Manchester school board warns language in budget trailer bill could cost city schools $10.2M
Page 70 of the bill includes language establishing what is essentially a cap on targeted aid for larger school districts.
For districts with 5,000 or more students, the bill seeks to subtract from targeted state aid until the amount decreases to $3,750 per student.
The cap would effectively cut Manchester's adequacy aid from $127.8 million under current law to just under $117.6 million — a cut of more than $10.2 million.
By comparison, the city of Nashua would see its targeted aid jump by more than $1.2 million under the new language, from $83.2 million to $84.4 million.
'As far as we can tell, Manchester is the only municipality in New Hampshire that stands to lose money because of this cap on targeted aid,' the letter from Manchester's school board to the Legislature's Committee of Conference says. 'Such a loss would put at risk our ability to best serve the educational needs of our students.'
The state's education aid formula was tweaked in response to Manchester getting a bonus from the introduction of the Extraordinary Needs Grant in 2021, a more than $30 million annual increase.
The amendment limits that bonus and will lead to Manchester getting more than $10 million less than it gets now. The amendment received support from members of both parties, because the $10 million is being shared by other income- and property-poor communities like Berlin, Claremont and Franklin.
Manchester Mayor Jay Ruais said Tuesday he has been in contact with some of the committee members, who will likely begin meeting later this week.
"I am reaching out to the conferees to gather information and develop a course of action to address this issue," Ruais said.
School board member Bob Baines, a former mayor and educator, said he spoke to Gov. Kelly Ayotte about the targeted cap last week.
'We've been in touch with various representatives, but this needs to be watched very, very carefully in the (Legislature's) Committee of Conference,' Baines said. 'Can you imagine the devastation that will occur in Manchester, the most significant devastation possible in our public schools. We all need to work on that with our representatives, because I think in any big government bill — no matter how big and beautiful it is — some people don't read it and don't understand.
'Why would Manchester be singled out as the only community in the state of New Hampshire that would lose funding? If you care about Manchester, we should get that funding — we planned on it.'
School board member Sean Parr drafted the letter and gathered the signatures of fellow board members this week.
'We are hoping to reach out to the Committee of Conference to let them know that it has this particular effect only on Manchester,' Parr said. 'I think it would be good for us to at least explain the situation, tell them that it's a significant impact to our budget in its current form, and to ask that they reconsider that part of the budget proposal.'
In the letter, school board members urge committee members to reconsider the 'targeted cap' portion of the bill, warning the proposed budget could lead to 'harmful cuts and reductions to student services.'
School officials point out that despite being the largest school district in New Hampshire with nearly 12,000 students, Manchester ranks at the bottom of the state in per-pupil spending, with over 53% of students qualifying for free and reduced-price meals, 20% multilingual learners, and 23% special education students.
'The proposed reductions would therefore have devastating consequences for our students, our educators, and ultimately, the future of our city,' the letter says. 'We welcome the opportunity to engage in continued dialogue, and we hope that you will collaborate in crafting a budget that reflects the values, priorities, and long-term vision of a thriving state with excellent public schools.'
pfeely@unionleader.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
2 hours ago
- Politico
Redistricting kills tax hikes talk
Presented by BACK-BURNERED: Gov. Gavin Newsom's gerrymandering play has effectively ended any possibility, however slim, that lawmakers would seriously consider a push by progressives to raise taxes before the Legislature adjourns next month. It was always a longshot. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire had been more tepid on taxes since wrapping the budget in June. But Newsom's sudden redistricting effort has become all-encompassing at the Capitol, effectively sidelining anything else. 'I think the conversation about raising revenues, it's not something we're going to solve this week or this month,' said Assemblymember Nick Schultz, a Burbank Democrat and Progressive Caucus member. 'It's going to continue.' While extensive cuts in President Donald Trump's megabill likely won't be felt until after the midterm elections, rollbacks of Medi-Cal and other safety net programs that Newsom and lawmakers made in response to a $12 billion budget shortfall are slated to begin in 2026. Progressives had been hoping to push some kind of new tax scheme through the Legislature this year to stave off the reductions, in particular cutbacks to health insurance for undocumented immigrants. A group of more than two dozen mostly progressive lawmakers met regularly to explore options, including a proposal from labor groups like SEIU and members of the Latino Caucus to penalize big businesses that had large shares of employees who depended on Medi-Cal and other public benefits. Assemblymember Damon Connolly was pushing another idea for a tax on business profits stashed in overseas accounts, called a 'water's edge' exemption. His office estimated it could bring in around $3 billion per year. Even before redistricting sucked the air out of the Capitol, winning support for a new tax was going to be an uphill battle, as Newsom has consistently resisted proposals for new taxes. And Democrats in the state's two chambers were decidedly split on the idea. When party leaders in the Assembly polled their caucus on pursuing new revenue streams now, later or not at all, a third of the 60 members said they wanted to move on revenue-raising options, 16 said they were open to it down the road and 15 rejected the idea. Nine members abstained from responding to the survey. Also in favor of a new tax was Los Angeles state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, who said in an interview that constituents in her communities want state leaders to provide a safety net to counter the Trump administration's cuts to health care, education and other government-funded services. 'Overwhelmingly, what I hear from my constituents when I engage with them is that this is what they want to see,' Pérez said of revenue-raising. 'That we take care of the little guy, and we take care of working people who have been struggling to get by.' But for now, lawmakers have other things on their minds, said Jim Mangia, director of St. John's Health Center, a network of health care clinics in and around Los Angeles that primarily serve the poor and immigrant communities. 'The redistricting conversation has changed a lot in Sacramento. The Legislature is no longer focused on revenue,' Mangia said. 'We are meeting with many legislators … and having some good conversations and more to come, but it has totally changed the focus of the Legislature right now.' The idea of a new tax isn't totally sunk. Lawmakers have been preparing for the possibility of a special session in the fall to deal with the ongoing fallout of federal budget cuts. Generating a new revenue stream could be part of that agenda. 'It's something where I think we owe it to California to keep all options on the table and to entertain any and all possibilities,' Schultz said. Dawn Addis, chair of the Assembly's health budget subcommittee, said that while the cuts to health care remain an urgent problem, lawmakers need more time to work out all possible solutions. 'We want to do something thoughtful that doesn't have a lot of unintended consequences,' Addis said. 'The timing is a little bit tough to discern at the moment. Part of that is because obviously we're dealing with redistricting and the egregious attacks from the Trump administration … We just have no way not to prioritize that. It's got to take front and center.' IT'S TUESDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to lholden@ WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY REDISTRICTING RUMBLE: Republicans' anger over their near-powerlessness in the face of Democrats' redistricting gambit boiled over today in the Assembly Elections Committee. GOP Assemblymember David Tangipa got into a snipefest with Democratic Assemblymember Marc Berman, who was presenting a bill from the legislative package needed to put the gerrymandered map on the November ballot. When Tangipa said lawmakers didn't have enough time to consider the legislation, Berman snapped back that he was surprised it took so long to read a five-page bill. The Democrat also accused the Republican of making veiled threats to his witness when Tangipa suggested they would become 'really good friends' over the course of his questioning. After Tangipa's queries dragged on, chair Gail Pellerin attempted to cut him off at the behest of other Democrats on the committee. Assemblymember Catherine Stefani sternly told Tangipa not to interrupt her during her comments. 'You play stupid games, you get stupid prizes,' she said, alluding to Texas Republicans' redistricting efforts. 'And that's what you are doing.' Pellerin eventually cut all the committee members' microphones, leaving Tangipa yelling at his colleagues, à la former GOP Assemblymember Bill Essayli during the final hours of session last year. Democrats ultimately approved the bill over his protests. IN OTHER NEWS DEFENSE DOLLARS: California Sen. Adam Schiff has launched a legal defense fund amid the Justice Department probe into his finances, our Hailey Fuchs and Gregory Svirnovskiy report. Schiff, who led the first impeachment effort in the House against Trump and aided the congressional investigation into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, has become a frequent target of the president in his second term. Earlier this summer, Trump alleged in a post on Truth Social that the California Democrat 'engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud' — an allegation Schiff vehemently denies. 'It's clear that Donald Trump and his MAGA allies will continue weaponizing the justice process to attack Senator Schiff for holding this corrupt administration accountable,' Marisol Samayoa, a spokesperson for Schiff, said in a statement. 'This fund will ensure he can fight back against these baseless smears while continuing to do his job.' BITING BACK: California Republicans petitioned the state Supreme Court to block legislative Democrats from voting on their redrawn congressional map this week, raising process issues in a bid to stop redistricting from reaching the ballot in November, our Blake Jones reports for POLITICO Pro subscribers. GOP state legislators announced the filing today. In it, they argue legislative language to carry out Democrats' gerrymander must be in print for 30 days before it can be voted upon — or else three quarters of lawmakers must approve suspending a state constitutional rule laying out that timeline. The bills at hand have technically been in print for months, but were gutted Monday and amended to include the redistricting play. The Legislature frequently guts and amends bills in Sacramento and votes on them within a month without drawing legal challenges, but an attorney for the Republicans argued that does not justify the practice. 'If the Legislature has been flagrantly violating this provision of the Constitution in the past, so what? It should stop,' Dhillon Law Group partner Mike Columbo said at a news conference at the California Republican Party headquarters in Sacramento today. CAP-AND-TRADE UNVEILED: The Assembly is proposing modest reforms to the state's signature cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions, according to draft legislative language circulating today, our Camille von Kaenel scooped for Pro subscribers. Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, who is leading the Assembly's negotiations on the program, is proposing significant amendments to her placeholder bill, AB 1207, that would direct the California Air Resources Board to extend the cap-and-trade program from 2030 through 2045, make changes to offsets and allowances and make several multi-year appropriations of its revenues for wildfire, water, air and energy programs. Her office confirmed the language this morning. In addition to serving as the backstop regulation that ensures the state meets its emissions reduction obligations, the cap-and-trade program is also a major revenue generator. But proceeds in the state's quarterly auctions have fallen as traders reckon with the program's impending expiration in 2030 and uncertainty over whether regulators will adjust the market's rules. WHAT WE'RE READING TODAY — California State University is spending nearly $17 million to make OpenAI's ChatGPT available to all students and faculty even as it faces a $2.3 billion budget gap. (LAist) — Hundreds of professors at UCLA, including a large swath of Jewish faculty, signed a letter condemning Trump's $1 billion settlement demand over alleged antisemitism on campus and the freezing of million in research grant funding. (The Los Angeles Times) — California now has the largest and fastest growing early education program in the country as at least 200,000 kids are set to attend transitional kindergarten this fall. (CalMatters) AROUND THE STATE — A growing number of working- and middle-class families in the North County are enduring long commutes to work or school as they leave in search of affordability. (Voice of San Diego) — Silicon Valley tech giants Cisco and Oracle are slashing hundreds of jobs across the Bay Area. (San Francisco Chronicle) — The Alameda Health System is preparing for a backup plan after Trump's budget bill in July called for a $1 trillion cut to Medicaid that would likely disproportionately affect the hospital's revenue stream. (East Bay Times) — compiled by Juliann Ventura
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Democratic governors face a school-choice reckoning: Kids or unions?
Republicans in Congress achieved a historic breakthrough last month — and Democratic governors should jump at the chance to take advantage of it. It's the first-ever nationwide school choice program, included as part of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The program aims to give every child in America a shot at a better future by funding private- and parochial-school scholarships through a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit. Advertisement But each state's governor has to choose to join it — and nowhere is the need more urgent than in New York, where Gov. Kathy Hochul has a golden opportunity to make good on her own words. In 2022, in her gubernatorial debate with GOP nominee Lee Zeldin, Hochul said she supported lifting New York's charter school cap. But in the years since, she's let the leftist state Legislature handcuff charter expansion, leaving too many poor kids stuck in a one-size-fits-all government school monopoly that's failing them spectacularly. Advertisement Empire State families are demanding more choices to escape from failing district schools. Tens of thousands of kids are on charter-school waitlists in New York City — and 78% of New York parents support Education Savings Accounts like the school choice initiative passed by Congress. New York spent about $37,000 per student in 2023 — 66% higher than the state's average private-school tuition — yet only 13% of NYC's black 8th graders are proficient in math. Statewide, inflation-adjusted per-student spending has skyrocketed 209% since 1970. Have outcomes gotten 209% better? Advertisement Of course not: Test scores have stagnated or declined, proving that throwing more money at the problem without competition is a fool's errand. But now Hochul can't blame the Democrat-controlled state Legislature as an excuse to keep poor kids from accessing better schools, whether charter, private or religious. The new federal school-choice program puts the decision squarely in her hands, and in the hands of her fellow governors. Advertisement Other states' Democratic leaders are showing signs of cracking under the pressure of common sense. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's team has said he's considering opting in to the federal program. Even more encouraging is North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein, who vetoed a bill passed by the state's GOP-controlled legislature demanding he sign on to the program — calling the bill 'unnecessary,' since he 'intend[s] to opt North Carolina in.' Stein's veto message explicitly stated that 'school choice is good for students and parents,' and pledged to allow North Carolina's public-school students access to the funding. Stein's stance could encourage other Democratic governors to jump on the bandwagon. Speaking of which, California's Gov. Gavin Newsom should opt in, too. He sent his own kids to private school, and attended one himself in his early years. It's hypocritical to oppose school choice for other families while enjoying it for your own. Advertisement What makes the new federal program so compelling — even for Democratic governors beholden to teachers' unions — is a built-in incentive that's impossible to ignore. If states don't opt in, their constituents — whether they know it or not — will be subsidizing scholarships for families in the red states that are already rushing to sign on. All American families and taxpaying individuals can donate to K-12 scholarship-granting organizations and receive a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit in exchange, even if their state doesn't join up. Advertisement All the governors can decide is whether kids in their state can access those scholarships. Opting out means shooting your state in the foot: Your taxpayers' donations will flow to other states' kids, leaving your own students behind. The ongoing crisis in our schools amplifies the urgency. Last week a new FBI report revealed 1.3 million crimes committed at schools from 2020 to 2024, including about 540,000 physical assaults. Advertisement The statistics prove what parents already know: Too many kids are getting beaten, bullied and traumatized in environments that should be safe havens for learning. Democratic governors can no longer do the bidding of teachers' unions by locking children in failing schools infested with violence. The unions' iron grip has protected mediocrity and danger for too long. School choice breaks that stranglehold, giving parents the power to vote with their feet and demand better. Trump's bill puts children first and champions freedom, opportunity and accountability in education. Advertisement It's time for Hochul and her peers to free our kids from the public school monopoly by helping families find better education opportunities. If she doesn't, she risks cementing a legacy of statewide failure and decline. Corey DeAngelis is a senior fellow at the American Culture Project and a visiting fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Republicans sue to block Newsom's fast-track California redistricting plan
Republican state legislators in California filed suit on Tuesday to block a mid-year redistricting plan meant to counter Texas's effort to redraw congressional district lines. The emergency petition argues that the process being used in the California assembly violates laws requiring a 30-day period between the introduction of legislation and voting on it. 'Instead of a months-long transparent and participatory process overseen by an independent citizens redistricting commission for such a sensitive matter, the public would be presented instead with an up or down vote on maps unilaterally prepared in secret by the Legislature,' states the filing on behalf of senators Tony Strickland and Suzette Martinez Valladares, assemblymember Tri Ta and assemblymember Kathryn Sanchez. California's governor, Gavin Newsom, announced his state's redistricting plan last week in terms on social media mocking Donald Trump's flamboyance, intent on using the voting power of the US's most populous state to counteract Texas's redrawn map, which would be expected to deliver a net gain of five congressional seats to Republicans in 2026. Newsom praised the California effort on Monday, calling it a necessary response to Trump's influence over redistricting in Texas and other Republican-led states. 'We are not going to sit idle while they command Texas and other states to rig the next election to keep power,' Newsom said, adding that the proposal gives Californians 'a choice to fight back'. To do so in time for a special election in November, the state assembly must pass the plan this year. As has been a common practice near the end of legislative terms, California lawmakers took an existing bill introduced earlier in the session and gutted it of its language, replacing it with legislation that overrides the state's neutral redistricting commission to present maps to voters. On Tuesday, a spokesperson for Newsom said the governor was unconcerned with the legal challenge seeking to blunt his redistricting effort. 'Republicans are filing a deeply unserious (and truly laughable) lawsuit to stop Americans from voting?' Brandon Richards, the spokesperson, said. 'We're neither surprised, nor worried.' The Mandeep Dhillon law firm filing the suit was previously owned by Harmeet Dhillon, who is now assistant attorney general overseeing the US Department of Justice civil rights division. Dhillon was known for her efforts to sue California's university system to overturn policies which barred controversial conservative speakers from appearing. She sold her firm to her brother Mandeep Singh Dhillon after Trump nominated her to take over civil rights enforcement in his administration. The suit does not challenge 'gut and amend' in principle, but rather asks the court 'to enforce an external constitutional constraint against the Legislature to protect the people's rights'. Internal polling presented to lawmakers showed voters favored the measure 52% to 41%, with 7% undecided, according to the local television station KCRA. Republicans in California condemned the proposal as an assault on the state's voter-approved independent redistricting commission and said they plan to introduce legislation that advocates for creating similar map-drawing bodies in all 50 states. 'Governor Newsom, this is nothing more than a power grab,' Strickland said during a Monday news conference in Sacramento. He warned the redistricting tit-for-tat sets a dangerous precedent that will not be easily undone. 'The Golden Gate Bridge toll was supposed to be temporary,' he added. 'You're still paying the toll.' The legislature could hold floor votes to send the measure to voters for approval as soon as Thursday, KCRA reported. House Republicans currently hold a razor-thin three-seat majority in the US House and Trump has pushed to redraw district boundaries ahead of next year's midterm elections, in which the president's party typically loses seats. Republicans are also poised to redraw congressional districts in Ohio, Missouri and Florida, as well as potentially Indiana.
