By GARRY RAYNO, Distant Dome
The old adage “the devil is in the details” certainly is true about how state lawmakers view education.
Likewise, “numbers don’t lie” would apply as well.
The state education funding system has been challenged for years going back decades, with one of the most recent suits decided by the state Supreme Court and the other still before the court.
In that suit, the state — through the Ayotte administrations Attorney General’s Office — is preparing to ask the court to overturn the landmark Claremont decisions that the state has an obligation to provide an adequate education for the children of the state and to pay for it, which has been the sticking point legally.
But the state’s education system is more than the traditional K through 12th grade public schools, which has been under attack by the Libertarian/Republicans in the legislature for a decade.
The state education system also includes charter schools, which live outside the rules and regulations traditional public schools must follow.
Charter schools allow students and their parents to specialize in the arts, or mathematics or science or alternative programs for those with physical or mental disability, or for behavioral issues.
And the most recent addition to the education system is the Education Freedom Account or voucher program that is mostly a subsidy program for parents with children currently in religious or other private schools and homeschooling.
The program was touted as an alternative for parents whose child did not fit the traditional public school environment, but few kids have left public schools for the program as most were in religious or private schools or homeschooled before they joined.
The state’s Education Trust Fund has to pay for the three programs, not just public education.
Last fiscal year, which ended June 30, the trust fund had revenues of $1.36 billion, which is approximately $100 million more than budget writers anticipated.
At one point, the Education Trust Fund had a surplus of over $200 million but that has been declining as more and more programs draw money from the fund established after the original Claremont decisions to ensure the money would be allocated for public education. Much of where the money goes in the EFA program is not public education, but the court has said that is OK because the EFA law allows it and the amount of money is not significant.
That decision may need to be re-litigated soon.
So the obvious question is how equitable is the funding for the three major branches of the state’s public education system.
The public education system is largely funded by local and state property taxes, along with about a 20 percent contribution from the state and less than 8 percent from the federal government.
Both the charter school program and EFA program are funded solely by the state through the Education Trust Fund.
Where does that money come from? A percent of state business, rooms and meals, tobacco, and real estate transfer taxes, video lottery terminals and the other category go into the trust fund, as does all the revenue generated by Lottery Commission, utility property tax and the tobacco settlement money.
Public schools are paid for from multiple sources the other two are not.
The three programs pay the basic adequacy cost, which will be $4,351 this year and differential aid for students who qualify for free or reduced lunch, $2441; special education services, $2,229, and English language learners, $849.
The latest figures on the Department of Education’s website for charter schools is for the 2025 fiscal year.
Charter schools serve 7,514 students and the state pays $36.2 million plus about a $5,000 bonus per student that comes out to be $9,086 per student.
The latest figures for the EFA program, which were from April 1, show 10,708 students, which means 200 students were added since the school year began. Those students would have to come under the exemptions which include whose parents earn less than 350 percent of the federal poverty level, or they have siblings in the program because the program was at its 10,000 cap before the school year began.
The total state cost of the program from the April 1 data indicates it is $53.14 million for the recently completed school year.
That makes the average per pupil cost the state provides $4,963.
To compare apples to apples, that means what does the state actually pay per pupil from the Education Trust Fund for public school students.
The statewide property tax is a property tax that one year was local and then the next year went to the state. Almost all of the money collected at the local level for the statewide property tax never leaves the school district, the state just takes credit for it.
It is not money in the Education Trust Fund raised from state levies or gambling or the tobacco settlement.
The state also has programs that target money to needy school districts and another program that holds districts harmless from the last time a major revision was made in the distribution formula, but that program is being phased out.
That money does not go to every district to offset costs just to those that need additional help to provide an adequate education to their students.
Using the information from the Department of Education’s website for the upcoming school year, the agency projects that the cost of adequacy or state aid to schools including the differential aid will be $817.8 million.
With the other targeted aid, the state says the cost is $1.06 million.
The department lists 148,918 students for the upcoming year based on last year’s figures.
That would indicate the state per pupil aid to districts is $7,118.
But to compare apples to apples, the targeted aid would need to be withdrawn as well as the statewide property tax to find out the real money the state is spending on public school students.
When that revenue is eliminated, the state is sending $3,047 per student to school districts in real money from the Education Trust Fund.
Using those figures, the average voucher is 63 percent higher than the public school aid, and the charter school average is three times what the state pays for public school students.
Granted there are many more public school students than either charter schools or the EFA program, but should the state be spending more per student on those programs than for public school students, the backbone of the state’s education system?
When Gov. Kelly Ayotte and others say the state spends enough on public education, what they really mean is that local property taxpayers pay more than their fair share for public education so the state doesn’t have to come close to the national average of 47 or 48 percent that states pay for public education.
Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.
Distant Dome by veteran journalist Garry Rayno explores a broader perspective on the State House and state happenings for InDepthNH.org. Over his three-decade career, Rayno covered the NH State House for the New Hampshire Union Leader and Foster’s Daily Democrat. During his career, his coverage spanned the news spectrum, from local planning, school and select boards, to national issues such as electric industry deregulation and Presidential primaries. Rayno lives with his wife Carolyn and their two rescue dogs.