Books, Ideas, and Goats
From “Books, Ideas, and Goats” Weekly newsletter on Substack by Andru Volinsky. He specializes in writing primarily about national movements for fair school funding and other measures to effect social change. The link is: https://substack.com/@andruvolinsky?utm_source=profile-page
This week's two topics are special education funding reform and Governor Sununu's childish attack on Judge Ruoff.
Andor Volynsky
The next funding consideration is special education funding. reform. Special education is necessary for some children to receive the constitutionally adequate education required by the state constitution. Special education is important and we need to support it. The problem is how to raise funds.
Legally, the cost of special education should be borne by the state and not pushed onto local governments. The state's inclusion of special education costs as an increment in adequacy funding in her RSA 198:40-a acknowledges that adequacy includes special education and related services. All we need to do is convince the state to put a fair price tag on the price of admission.
Special education costs are mentioned repeatedly. It is often cited as the first or second most important driver of school budget increases. The other is that employee health insurance premiums continue to rise. Again, New Hampshire would do well to start by not just locking in special education funding, but locking in special education funding.
Funding for special education in New Hampshire, like in many states, comes from federal, state, and local sources. Local funding is the largest of the three and comes from property taxes. Special education and related costs in New Hampshire total approximately $850 million each year. The federal government is contributing $48 million directly, and he is contributing an additional $15 million through state and federal Medicaid partnerships. The state contributes $93 million to her through two programs. The remaining approximately $694 million will be collected by local property tax payers.
Suppose a small school district must raise $500,000 to pay for special education costs. Whether this is possible depends on the wealth of the community. Moultonboro and Pittsfield are her two communities of similar size, but Moultonboro has valuable lakefront land. To raise the same $500,000, Moultonboro would have to levy a tax of just over 8 cents per $1,000 of property value. Using 2022-23 numbers, Moultonborough's local education equalization tax rate would increase to 1.53/1000, adding a total of $25.05 to property taxes on a $300,000 home. Pittsfield would have to levy a full dollar tax to raise the same funds, and that dollar would increase her local education tax to 8.82/1000, which would increase her local education property tax on her $300,000 home to 291. dollar increase.
The same cost change of adding $500,000 to special education fees would cause homeowners in Pittsfield to pay 10 times more property taxes than homeowners in Moultonboro. This is to provide programs required by federal and state law.
New Hampshire should overhaul its two very poor special education systems. flow of funds. One program provides reimbursements of about $32 million a year after costs based on arbitrary limits, but states rarely fully fund the program. The second funding program provides approximately $61 million through adequacy assistance. This adequacy aid component is $2,100 per student, even though we know districts spend an average of $30,000 per student.
Reliance on local funding also cannot handle the costs of children moving from district to district without notice, leaving new districts with high special education costs they could not have planned for. Particularly in smaller districts, families with children with expensive special education needs become scapegoats as special education budgets skyrocket when they move into town.
How can I solve this problem?
First, when Congress passed the landmark special education law now known as “IDEA” in 1975, it committed to funding 40 percent of compliance costs. That never happened. Federal funding typically hovers around 20%. Rep. Rick Rudd (R-Haverhill) and others are sponsoring a resolution calling on the federal government to “pony up.” That's good, but you also need to look closer to home.
Second, New Hampshire should create a state program similar to an insurance plan for special education funding, as proposed by Rep. Cam Kenney (D-Durham). By the way, Cam had an IEP for special education until elementary school. He is a soon-to-be graduate of UNH Law School and is serving his third term in the House of Representatives.
Statewide insured special education funding system Provides direct payments to outside consultants, provides quarterly reimbursement for local officials' costs associated with providing special education services, and allows local officials to plan special education budgets annually. The ability to control the region, not just respond to emergencies, will be strengthened.
Similarly, asking property-poor communities to raise funds in the same way as property-rich communities is unfair and leads to scapegoating. If state policymakers insist on relying on property taxes, a new insurance-style funding program could make that possible. Considering the value of taxable property in the state, it would cost the state property taxes of $1.00 per 1,000 to raise approximately $250 million in revenue. If the state levied an additional $2.00 in state property taxes to fund this insurance-type plan, $500 million would be raised.
Of course, recent business tax cuts reduced state revenue by more than $500 million.
Setting aside corporate tax breaks and adding $500 million in federal, Medicaid, and existing state funds, $656 million would be raised, with the remaining $200 million coming from local taxes. This is a much easier amount to raise locally, and my friend Doug Hall said that reducing local special education spending by about two-thirds also lowers existing local school tax rates, so The net increase in taxes and local property taxes will likely increase. Must be less than 2.00/1000.
A final point regarding special education funding is that school districts devote about a quarter of their budgets to paying for special education and related services. Wealthier regions also bear this burden. Portsmouth spends just over 20 percent of its school budget on special education. This means Portsmouth gains the predictability that comes with a statewide insurance funding plan. It would also significantly increase local funding provided by the state. In short, this approach crosses the artificial divide between wealthy and dispossessed communities.
Gov. Chris Sununu called Judge David Ruoff “political” and the ruling “stupid.”” he said in a speech at Manchester Chamber of Commerce last week. Judge Ruoff ruled that the state's $4,100 cost for a constitutionally adequate education was insufficient.
Judge Ruoff also ruled that SWEPT is unconstitutional.
This speech was notable for two reasons.
Manchester, the city where the speech was given; There is a school district that appears to be the most challenged school district in the state. In some schools, less than 10 percent of students are proficient in reading, math, and science, and two high schools have just recently improved their graduation rates and received the federal comprehensive education system's “High Risk” rating.・Some schools have gone so far as to remove them from the “Robinson” status. .
The district is a school district whose education commissioner recently testified before the House Education Committee that Manchester's spending would need to increase by $50 million to reach the state average, and whose school funding committee recently testified before the House Education Committee that Manchester's spending would need to increase by $50 million to meet the state average. A school district that has identified a need for increased spending based on needs. Her $10,000 per child in Manchester schools is too little (the total shortfall is more than her $120 million).
Sununu was speaking in Manchester, no doubt because Manchester's former mayor is running for governor and he wanted to overshadow her, but he also spoke in Manchester about improving education, making funding more fair, There was no indication of any plans to help attract businesses to the area. New employees who wish to live in the city. He offered no aid to a diverse city whose residents are less educated, have lower incomes, and are more likely to be uninsured or underinsured than other parts of the state. There wasn't. No, he came to offer a well-thought-out criticism of Judge Ruoff, the judge whom Sununu voted to confirm while on the executive council.
It's hard to imagine how Judge Ruoff will recover from Sununu's criticism. Judges are 'political' and their decisions are 'stupid'”
Of course, Chris Sununu's father called Claremont's ruling “ridiculous” and revealed that Claremont famously broke his father's promise to fund Augenblick's Targeted Aid School Funding Program. Judge Ruoff can take solace in the fact that he had cause to file a lawsuit.
Perhaps Judge Ruoff also says the state will pay $4,100 per student in constitutional legal fees, even though the state spent more than $1 million on experts and outside counsel to defend the Convall and Rand cases. You can take solace in the fact that you haven't been able to find an expert yet. A good education is enough.
It's not “stupid” to decide that $4,100 per student can't cover the funding. Constitutionally appropriate education in NH. Average state spending is more than $20,000 per student. Even Croydon's most sycophantic supporters of Frank Edelblut wanted to spend $8,000 per pupil when cutting school budgets in the dark of the night after townspeople returned from district meetings.
A careful study of what $4,100 produces in Hopkinton, Newport, and Pittsfield shows that in schools funded at this low level, there are 60 children per teacher, and teachers have no health insurance or pensions. This means that children will miss out on sports and other extracurricular activities. That is not my vision of high-quality schools that support the needs of children and the democracy that they will one day be a part of.
It is not “political” to say the facts as you see them, as Judge Ruoff did.
Come on, Governor. You're leaving the office. What was this?Speech to encourage whoever the next governor is she Might follow the same path as you or your father?
We can do better for the people of New Hampshire.
Yes, Governor, you contributed more business tax revenue and interest and dividend income than any other governor. You have saved out-of-state multinational corporations a lot of money and freed the wealthiest people from contributing to this great state. You, more than anyone else, supported the discredited theory of trickle-down economics.
Some would say he allowed ordinary people in the state to be extorted while draining nearly $1 billion in revenue.
Think about what you could have done instead. If you were governor, our state could support policies that help seniors stay in their homes and address high property taxes. They could have worked to expand early childhood education and reform the special education system. I would go so far as to say that, unlike his Democratic and Republican predecessors, he could also fund NH's mandate to provide constitutional education to all children, not just those who are already privileged. Dew.
Please stop naming the judge. It comes under the governorship that you hold. There is still time to move forward constructively. Don't waste it.
Editor's note: The opinions expressed here belong to the author. InDepthNH.org welcomes your feedback at nancywestnews@gmail.com.