Late last week, the State of New Hampshire filed its final brief in the ConVal lawsuit now before the New Hampshire Supreme Court, clearing the way for the Court to begin to decide what could be a landmark case for students, homeowners, and local businesses.
The ConVal case began in March 2019 when four school districts — Contoocook Valley (or ConVal), Winchester, Mascenic, and Mondanock — filed a lawsuit against the State of New Hampshire last year, alleging that the State’s school funding system falls far short of compliance with the New Hampshire Constitution and the Claremont decisions of the late 1990s. Last June, the Cheshire County Superior Court issued a ruling in favor of the school districts, holding that the State was violating the Constitution by failing to fully fund an adequate education for Granite State students. Not surprisingly, the State appealed the decision to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, which accepted the case in September 2019.
The State’s latest filing is intended to respond to the brief filed this spring by the plaintiff school districts as well as to two amici briefs, one submitted by the ACLU of New Hampshire and another authored by Natalie Laflamme and John Tobin on behalf of 25 school districts across the state, plus the New Hampshire School Boards Association (NHSBA). However, rather than addressing the merits of the substantive arguments laid out in those briefs, the State’s response, for the most part, focuses on the process followed by the Superior Court in arriving at its ruling, maintaining that its “proceedings bore little resemblance” to the usual adversarial process and repeatedly emphasizing the short time frame under which the Court reached its decision.
To explain some of the key issues in the ConVal case and to provide a fuller context for considering the assertions made by the state, NHSFFP hosted a background briefing for members of the media on Wednesday, July 1. Attorneys Laflamme and Tobin reviewed the facts presented in their amicus brief, while a panel of local school officials discussed the ongoing consequences of educational funding inequities for the families and communities they serve. That panel included:
- Frank Sprague, Chair, Claremont School Board
- Leslie Want, Vice Chair, Manchester Board of School Committee
- Jasen Stock, Chair, Winnisquam Regional School Board
- Jim O’Brien, Chair, Hopkinton School Board
- John Freeman, Superintendent, Pittsfield School District
- Heather Raymond, Chair, Nashua School Board
The Concord Monitor included coverage from the briefing in the first of a series of articles it plans on efforts to restructure the state’s approach to education. That initial story offers a thorough review of the ConVal case, as well as the activities and plans of the Commission to Study School Funding. In quoting Jim O’Brien, the Chair of the Hopkinton School Board, the story sums up well the the difficult choices before many districts across the state; he noted, “We can’t continue to cut our programs…we also know that we can’t keep raising taxes on those in the community who can least afford it.”
Now that the plaintiff school districts and the State have had the opportunity to offer their arguments in writing, the next step will be oral arguments before the Supreme Court. The amici school districts have asked the Court for permission to participate in the those arguments, but the Court has not yet ruled on their request. Similarly, a date for oral arguments has still to be set, but it is not unreasonable to expect that those arguments could be scheduled for later this summer or fall, with the Court issuing its decision before the next Legislature convenes in January.