A new Republican-backed proposal at the State House is setting up another high-stakes clash over how New Hampshire pays for its public schools.
Following a recent New Hampshire Supreme Court decision that found the state is underfunding education, GOP lawmakers are advancing legislation that would redefine what counts as “adequate” funding — and who is responsible for paying it. Supporters say the bill restores legislative authority. Critics argue it attempts to sidestep decades of constitutional precedent.
House Bill 1815, introduced by Rep. Bob Lynn of Windham, would establish in statute that providing a constitutionally adequate education is a shared responsibility between the state and local school districts. A companion measure, Senate Bill 659, mirrors the House proposal.
The legislation comes in response to a 2025 ruling in Contoocook Valley School District v. State of New Hampshire, commonly known as the ConVal case. In a 3-2 decision, the Supreme Court ordered lawmakers to increase education funding, affirming a lower court’s conclusion that the current system falls short of constitutional requirements.
Lynn, a former chief justice of the state’s Supreme Court, told members of the House Education Funding Committee that the bill is meant to clarify the Legislature’s role. He described the proposal as a message to the judiciary that lawmakers believe the court misinterpreted the balance of authority.
Democrats and Education advocates see it differently
John Tobin, one of the attorneys involved in the long-running Claremont school funding cases of the 1990s, testified that the measure attempts to dilute the constitutional obligation outlined in Part II, Article 83 of the state constitution. That provision requires the state to “cherish” public education and, courts have ruled, to fund it in a manner that is reasonable and proportionate across communities.
Opponents argue that wide disparities in local property tax rates show the system remains unequal. For example, residents in Sunapee pay significantly less in school property taxes per $1,000 of valuation than neighboring Newport, where higher rates have not translated into stronger budgets. Advocates say such gaps underscore why state-level responsibility is critical.
Supporters of HB 1815 contend the current framework places too much financial burden on state taxpayers while leaving hiring and spending decisions largely in the hands of local districts. By framing adequacy as a joint obligation, they argue, the state can create a more balanced approach.
The bill also makes two notable adjustments. It narrows the definition of adequacy to focus specifically on academic programs and expands the funding streams counted toward adequacy. In addition to the $4,351 base adequacy payment per student, it would include differentiated aid provided for lower-income students.
That distinction has been central to the legal debate. When Rockingham County Superior Court Judge David Ruoff ruled in 2023 that base funding levels were insufficient — ordering at least $7,356 per student — critics argued he excluded differentiated aid from his calculations. Including those funds, they say, brings the total closer to or above $7,000 per pupil.
Assistant Attorney General Sam Garland, representing the state, testified in favor of the bill, calling it a needed clarification. He said the changes would provide more precision in defining both what constitutes an adequate education and which funding streams should be included.
The New Hampshire Department of Justice has formally endorsed the proposal — a rare step while litigation remains active. Meanwhile, a separate case, Rand v. State of New Hampshire, is expected to reach the Supreme Court in the coming year and could be influenced by any statutory changes lawmakers enact.
Public response has been sharply divided. More than 1,000 people submitted testimony opposing HB 1815, while only a handful expressed support. During committee hearings, critics warned that redefining adequacy without increasing funding could allow the state to retreat further from its financial role.
When asked directly whether the bill would increase state funding, Lynn answered no. He also said he believes current funding levels already meet constitutional standards.
Senate President Sharon Carson has praised the measure and credited Governor Kelly Ayotte with convening a study committee in 2025 that helped shape the proposal. Carson described the legislation as part of a broader discussion about the future of education financing in New Hampshire.
Whether HB 1815 ultimately withstands judicial scrutiny remains uncertain. If passed, it could prompt new legal challenges — and further define the ongoing tension between the Legislature and the courts over how the state fulfills its constitutional duty to fund public education.
