AFT-NH Testimony on the non-germane amendment 1005h to HB 1583 relative to the per pupil cost of the opportunity for an adequate education.
From Debrah Howes, President AFT-NH
Thank you, Chair Weyler and Members of the House Finance Committee. Thank you for reading my testimony.
My name is Debrah Howes. I am president of the American Federation of Teachers – New Hampshire.
I am here to speak on behalf of our 3700 members across the state, as well as the students, families, and communities we serve. Our members include preK through 12 public school educators and support staff, university faculty as well as town employees. I am here today to testify in opposition to the non-germane amendment 1005h to HB 1583 relative to the per pupil cost of the opportunity for and adequate education.
Every Granite State child has a constitutional right to the opportunity for a robust public education through our local neighborhood public schools no matter where they live in the state. Whether families choose to enroll in the local neighborhood public schools for their children’s education, or choose private school, homeschooling, or a charter school, it is the child’s constitutional right to have that opportunity for a robust public education and the state’s constitutional duty to fund it. Our Granite State students have a right to more than just a barebones public education, as the case law over the past three decades has made clear. They have a right to a public education that prepares them for college, entering the workforce, joining an apprentice program or the service and to become productive citizens of their communities and our state, or wherever their goals and dreams take them after high school.
AFT-NH supports HB 1583 as passed by the NH House on Feb. 22, 2024. We have serious concerns about amendment 1005h. We greatly appreciate the part of the amendment where the state per pupil base adequacy aid is increased to the minimum amount recommended in the findings of the ConVal lawsuit, which is $7356.01. That amount of funding, if local neighborhood public schools were to receive it, could be put to good use hiring more teachers to lower class sizes, provide reading and math intervention in the younger grades, hiring and retaining paraeducators for flexible learning support, and increasing experiential leaning programs in middle and high schools to engage and excite students about what they are learning. However, we are concerned that focusing all of the limited state revenue available, in a nonbudget year, just to increase just one part of the school funding formula will ignore another key part of students’ constitutional right to a robust public education.
Each Granite State student has the same constitutional right to an opportunity for a robust public education regardless of where they live in New Hampshire. That public education has to be equally as robust in Berlin as it is in Bedford, just as robust in Franklin as it is in Windham. If we don’t focus some of our state revenue on other parts of the state education funding formula, we will be perpetuating the current inequalities in educational opportunities between districts, which is unconstitutional. We need to focus some of our revenue on individual students who require greater learning support to make academic progress, and thus greater funding. We also need to focus on communities that have higher concentrations of families in need of support, and on those communities with less ability to raise money through property taxes. Don’t entrench these existing inequalities between school districts in granite by focusing only on the per pupil base adequacy aid.
We also have serious concern about the part of the amendment that caps local appropriations for schools going forward. Whether a city, town or district adopts a spending or tax cap is a local decision. To impose one through the carrot of increased state school funding is state overreach. Beyond that, a cap is a blunt instrument that makes it very hard to respond to sudden spikes in expenses. For example, if the cost of fuel skyrockets as it did 2 years ago, you still have to run buses to bring students to and from school and still need to heat the school through the winter. If this cap is imposed, a district may have no choice but to make cuts to educational programs and staffing because there is only so much you can save by cutting field trip buses and lowering the thermostat. Pretty soon the district is faced with planning for the next budget, looking at trying to consolidate classrooms, increasing class sizes, reducing academic provided by classroom paraeducators, perhaps cutting back on art and music programs in the schools. Yes, the cap has a two-thirds override provision, but it is extremely difficult to reach that level of support in a vote, and very time consuming. Students’ education could suffer, which brings you further away from the state meeting its constitutional obligation to all Graite State children to provide the equal opportunity for a robust public education no matter where you live in the state.
For these reasons, we urge you to find amendment 1005h Inexpedient to Legislate, though we hope that you find HB1583 as passed by the house Ought to Pass.
Sincerely,
Debrah Howes
President, AFT-New Hampshire