Letter to the Editor: It was good to read what our representatives Peternel and Cordelli have to say about education funding. We in fact need to hear from them more often since we send them to Concord to represent our interests. Sadly, they are not representing our interests well on this topic.
Let us be clear, state funding of education has been non existent or totally inadequate forever. This state obligation has been clarified repeatedly and is based on our state constitution instituted in 1784. It is unconscionable that the state still provides such a meager share of the actual cost of education, putting the preponderance of our education funding burden on local taxpayers.
Given the state has many more sources or avenues of collecting funds -- and towns have very limited options -- the state's meager funding is truly unjustifiable. Adding injury to local taxpayers, the state requires our schools to provide things which the state does not include in their determination of the cost of education. Yes, the state requires us to provide transportation, school nurses, buildings/facilities and much more but does not include these costs in their formulation. Really building and facilities is not part of their calculations!
Peternel and Cordelli, as well as the majority of other legislators, have been neglecting their responsibilities for decades. Then they tell us we should be grateful when they tell us they are working on it. Really it takes 50 years to come to a solution? Or we should be glad when they provide a few more million dollars, to partially address the inequities which have existed and gotten worse for the same 50 plus years.
Add to these issues the spending of money on things which the state is not legally obligated to do -- like education freedom accounts which Cordelli and Peternel supported -- and this adds insult to local taxpayers.
Then our reps tell us they will have to collect more money through the SWEPT tax formula if we want them to provide more education funding. That's just not true. They can use almost any funds the state raises to meet their education obligation. They could in fact use the business taxes they're presently using for education freedom accounts toward their real obligation. Not reducing taxes, which the state has done repeatedly in the last several budgets, would also help address the state's education obligations.
Peternel and Cordelli's argument that we will lose local control if the state meets its obligation is bogus. The New Hampshire Department of Education has 327 employees, a budget of $65.1M, 4 divisions and 4 additional offices/commissions, with hundreds of education regulations and requirements. Local control has already been substantially altered. Plus, as was noted previously, the state already mandates any number of unfunded requirements.
Peternel and Cordelli are serious about other constitutional freedoms and obligations. They should be equally dedicated to fully meeting NH's state responsibility for education funding.
In fact, New Hampshire should fully cover constitutionally required expenses before they spend money on things which are not legally mandated.
Karen Burnett-Kurie
Comments