Committee hears bill to raise New Hampshirestate share of school adequacy and add equity factors

CONCORD, N.H. Representative Dave Luno introduced House Bill 651 during the House Education Committee hearing, proposing an increase in the stateshare of the cost of an adequate education and adding differentiated aid aimed at making school funding more equitable.

Luno, who identified himself as representing Hopkinton and other towns, said HB 651 "builds on what we talked about last week in House Bill 550" and would "increase the state share of the cost of an adequate education from $4,100 to $7,356.01." He told committee members the bill would also "add increases to the three differentiated costs" that feed the adequacy formula, specifically citing free and reduced-price lunch (as a proxy for low income), English-language learners and special education students.

"The Rand case is about fairness," Luno said during his presentation, adding that the bill seeks to recognize "the additional educational costs based on student characteristics." He told the committee that the bill would also modify statute (referred to in testimony as "193 E2B paragraph 1") to list specific resource elements the judge in the Conval litigation had identified.

Why it matters: Supporters told the committee the proposal would shift some of K—2 funding away from local property taxes toward the state, reducing pressure on local tax rates. Zach Sheehan, executive director of the New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project, told the committee that New Hampshire currently collects a larger share of education costs from local property taxes and a smaller share from the state than most states. Sheehan said HB 651would not necessarily increase total spending statewide but would increase the state's share and thereby provide tax relief in many districts.

Fiscal details and questions: Testimony and a department fiscal memo presented numbers the bill's backers said were drawn from the recent school funding commission and court rulings. Luno and others cited specific dollar changes: an increase in the state adequacy grant rate from $4,100 to $7,356.01, and estimated increases in statewide adequacy aid that proponents described as moving the state's share closer to roughly 45to 50 percent of total school spending. Department of Education staff said the fiscal analysis the department prepared covers the bill's immediate effects on adequacy aid and noted secondary impacts on charter and other state aid formulas that rely on the adequacy baseline.

Committee discussion: Committee members asked for the empirical basis for the differentiated aid amounts and for details about how the bill treats enrollment versus average daily membership (ADM). Representative Popovich asked for studies showing per-student additional costs for educating low-income students; Luno and Sheehan cited the School Funding Commission reports hosted by the Carsey School at UNH and national research such as the American Institutes for Research. Members pressed whether the fund would increase total spending or simply shift who pays; Luno said the intent was to increase the state share and provide property-tax relief, but he conceded he could not predict how each local district would use the additional revenues.

Next steps: Sponsors requested work sessions so the committee can examine the commission data, the Conval and Rand rulings, and the fiscal note in greater detail.

Ending: HB 651 remained at the hearing stage; proponents asked the committee to schedule a work session to reconcile formula mechanics and the selection of equitable cost factors for differentiated aid.