CONCORD, N.H.—After years of fighting over a school aid pot that never grows bigger, the state Senate voted Thursday to change the constitution so the neediest towns could be singled out for aid.
The 19-5 bipartisan vote ensures a repeat of last year's fight with the House over putting a constitutional amendment on the November ballot.
Democratic Gov. John Lynch, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Foster and Senate Republican Leader Ted Gatsas crafted the amendment that they say will allow the state to stop sending a base per pupil amount of aid to every town. They argue wealthier towns don't need the state's help like poor towns do.
For a decade, the state has divvied up between $800 million and $900 million in annual state school aid. Lawmakers have argued not only about who gets the money and how much, but whether property-rich towns deserved any aid.
Lynch and amendment supporters believe the state should send all or most aid to the poorest towns -- which means towns in the middle and upper end of the property wealth spectrum would get little or no money.
In repeated rulings, the state Supreme Court has said the state can't do that. Instead, the court has said that the state must define an adequate education, determine adequacy's cost, pay for it and hold local schools accountable to provide it. The court also said the state can distribute more aid on top of what it determines is adequate.
Foster said that means the state must give a basic amount of aid to property-wealthy towns "while we struggle to get dollars where they are needed most."
"As a matter of policy, I think that is wrong, and I believe the court was wrong in establishing that requirement," said Foster, D-Nashua. This amendment "will correct that inequity and allow the state to direct money to the schools with the greatest needs."
Foster insisted the amendment would not shift total control from the courts over education funding to the Legislature. Lawmakers still would have to define adequacy and fund it -- though they could use the money to alleviate disparities, he said.
Webster Democrat Harold Janeway -- who voted for the amendment -- pointed out that it would lower the court's review authority.
"It moves from strict to easy and this is no small matter," he said. "Given the Legislature's lengthy history of failing to fund over the years, who in the future is going to hold the Legislature accountable given the change in scrutiny?"
Sen. Bob Clegg objected the state could use the new power to circumvent an existing constitutional prohibition against the state mandating programs it doesn't fund. For example, lawmakers could decide an adequate education includes preschool programs, then only pay for them in poor towns, he said.
"The amendment says the (Legislature) will decide how much money to give you," said Clegg, R-Hudson.
Clegg offered a change to the amendment to prevent that from happening, but the Senate voted 14-10 along party lines to defeat it. Foster and Gatsas insisted such unfunded mandates would not be allowed under their proposal.
Total state aid has remained unchanged for a decade despite rising school costs. A special legislative committee this month recommended a new aid system that probably won't spend much more than the $897 million being spent this year.
The self-imposed political ceiling on aid has put enormous pressure on legislators to divide up a pot of money that isn't big enough to satisfy those who believe all towns deserve some per pupil aid and those who believe more should go to the property-poor towns.
Amendment critics argue the state should increase total aid so there's enough money for a realistic base amount and targeted aid for pupils needing more help.
But Lynch wants to focus on providing the existing aid to the poorest towns, not the wealthy ones. He says giving some aid to everyone increases inequities between rich and poor towns.
"I believe strongly that we have a responsibility to ensure all our children have an opportunity for a quality education, regardless of where they live. That is why we must pass an amendment that allows us to direct aid," Lynch said of the Senate vote.
Opponents respond that the proposed amendment will magnify, not ease, inequalities because lawmakers can't be trusted to send towns enough aid to make a difference. Additionally, some towns would get less or no aid and their taxpayers would have to make up the loss, they say.
The amendment would give lawmakers "the authority and responsibility to reasonably define the content of an adequate public education and to distribute state funds for public education in the manner that it reasonably determines to alleviate local disparities."
In the last decade, lawmakers have tried repeatedly and failed to muster the three-fifths vote needed in each chamber to put similar amendments before voters.
Thursday's passage in the Senate is no guarantee the proposal will be on the November ballot despite Lynch's lobbying. The Senate passed a similar amendment last year that died in the House.
House Finance Chairwoman Marjorie Smith said Thursday her committee will begin work on the amendment, probably in late March.
"This amendment, like all legislation, will receive full debate and careful deliberation in the House," House Speaker Terie Norelli said.
