Relative to the base annual cost per pupil of providing the opportunity for an adequate education and statewide education property tax rate.
Summary
HB 769 would substantially increase the state’s statutory base annual cost per pupil for an adequate education from $4,100 to $7,356.01 for the biennium beginning July 1, 2025. The bill also updates the education funding formula language to reflect the new biennium and preserves the department’s authority to adjust rates under existing law. In practical terms, this would raise the state-defined cost of providing an adequate education, which is the benchmark used in New Hampshire’s school funding system.
The bill also changes the statewide education property tax. Instead of the current approach that allows the commissioner to set the rate to generate a specified amount of revenue, HB 769 would set the education tax rate at $2.50 per $1,000 of assessed value beginning July 1, 2025, and continuing thereafter, with certain property classes excluded as under current law. The act would take effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
HB 769 would amend RSA 198:40-a and RSA 76:3, directly affecting the state’s school funding formula and the statewide education property tax. By increasing the per-pupil adequacy amount, the bill would likely increase the calculated cost of an adequate education and could affect state aid calculations, local school funding obligations, and overall education appropriations. By fixing the education tax rate at a specific dollar amount rather than tying it to revenue sufficiency, the bill would also change how the statewide education property tax is administered and could alter the revenue stream supporting education funding.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call data. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears to be a significant education-funding increase and a tax-rate change, which typically draws both support from those seeking greater school funding and scrutiny from those concerned about tax burdens and fiscal impact. The fiscal note was not completed because the Department of Education had not yet provided information, indicating that the financial effects were still being evaluated.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely the size of the increase in the adequacy amount and the decision to set the statewide education property tax rate at a fixed $2.50 per $1,000. Supporters would likely argue that the current adequacy amount is too low and that the state should better fund public education. Opponents or skeptics would likely focus on the potential cost to taxpayers, the effect on local property tax bills, and the uncertainty created by the incomplete fiscal note. Because no hearing transcript is available, no specific legislator, agency, or stakeholder position can be identified from the provided materials.