is a cornerstone of democracy.
NEA-NH rejects CACR 19, introduced
in the Senate on June 7, in a desperate attempt to get
some amendment, not matter
how bad, passed before the end of the session. CACR 19 would
provide less court oversight, would set no floor for state
funding, and would open the door to vouchers.
The
Legislature should comply with the New Hampshire Supreme
Court’s Londonderry
decision and live up to its constitutional duty by defining
an adequate education and fully funding
it.
References
CACR
19 (new Senate amendment)
Smith
Amendment to CACR 18 (passed by House Finance Committee)
Kurk
Amendment to CACR 18 (defeated in House Finance Committee)
Bill
introducing CACR 18, the Lynch amendment
Governor's
news release about the amendment's introduction
Information from the Bipartisan
Funding Group (the Purple
Group)
Senate
Testimony of Superintendent Nate Greenberg (Londonderry,
SAU # 12)
NEA-NH position on the definition
of educational adequacy
NEA-NH News
Conference, April 24,
2007
Updated June 15, 2007. |
