LONDONDERRY — The New Hampshire Supreme Court yesterday decided to dismiss the school funding case and hand the long-running arguments back to politicians.
Over the last two years, the state's highest court has had jurisdiction over the 17-year struggle over public education funding, according to attorney James Allmendinger of Concord.
"Our view has long been that the role of the Supreme Court in the education funding dispute has been critical," he said. "And so we are disappointed the court has not decided to retain jurisdiction. Now, we'll see if the Legislature is going to step up to the plate in the way it's promised the past couple of years."
If not, yesterday's decision means any future disputes about education funding will have to go through Superior Court, Londonderry School Superintendent Nate Greenberg said. But short-term, it will be business as usual locally because the ruling has no immediate impact on schools or taxpayers.
"It's going to be no different than it was six months ago because of the (education funding) formula instituted in the last legislative session," Greenberg said. "People are saying this was a loss. No, it wasn't. When we first started, the method of funding was 'you pick a number.'"
Funding wasn't predicated on anything factual, he said, like the number of students in the district. Ultimately, under the Supreme Court's prodding, state lawmakers did define an adequate education. They also figured its base cost at $3,450 per student and gave themselves a goal this year to decide how to pay for it.
"To that degree, our lawsuit has moved things along," Greenberg said.
The Londonderry School District joined several other communities and brought the lawsuit in 2005, claiming the existing state education law was unconstitutional because it relied on local taxes to fund state education mandates.
Londonderry also claimed the law failed to define an adequate education or say how the state would determine the cost and establish accountability.
The court split 3-2 yesterday. The majority sided with Attorney General Kelly Ayotte's office and agreed the state had met its burden of proving the case is now legally moot because lawmakers have eliminated the unconstitutional parts of the state's education law.
Yesterday, Steve Young of Londonderry, one of the catalysts behind the school funding lawsuit, credited the lawsuit for the state's progress so far on education funding. But, he added, the work was still in midstream.
"I pray they fund it," Young said.
But if lawmakers break their commitments, the school funding lawsuit, which was dismissed without prejudice, could come back.
The court also gave the state Legislature four mandates. Lawmakers have not yet attacked the last one — accountability, Young said.
Allmendinger, who represented the teachers union National Education Association New Hampshire, said he was disappointed by yesterday's outcome.
In their dissenting opinions, both Chief Justice John Broderick and Justice James Duggan "made compelling arguments for the courts remaining actively involved," he said.
"The orders of this court going back more than a decade cannot be trumped by extended and repeated noncompliance," Broderick wrote in his dissenting opinion. "Certainty and finality are long past due."
