Public School Funding

In 1991, the city of Claremont sued New Hampshire to address their underfunded public education. At the time, the state was supposed to cover 8% of the cost of public education, with local taxpayers funding the other 92% directly.

Claremont’s only high school had lost its accreditation because the city simply could not raise enough tax revenue to maintain the school.

The NH Supreme Court declared that, indeed, our school funding system was unconstitutional. The Court cited Part II, Article 83 of our state constitution—which states that it is the “duty” of our state government to “cherish” public schools. This landmark decision declared that every public school in our state must receive equal funding.

In fact, the court ordered the state to establish an adequate funding model.

Back then, Jeanne Shaheen was our governor. A journalist for The Boston Globe wrote that she “has shown an almost Republican unwillingness to part with state money. Since school funding moved to center stage, both she and the Legislature have largely rejected any new spending.”

So instead of solving the Claremont problem, and in direct violation of the court’s order, Shaheen and the Republican-controlled legislature agreed on a “temporary” statewide income tax.

Known as “SWEPT”, the NH Statewide Education Property Tax persisted under two more Democrat governors and three Republican governors—right up through today, over two decades later.

Property Taxes

The “temporary” statewide property tax is a flat tax on property—it’s a set percentage of assessed property values across the state.

The goal is to raise $363 million per year, and everyone is supposed to put in their fair share based on the value of their property.

So for example, if the rate is 1%, and your home is valued at $300,000, you’re paying $3,000 toward the public school system.

But there’s a caveat.

In 2011, Governor John Lynch did a huge favor to the property-rich towns. If their properties were so valuable that they raised more than what was needed to fund their local school system, they could just keep the excess. No need to share the wealth with the rest of the state.

So the “flat tax” was gone—and the wealthiest property owners now pay less into the “statewide” property tax than the poor.

Housing Costs

The SWEPT tax has to be collected by the town and city governments, even though they don’t have any say in how much is collected.

So the only thing these municipalities can do is cut spending on local education.

One way this is achieved is by blocking new students from entering the local school system. Local zoning and planning boards reject family-sized housing, instead favoring 55+ communities and studio apartments.

And obviously, when there’s less of something, it costs more to get it.

When Claremont sued in 1991, the median home value in NH was only $129,000.

Today, it’s $540,000.

This is the consequence of refusing to adequately fund public education. This is the result of leadership from both parties kicking the can down the road for literal decades.

So when you wonder why your rent is so high, or why your tax bill just keeps growing—remember that both Republicans and Democrats worked together to avoid taxing the wealthy at the same rate that they’re taxing the poor and middle class.

(But who’s surprised? We know who funds their political campaigns.)

No matter which tax we use—income, sales, or property—we will always need donor towns with more wealth paying higher taxes to fund the poorer schools. That’s the entire point of the Claremont decision. Our state constitution requires that every child in NH have access to the same level of public education—so we must redistribute wealth from richer towns to poor towns.

Jon Kiper is a lifelong New Hampshire resident, community activist, and former Town Councilor. He is currently running for New Hampshire Governor as an independent.