Revises the statutory policy and definitions governing what constitutes an adequate public education, restating the required learning areas and how the state calculates the per-pupil cost of providing that adequate education.
relative to education financing.
HB1815 would amend the statutory language New Hampshire uses to define the state's responsibility for providing an "adequate education," including how adequacy is tied to school approval standards and how funding contributions are counted. The overwhelming majority of submitters oppose the bill, arguing it is a legal maneuver to redefine the state's constitutional obligation rather than address the funding gap identified in the ConVal court ruling, and that it will shift costs to local property taxpayers. A small number of submitters support the bill, framing it as a legitimate clarification of the state's obligation or as a step toward more taxpayer oversight of school spending.
A supporter frames the bill as a positive step toward clearly defining the state's constitutional obligation for education, describing it as reform-minded legislation.
A supporter argues in favor of giving voters more representation over school budget decisions, citing concern about the size of annual budget increases and their effect on property taxes.
A supporter argues that redefining adequacy does not eliminate schools' practical obligations, since standards and required services remain in place regardless of the statutory language.
Submitters argue New Hampshire courts have repeatedly affirmed a constitutional obligation to define, cost out, and fund an adequate education, and that the bill represents an attempt to evade or weaken that obligation and its judicial enforceability.
“You have a responsibility, both moral and legal, to fund public education in this state for all children. It is our right.”
— Bryn Neenos, Plymouth · #628207 — read full submission →
“New Hampshire has a clear constitutional obligation to adequately fund public education, and the state must finally honor that responsibility.”
— Catherine Bushueff, Sunapee · #628965 — read full submission →
Submitters contend that changing the legal definition of adequacy does not reduce the real-world costs of staffing, transportation, and services, so the financial burden will simply shift from the state onto local property taxpayers.
“If the state lowers its obligation, the cost does not disappear — it shifts directly to local property taxpayers.”
— Amber Kingsbury, Wentworth · #629174 — read full submission →
“None of these changes reduce the real-world obligations schools must meet. Standards still apply. Students still need services.”
— Lynne Bishop, Colebrook · #628674 — read full submission →
Submitters describe the bill as rewriting the statutory framework for adequacy at the same time courts ruled the funding system unconstitutional, arguing it is an end run around the ConVal decision rather than a response to the funding gap it identified.
Some submitters characterize the bill as a deliberate, "sneaky" effort by particular political actors or interest groups to weaken public education, often linking it to school voucher expansion or broader distrust of the sponsors' motives.
Submitters argue that shifting funding responsibility to local property taxes increases disparities between property-wealthy and property-poor communities, making the quality of a child's education depend on where they live.
Submitters express concern that the bill's language changes could lower the minimum standards required for core content areas, resulting in a weaker education for New Hampshire students.
Submitters note the bill is substantially similar to HB283 from the prior session, which drew roughly 30,000 opposing sign-ins, and argue reintroducing it disregards that public input.
Some submitters point out that New Hampshire already ranks at or near last in the nation for state-provided funding of public education, and argue the bill would worsen this position.
A number of submitters object to language they say would let the state count locally raised property tax dollars as if they were state contributions toward adequacy, obscuring the actual source of school funding.
A few submitters focus on specific curriculum areas, such as computer science or civics, that they believe would be cut or de-emphasized under the bill's changes.
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
This bill should not earn and OTP. It is in stark contrast to our State Constitution, and should come as a constitutional amendment, if at all. It will bring mud to the water of clarity about how to fund education, where clarity should be the goal. I object to this bill. As written, this would be an unfunded mandate, which is itself unconstitutional. Kill this bill!
The state of NH has already been found multiple times to be at fault when it comes to funding an adequate education for the 90% of resident children who attent public schools. The answer to this is to increase adequacy funding to public schools to at minimum the level dictated by the courts, NOT to attempt to falsely redefine adequate education It's is openly known that there are better outcomes for students in districts that are property wealthy and thus have more money to provide staffing, programming, a safe building, and more opportunities for its students. In order to provide all students in NH with equitable opportunities, the definition of adequacy must remain, and NH must fulfill their obligation. I imagine if you pass this bill, it will be challenged in court, leading to even more costs to NH taxpayers like myself.
Please, please stop this madness that keeps on attacking our public schools. WE need fair and adequate funding across the State! Thes repeated attacks do nothing to bolster up the system. Instead, they break it down!
HB 1815 rewrites how the state defines its responsibility for providing an adequate education, at the same moment the Courts have ruled the current system unconstitutional. Rather than responding to the funding gap identified in the ConVal decision, HB 1815 revises the statutory framework itself. None of these changes reduce the real-world obligations required of NH public schools. Standards still apply. Students still need services. Transportation, staffing, and instructional needs do not disappear, and the financial burden for these services is shifted to taxpayers.
This initiative will unravels protections meant to ensure students have access to needed services and that the state has an obligation to fund them. I strongly oppose this bill and the underlying intent to dismantle public education in New Hampshire.
ALL of our children deserve an excellent education that is adequately funded. Our public schools are at risk with this bill. Please vote NO on HB1815
Stop gutting public education!
Instead of this bill, I urge members of the House to consider legislation that will change how education is funded in New Hampshire so that funding does not rely so heavily on local property taxes. This reliance on local property taxes puts a heavy burden on lower income towns that do not receive a lot of revenue from businesses. It increases inequity in education between richer and poorer towns. School districts suffer. Ultimately, the students suffer, receiving less than adequate education.
Do you all remember HB 283 from last year, which 30,000 NH citizens opposed? I do! Is there a reason why you thought you could dress it up in a mustache and a trenchcoat, give it a new name, and we just wouldn't realize it was the same exact thing? This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to once again render our public education system as ineffective as possible. Districts are already struggling, and last year the NH Supreme Court ruled that our current school funding system is unconstitutional (...again). Pushing more of the responsibility onto municipalities is a surefire way to make it more difficult for the average NH student to access a good education. Although, since HB1815 aims to get rid of the language guaranteeing NH students the "opportunity for an adequate education," I suspect that is in fact, the end goal here. Families are already struggling to keep up with staggering property tax bills and rent payments. Pushing more of the funding responsibilities onto towns is STILL unconstitutional, will hurt the wallets of NH families, and will put our most rural and low-income students at yet another unfair disadvantage. Continuing to put working families through this fiscal hardship while simultaneously making education more difficult to access is akin to cruel and unusual punishment. (Only for the poor, of course, but guess who you need to vote you in to that seat?) PLEASE stop giving us the same bills with new names. We see you. We will continue to speak out. And we will remember how you voted on these bills to harm children when it's our turn to vote for you.
This is exhausting. We see what you are trying to do. Enough is enough. I am parent of school-aged children and a property taxpayer in a property-poor town. Please stop wasting your time trying to rob and cheat me out of my money and my children out of their education. This is about constitutional responsibility and basic fairness. OPPOSE HB1815. Stop trying to pass the buck. Have the integrity to represent your constituents over your loyalty to your party and the almighty dollar. Honor the state Constitution, protect taxpayers, and ensure EVERY child in New Hampshire has access to an adequate education.
Over 30,000 NH citizens opposed almost this exact bill last year, HB 283. Again, I opposed this bill, HB 1815 and the same bill in the Senate, SB 659. Per the state constitution and several supreme court decisions, the state of NH is responsible for providing adequate education to each child. The legislature needs to find an equitable way to fund and provide that adequate education as determined by the supreme court as this is at the core of our beliefs by being in our state constitution for so long. Adequate education provided by the state to each child is so important for community and a well educated society. Downshifting that cost by way of increasing local property taxes is no longer acceptable.
It’s all about money isn’t it. Shame on us.
This bill is an attack on public education and will further increase the burden of real estate taxes. Abuses of the voucher system are well documented and the cost of vouchers will certainly become a major drain on funding of public education.
The Bill. flies in the face of the State Supreme Court decision on school funding. It teaches our children. that Court decisions are followed by the whim of the opposition instead of teaching respect for the rule of law.
Stop trying to destroy public education with this bill. You’re not fooling anyone.
I vehemently oppose this bill, which is an unconscionable attempt to deny public school children funding for the education they deserve!
We are last in the nation for our state aid to public education even though a huge majority of our students attend public schools. In addition more money is being taken from the Public Trust Fund and therefore public schools for unlimited vouchers to a majority of recipients who can afford their choices of private schools and home schooling. This has caused a weakening of public schools especially in property poor districts, higher property taxes and a decline in the formation of new businesses in the state who care about an educated work force and strong public schools. HB 1815 will only make these trends worse with the State taking even less responsibility for public education. A vote for this bill will only weaken our schools, increase our property taxes and keep more businesses from coming to NH. Sue Taylor, Plainfield, NH
This is another attempt to push the responsibility of funding state public education to the property tax payer, The state has a obligation to fund an adequate education, not move the goal post closer to their denial of that responsibility. If the state spent as much time and money to uplift public education as these bill and school vouchers are doing to tear it apart, NH could have a successful public education program across the state. Start putting the focus on supporting the system that is in place and legislate so that it is propped up and successful for every resident across the state. Then each community wins, educated folks stop leaving the state for better opportunities and businesses will be able to flourish with great employees!
This would do a horrible disservice to our education system and to all the children of the state.
I support having some representation on votes for school budgets. The constant increasing of budgets by $10 Million+ per year should have to be justified and voted on. The increases are ridiculous and cause property taxes to increase significantly year after year and needs some oversight.
As a parent, as an educator, as someone who has worked supporting students in our public schools, as a taxpayer, voter and longtime resident in New Hampshire, I am stating my opposition to this bill. With respect and regards, Thank you for your consideration. Lauri Murphy
I am opposed to the bill because it will weaken school approval standards and lessen state responsibility to fund education. A free, adequate education is a right for all. Do not pass this bill.
Legislators should not be dictating what teachers can do. Please oppose this ridiculous government overreach.
Absolutely bonkers bill that tries to mess with education funding, making it a partisan matter instead of letting towns have local control. No!
I am opposed to this bill. The state needs to step up and pay to improve public education and stop stealing money from taxpayers to fund private schools.