#

Inescapable realities about New Hampshire: Live Free or Die is the best state motto; we have better maple syrup than Vermont; and we may never stop fighting about the right way to pay for public education.

Everything about school funding is up for grabs this year, with new proposals coming out of the State House, a lawsuit heading to the state Supreme Court, and an open gubernatorial race putting free-market reforms in the spotlight.

“This is a great opportunity for us to have these conversations,” said Sarah Scott with Americans for Prosperity.

Scott and AFP hosted a forum last week at Throwback Brewery in North Hampton with state Reps. Glenn Cordelli (R-Tuftonboro) and Dan Maguire (R-Epsom) to educate people about the realities of the biggest tax bill in the state.

The problem is front and center for legislators this session, who are working on different proposals to address education spending without raising taxes. But whether they do that is up in the air.

Cordelli, vice chair of the House Education Committee, said there’s no guarantee conservative lawmakers can get meaningful changes since House membership is split so evenly. Republicans control the House with a slight majority, which can evaporate depending on the time of day. If the weather is bad, or several members are sick, or votes happen after lunch, the majority can flip.

“Every day, it’s a gamble which party is in charge depending on who gets to the State House,” Coredelli said.

But the local level is where taxpayers bear the largest education funding burden, Scott said. “Most towns spend between two-thirds and three-quarters of their taxes on education.”

And they could end up paying more, thanks to the recent court decision in the ConVal funding lawsuit. Judge David Ruoff ordered the state’s adequacy grant of $4,100 per pupil raised to at least $7,300. The ConVal ruling is causing more problems than it will solve, Maguire said.

“ConVal is the logical conclusion of 30 years of bad rulings,” Maguire said, who sits on the House Finance Committee. “At some point, we have to get off this track of unreality.”

The Supreme Court’s Claremont decision from the 1990s paved the way for adequacy grants and the statewide property tax. Currently, the state sends about one billion dollars a year to local schools in the form of adequacy grants and other aid programs. 

Under the current system, what each town gets per pupil varies. The base grant of $4,100 goes up for students determined to have greater need, and for students in communities that are considered property poor. However, Maguire said if Ruoff’s ruling stands, all of the extra funding for students and communities in need would go away. 

Ruoff’s ConVal ruling would seem to add at least $500 million to education spending on top of what is already being paid. But Maguire said it would result in all of the funding being replaced by a flat $7,300 per pupil grant, leaving poor communities scrambling again. 

Lawmakers are searching for a fix while the state appeals Ruoff’s ruling to the state Supreme Court. But state spending on education represents less than a third of total spending. The rest comes from homeowners through local property taxes, and those taxpayers are already shelling out more for less.

Department of Education data released this month show the new statewide average operating cost per student has reached a record-setting $20,323 for the 2022-2023 school year. That’s a 4.8 percent increase over last year’s $19,400 and close to a 90 percent increase on 2000’s $11,000 per pupil cost.

This year’s new average — well above the national $14,295 — puts the Granite State on track to spend $3.8 billion in total on education for the 2022-2023 school year.

Over the same period, student enrollment numbers in the Granite State cratered. The student population dropped from 207,684 in 2002 to 165,095 in 2023. That’s a decrease of 42,589 public school students, or about a 20.5 percent decline during the past 21 years. 

Coredelli sees an opportunity to deliver education in charter schools and the Education Freedom Account system with better results and lower costs.

“At the end of the day, the free market is the only way to make changes to education,” Cordelli said.

About 7,000 students are enrolled in New Hampshire’s charter schools. Those tuition-free public schools receive state funding of up to $9,000 per pupil and no local tax revenue. Instead, the schools are operated as non-profits and raise donations to cover expenses beyond the state grants.

The EFA program awards grants of around $5,000 per pupil to qualifying families, who are then able to put that money toward any education choice: public, private, or home school. EFA enrollment went up 20 percent this year to 4,211 while costing taxpayers about $22 million in total. 

Exeter High School Athletic District Bill Ball said the school respects all students.

But the attorney for an Exeter student who was punished for expressing his opinions about gender said the school needs to respect the rule of law.

During the bench trial in Rockingham Superior Court, Ball and Assistant Exeter High School Principal Marcy Dovholuk explained why they punished a Catholic student for what was a private text sent outside of school.

The football coach benched the freshman student for one game in 2021 over a discussion he had with a classmate. He is seeking $1 in damages. He also wants Ball to admit wrongdoing. The student insists he was punished for defending his view that there are only two genders, male and female.

His attorney, Richard Lehmann, told NHJournal Exeter is another example of New Hampshire school districts running roughshod over anyone who disagrees with the new, extreme gender mores.

“It’s bad enough that children are made to feel uncomfortable expressing traditional views on matters related to gender in school,” Lehmann said. “Or when schools announce they will lie to parents about their children’s in-school gender expression, as Manchester, Exeter, and other schools do. But it’s made even worse when schools reach beyond their gates and into children’s private lives and seek to control their behavior at home or in private communications with other kids that happen entirely outside of any context related to the school,” Lehmann said.

Lehamann’s client, John Doe, is using a pseudonym to protect his identity. He has since left Exeter and is enrolled at a Catholic high school. Doe testified he was talking with friends on a bus after school about another student who claimed to be “non-binary” during Spanish class. Doe testified he thought that odd since the Spanish language relies on feminine and masculine genders.

The non-binary student was not involved or aware, of the conversation at the time.

Instead, a female classmate who was not part of the conversation later confronted Doe, insisting that humans come in more than two genders. Doe and this female student then got into a heated conversation, with Doe arguing the mainstream stance that there are two sexes. Doe based this view on both science and his religious beliefs.

The girl texted him later that evening to continue the argument. At one point, Doe told the girl to “STFU,” which he testified was an attempt to be funny.

The next day, Doe was called in by Dovholuk and informed he would be punished for the conversation he had the night before over text. Dovholuk claimed the punishment was for bullying and bad language and not Doe’s beliefs regarding gender.

“At Exeter, we respect people, and we respect how they identify,” Dovholuk reportedly said.

Ball testified he told Doe, “We respect all.”

Lehmann said the United States Supreme Court already ruled that schools cannot punish students for things they say off campus. In June 2021, the High Court ruled against a Pennsylvania high school that suspended cheerleader Brandi Levy for using the f-word in a social media video about the cheer team.

“Three months before the facts of this case arose, the United States Supreme Court dismissed an athletic sanction imposed by a coach because the authority of the athletic department to penalize students for engaging in free speech could only extend to off-campus, non-school activities in rare circumstances,” Lehmann said.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that school districts cannot police students’ speech when they are not in school.

“From the student speaker’s perspective, regulations of off-campus speech, when coupled with regulations of on-campus speech, include all the speech a student utters during the full 24-hour day. That means courts must be more skeptical of a school’s efforts to regulate off-campus speech, for doing so may mean the student cannot engage in that kind of speech at all,” the justices wrote.

The Doe case is now being considered by Judge Andrew Schulman, who is expected to render a verdict in the coming weeks. Doe is doing well at his new school, Lehmann said.

“He is a great kid from a terrific family, and Exeter High School is a lesser place because of his absence.”

Opponents of New Hampshire’s popular Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs) suffered yet another setback when union chief Deb Howes’ lawsuit was tossed out of court by a Merrimack Superior Court judge.

Judge Amy L. Ignatius’s order dismissing the lawsuit was a rebuke to the arguments put forward by the plaintiff, Deb Howes, president of the New Hampshire chapter of the American Federation of Teachers. 

Parents like Amy Shaw were thrilled by the ruling.

“The EFA program helps my daughters attend a school that meets their unique needs and in which they are thriving,” said Shaw, one of the parents who intervened in the lawsuit. “It is a great relief that the program will continue to support educational options that work for my kids and for so many other families across the state.”

EFAs allow parents to use the state’s share of per-pupil funding for their children to choose educational alternatives, including a different public school, private school, or home school.

Howes called the dismissal disappointing but not surprising. She blames the EFA program for taking money away from public schools despite the state increasing public education spending.

“Vouchers have exacerbated an already disparate burden placed on local property taxpayers to fund the basic right to a quality public education,” Howes said.

In fact, because EFAs only use the state portion of a student’s funding — usually around one-third of the total — school systems that lose students through EFAs increase their per-pupil funding.

The key allegation in Howes’ lawsuit was that the EFA program was unconstitutional.

Jason Bedrick, a Research Fellow in the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation, said the judge’s ruling ended that debate.

“We knew from the outset that this legal complaint lacked any merit. The court agreed,” Bedrick said. “The judge decisively rejected every single one of the plaintiff’s frivolous claims. This is a massive win for Granite State families whose children benefit tremendously from the Education Freedom Accounts.”

Senate Education Committee Chair Ruth Ward (R-Stoddard), who helped craft the EFA program, said Howes and the teachers unions don’t want parents to be able to choose the best education for their children.

“Currently, 4,200 New Hampshire students are using Education Freedom Accounts to build a better education. The teachers’ union sued because it wanted every student to take the same path. I’m glad that Judge Ignatius sided with parents,” Ward said.

Senate President Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro) called the decision a victory for Granite State families.

New Hampshire’s Department of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut said EFAs are making a positive difference for families and children throughout the state.

“The court’s decision underscores the legality of the EFA program previously approved by legislators, but more importantly allows New Hampshire students and families to find the best educational pathway available for their unique needs,” Edelblut said. “The value of this program continues to be far-reaching, with numerous success stories emphasizing just how impactful EFAs have been statewide.”

Ignatius wrote in her order Howes completely failed to show any of her complaints about the program had any legal merit.

First, Howes tried arguing that EFAs are unconstitutional since the state uses money from the Education Trust Fund to award the EFA grants to parents. Howes claimed since the Education Trust Fund includes lottery revenue, any payout from the fund to the EFA program violates the state constitution.

New Hampshire’s constitution restricts lottery revenue to fund only public schools. But, Howes failed to show any proof any lottery money is going towards EFAs.

“Howes does not meet this burden, even with the allegations in her complaint taken as true and viewing all reasonable inferences in her favor,” Ignatius wrote.

The Education Trust Fund took in more than $1.1 billion in 2022. Of that, lottery revenue was $125 million. The EFA program was budgeted to take $9 million from the Education Trust Fund in 2022. Howes bears the burden to show lottery money is being unconstitutionally used for EFAs, Ignatius wrote, and she didn’t come close to doing that.

Next, Howes claimed EFAs allow the state to avoid its constitutional obligation to provide an adequate education by delegating the job to parents. The Supreme Court’s Claremont decisions from the 1990s found the state must provide an “adequate” public education to all New Hampshire children.

But Ignatius flatly stated Howes was wrong again. The Claremont obligation is limited to public schools, not private education. Further, EFAs don’t keep students out of public school. Families in the EFA program can leave and enroll their child into a public school at any point or use the EFA funding to attend a different public school.

“(T)he Court finds that the State did not delegate its duty to provide an adequate education because it has no duty to students not enrolled in public school and RSA 194- F (the EFA law) does not prevent students from attending public school,” Ignatius wrote.

Finally, Howes argued that the EFA program unconstitutionally allows parents to buy educational materials without government oversight. However, the organization administering New Hampshire’s EFA program, the Children’s Scholarship Fund, is delegated to make sure all spending adheres to the law. Ignatius wrote Howes failed to show proof of any improper EFA spending and failed again to show any legal problem.

“The legislature delegated the authority to approve expenses extraneous to the specific items listed to the scholarship organization but required those expenses be ‘educational,’ and Howes has not identified any expenditures that are not educational,” Ignatius wrote.

Now that she has lost in court, Howes wants lawmakers to spend more on public education instead of EFAs.

“The legislature should be focusing far more time and resources on the needs of the 160,000 Granite State public school students who deserve a robust curriculum and fully staffed schools, not on the 4,000 students whose families choose to take state-funded vouchers,” Howes said in a statement.

New Hampshire families can now choose a new financial literacy course from PragerU through the state’s Learn Everywhere program, and New Hampshire Democrats have a new hobby horse to ride into campaign season.

That was the result after three hours of a contentious State Board of Education meeting on Thursday, where Democrats, progressives, and union activists packed the room to denounce PragerU and its “right-wing” politics.

“This approval disregards the potential harm PragerU’s extreme content will inflict on our schools and the education of our children,” said Democratic Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington, who is seeking her party’s nomination for governor next year.

At issue is a video course on personal finances and financial literacy called “Cash Course,” and produced by PragerU, a conservative content business. The state Board of Education has been considering making the course, which contains no political or controversial content, part of the content eligible to complete course requirements for students in the Learn Everywhere program.

Learn Everywhere, an innovative education program unique to New Hampshire, allows students to earn credit for learning outside the classroom. The program, which has been under development since 2018, was first approved in August 2020 in a 4-3 vote.

The State Board of Education voted unanimously Thursday, with Chair Drew Cline’s abstention, to approve the PragerU content as a half-credit course. The class is offered for free for any student who chooses to take it.

The approval comes despite heavy, organized opposition from progressives and teachers unions against PragerU.

Their opposition is not based on the content itself but rather on the provider. Many of the people who spoke in opposition Thursday did not appear to have seen the Cash Course content under consideration.

“I am appalled by today’s Board of Education decision to allow PragerU to operate in New Hampshire. I will fight for every child in our state to receive a quality education, and I will never allow an extreme right-wing organization to influence their learning,” Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig said.

Craig is also running for the Democratic nomination for governor.

Warmington has been using the PragerU issue to campaign and fundraise for weeks, attacking “their extremist views.” Warmington declined to respond when asked to identify what “extremist views” were in the personal finance content under consideration by the Board of Education.

Warmington suffered a political faceplant early this week with an unfounded complaint that PragerU was falsely presenting itself as an actual university and potentially violating New Hampshire state law. Attorney General John F0rmella dismissed Warmington’s complaint, noting the website explicitly announces PragerU is not a university and that the law Warmington cited only applies to entities incorporated in New Hampshire. It was embarrassing for a career attorney who spent two decades at the Sheehan & Gordon law firm.

“There’s been a lot of misinformation about Learn Everywhere and this course,” Cline said during Thursday’s board meeting.

PragerU is not partnering with the state, getting a state contract, or being paid any taxpayer money, Cline said. Further, the PragerU class is not required for any New Hampshire student. Additionally, PragerU plans to offer its class on a website independent of the wider PragerU offerings.

The association with the conservative media personality Dennis Prager is the major red flag for the Cash Course opponents. Dozens of people who were against PragerU’s application spoke Thursday, accusing the conservative non-profit of pushing an extremist agenda and even likening it to the Ku Klux Klan.

Supporters say that while PragerU is unapologetically conservative in its philosophy, it is far from being an extremist organization. And they note that many of the union members and progressives who say its politics are “too extreme” have supported far-left “critical race theory” content from racists like Ibram X. Kendi in New Hampshire’s K-12 classrooms.

Board Member Richard Sala said the board had approved several Learn Everywhere options and charter schools with decidedly left-wing ideologies. He said the board is not trying to push an agenda other than giving all parents the most choices for their children.

“I trust parents to make good calls for their kids more than I trust the government to,” Sala said.

Sala noted that while PragerU is a conservative, so are at least half the families in New Hampshire.

“A lot of PragerU material is mainstream political thought in this country,” Sala said. “You can’t censor half the ideas in this country.”

It wasn’t all about fears children were being indoctrinated into the Republican Party. Deb Howes, head of the New Hampshire American Federal of Teachers, the state’s second biggest teachers union, claimed that allowing students to take the Cash Course class for a half credit would lower the state’s education standards.

“Watching a video and doing a worksheet doesn’t help you remember it when it counts,” Howe said.

Cline said PragerU’s Cash Course class covers a little more material than another financial literacy program already approved for Learn Everywhere. That program did not receive any public opposition when it was approved.

Board Member Ryan Terrell said the opposition to PragerU is ruled by a bias against all conservatives, which assumes any Republican is a homophobic racist.

“You say you want open dialogue and then attack a whole swath of people’s ideals,” Tyrell said.

The opponents revealed they are ultimately against New Hampshire families having real choices when it comes to educating their children, Tyrell said.

“The overall message was anti-choice. It’s simply that black and white,” Terrell said.

In a battle between educational content and political rhetoric, it appears content may have won the day at the State Board of Education Thursday.

At issue is a video course on financial literacy offered by PragerU that the board is considering adding to the curriculum of the state’s Learn Everywhere program. Board chairman Drew Cline said the content “has a lot of value” and is suitable for the flexible, self-directed education that is part of the non-traditional Learn Everywhere model.

Critics, like Deb Howes, president of the New Hampshire chapter of the American Federation of Teachers, had not watched the videos and were not familiar enough with the content to discuss it. Instead, they objected to the source of the content — PragerU, a politically-conservative nonprofit founded by media personality Dennis Prager.

Asked by Cline if the 15-video course met the appropriate educational standards, Howes, the head of the second largest teachers union in the state, declined to answer and appeared not to have viewed any of the content.

“I cannot speak to whether it goes into depth enough; I am not a financial literacy teacher,” Howes said.

State Rep. David Luneau (D-Hopkinton) bashed the board’s handling of the application and called PragerU a “racist propaganda mill.”

“I find it outrageous and unacceptable that this board would take a controversial subject and slip it into a meeting on Aug. 10 when hopefully nobody’s watching,” Luneau said.

However, when asked about the specific content, Luneau also appeared to be unfamiliar with it and pointedly refused to say if he watched any of the videos under consideration about the board.

Some critics, however, had taken the time to review the materials. Mark MacLean, executive director of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association, watched all 15 videos in the “Cash Course” series and said there is plenty of good material in the class.

“I don’t think there is anything wrong with the videos I watched,” MacLean said.

But MacLean did express concerns about the depth of the content and whether or not it is sufficient to be an accredited high school class. PragerU’s proposal sought to have students who took the class earn a half credit.

“The content is good; I just don’t think as a standalone it’s enough to provide students with a comprehensive financial literacy unit,” MacLean said.

But elected Democrats and progressive activists who attacked the board’s consideration of the content weren’t interested in the course but rather the source. They denounced PragerU and expressed concerns that curious students might become intrigued and begin exploring other content from the conservative nonprofit.

“Students and parents who view the first video in PragerU’s financial literacy course are one mouse-click away from a ‘Parent Action Guide’ that urges scrutiny of any public official who parents suspect is involved in topics related to diversity, equity, and inclusion,” the left-leaning Boston Globe warned.

Both Democrats running for governor in 2024, Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig and Executive Councilor Cinde Warmington, have announced their opposition.

Via social media, Warmington urged the board to reject what she called “radical & unaccredited PragerU into New Hampshire schools,” though she has also not indicated what part of the proposed course is objectionable.

And House Democratic Caucus Leader Matt Wilhelm (D-Manchester) claimed PragerU has content “that suggests slavery was ‘no big deal,’” and “peddle anti-LGBTQ+ hate.” Despite repeated requests, Wilhelm declined to provide any examples to bolster his claims.

Ultimately, it appeared the solution may be technology, not politics.

Brandon Ewing, with PragerU, told the board Thursday that the organization planned to create a separate website for the New Hampshire Cash Course class, one that was not linked to the wider PragerU site. It was a detail the board had not been made aware of.

“We’re working through the format details on the technical end,” Ewing said.

Cline said removing the Cash Course class from the PragerU main website would allow families to view it without concerns over the rest of PragerU’s content.

“We heard a lot of testimony that the content is strong, but a lot of concerns about the context. Having it as a standalone entity could change the whole conversation,” Cline said. Cline also asked Ewing to show the board more of the materials that will be used to access student progress in the course.

Ultimately, the board voted unanimously to table the application until next month, when it can see the proposed website and review additional materials.

“This is good financial literacy content, and we need to make sure that all of our young people have that skill going forward in life,” said Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut told WMUR after the board meeting. “I think that it got overly politicized, and I think there was some interest in doing that, and I’m disappointed that this is where we ended up.”

Kelly Smith is on a mission to change how children are educated, giving them the tools they need to learn and strive for a better life.

Smith is the founder and CEO of Prenda, the microschool company that now has 30 learning pods operating in all 10 counties of the state. He told NHJournal he wants to break the mold when it comes to thinking about how children learn best. And, he said, he rejects the “mind is a vessel” model of education.

“If you think of it as ‘sit in this chair, and I will give you assignments and lessons and education. I’m going pour this into your head,’ that’s one model,” Smith said. And, he believes, it is the wrong one.

“The correct metaphor is a fire to be kindled. We’re asking questions, setting goals, saying, ‘What do you want out of life?’”

Education pods and microschools exploded onto the education scene during the COVID-19 lockdowns as frustrated parents sought ways to get organized, adult-led education for kids otherwise abandoned to “Zoom school.” And test results in the wake of the closed-classrooms lockdowns pushed by teachers unions showed they were an academic disaster.

On the other hand, a study by the Rand Corporation found students using the “personalized study” model similar to microschools experienced significant improvements, often surpassing the national averages in math and reading achievement.

But Granite State public schools are not interested in using the successful model to help their own students.

Prenda has thousands of microschools nationwide, all with the goal of leading children to learn and think and grow. The company works with local parents to set up the microschools by training the teachers, called guides, to lead classes of about five to 10 students per class.

Though similar to the homeschool cooperative systems many families use, Prenda offers a unique approach to increase motivation and engagement in students while also taking care of their emotional well-being and teaching them the ability to work with others. The Prenda approach, Smith believes, sets students up for a life of meaning and purpose.

“If humans individually and society collectively are going to get to where we are capable of, we’ve got to push through. We need learners. And so I’m inviting people, but again, it has to be a choice,” Smith said.

Prenda families tend to be people who hit a brick wall with traditional education, he said. Many of the parents have children in public schools, but they come to realize their child needs something different in order to thrive and be a leader for the future.

In the post-COVID era, parents are exploring the choices now available, choices many didn’t have just a few years ago.

“They’re making choices, and they’re thoughtful choices. These are the people that endlessly research whatever they’re going to do for their child’s nutrition, their child’s healthcare. Of course, they’re going to think about education hard,” Smith said. “I think the difference is, in the past, there wasn’t really a choice. It was just, ‘There’s only one thing I can do.’”

Prenda was introduced into New Hampshire using federal COVID relief funds as a way to help families close the learning gaps created by the pandemic lockdowns. Smith said the company initially tried to build partnerships with local school districts to build up learning pods that would work alongside the traditional schools. For example, Smith told NHJournal, they could set up microschools to assist students struggling in a specific subject, like math or science, to enhance the public school experience.

But Granite State public schools weren’t interested.

“One of the first things we did was we went to all the superintendents. I went to Mount Washington when they had an annual meeting. We talked to everybody,” Smith said. “They’d heard about microschools and pods, and there was definitely interest among many of the school leaders in the state. So, we’ve had ongoing conversations.

“Ultimately, there’ve been roadblocks, and we haven’t been able to get to a completed partnership with any of those,” Smith said.

Prenda’s learning pods can also be funded beyond the COVID program using New Hampshire’s Education Freedom Account program. The aim isn’t to replace traditional schools but to give parents choices to find what works best for their children.

“It really comes down to this decision to learn. What we’re doing is inviting people to be what we call empowered learners. And an empowered learner makes a choice. They say, ‘I’m going to learn things. I’m going set goals for myself,’” Smith said. 

A man once entrusted with teaching Granite State children is going to prison after pleading guilty to raping a student at Rundlett Middle School in Concord.

Primo “Howie” Leung, 40, was employed at Rundlett and Concord High School before his arrest in April 2019 on child rape charges in Massachusetts.

He entered guilty pleas Wednesday in Middlesex District Court in Woburn, Mass., to two charges of aggravated rape of a child with a 10-year age difference; two counts of aggravated indecent assault and battery on a child under 14; and two counts of aggravated indecent assault and battery on a person 14 or older.

The plea agreement will see the disgraced teacher serve at least six years in a Massachusetts prison and then probation for another three years after his release. Leung is required to register as a sex offender, wear a GPS monitor while on probation, and have no contact with the victim or her family. He is also to stay away from the Concord School District.

Leung is further barred from ever teaching again in New Hampshire or likely anywhere else in the U.S. His teaching credentials in New Hampshire were revoked when he was first charged four years ago, and his name was reported to the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education Certification. 

“The Department worked aggressively to ensure that Mr. Leung will never be allowed to work with students again, and it will continue to proactively protect the safety of all students,” said New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut.

Leung reportedly used his position at the Concord middle school to groom the victim, then 13, kissing and fondling her in Concord starting around 2014. He also encouraged her to attend a summer camp for English language learners, where he volunteered. It was at the camp in Newton, Mass., where Leung reportedly raped the girl. The girl spent two summers at the camp.

“There are no words to describe the heinous actions against this young girl and no sentence that could ever bring back her innocence,” Edelblut said. “As educators, it is our job to protect students and prioritize their safety, but Mr. Leung instead chose to deliberately victimize a student entrusted to his care. It is our hope that, now four years later, she has found the strength, support, and purpose to overcome the violence and massive breach of trust.”

The girl and her family received a $1 million settlement from the district in 2022 to settle a lawsuit they brought accusing the district of failing to keep her safe from a predator.

After the accusations against Leung were finally taken seriously by the district in 2018, Concord School District officials decided to hire an independent investigator, who reported district officials ignored clear warning signs about Leung’s treatment of female students for years. At one point in 2014, a seventh-grade girl was suspended for reporting that Leung was having an affair with a student. The district did not investigate her story; instead, she was disciplined for “gossiping,” according to the report.

There were multiple instances of Leung’s behavior with teen girls being discussed among staff, with some saying that he made them feel uncomfortable with the way he treated the girls. But over the years, he was never formally investigated by the district and never brought up for any discipline for his behavior. 

After a group of students reported Leung to officials in 2018 for being intimate with a teen girl in his car, the district finally investigated. However, according to the report, Leung stayed on the job and remained around students for another three and a half months.

Leung has yet to be charged in New Hampshire. The independent report stated there could be multiple victims in the Granite State. 

Could the next 60 days see an end to New Hampshire’s school funding system as we know it?

Rockingham Superior Court Judge David Ruoff told lawyers Wednesday he is set to rule sometime in the next 60 days on either the final decision in the Contoocook Valley Regional School District adequacy grant lawsuit or the summary judgment for the Grafton County lawsuit seeking to cancel the Statewide Education Property Tax or SWEPT.

“Time is of the essence here for everyone involved,” Ruoff said.

New Hampshire lawmakers, education leaders, and local school boards have been tussling for decades over how to fund a constitutionally-mandated adequate education. Despite hundreds of millions in new funds going to education this year alone, there is still no agreement on how to pay for public schools.

Ruoff is now the one man in the state who could change everything thanks to the lawsuits which landed before him in court. 

The original judge on the Grafton County case, Grafton Superior Court Judge Lawrence MacLeod, recused himself last year, citing a potential conflict of interest. MacLeod is a property owner in one of the property-rich towns pushing to keep the current SWEPT system in place.

MacLeod’s recusal sent the case to Ruoff. Ruoff is also under orders from the New Hampshire Supreme Court to decide in the ConVal case exactly how much the state should pay per pupil.

In both cases, the school districts claim the way the state is currently funding education, using an unevenly enforced SWEPT to pay for adequacy grants that do not cover all necessary expenses, is unconstitutional.

Ruoff initially ruled in ConVal’s favor, agreeing the state is not paying enough per pupil, but he left setting a particular amount to legislators. On appeal, the Supreme Court ruled Ruoff needed to hold a trial and set a specific dollar amount.

New Hampshire upped its per pupil adequacy grant this year to $4,100. But the plaintiffs in the ConVal case are looking for just short of $10,000 per pupil. Ruoff listened to weeks of testimony this year; his highly anticipated ruling is pending.

With approximately 160,000 students in the state’s K-12 public schools, a $10,000 adequacy payment would cost state taxpayers $1.6 billion yearly.

Meanwhile, lawyers representing the state and the Grafton County plaintiffs argued in court Wednesday over an injunction to set the SWEPT rate at 0, as the plaintiff wants. Ruoff indicated he would issue a judgment in the case without need for a trial since neither side disputes the facts about how schools are funded.

SWEPT accounts for 30 percent of education funding in New Hampshire. Under a law change in 2011, a loophole was created. Now as many as 30 wealthier communities in New Hampshire are keeping a portion of the money raised through SWEPT, essentially getting to set a negative property tax rate, while poorer communities end up with higher SWEPT rates to make up for their low property values.

Michael Jaoude, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the uneven SWEPT burden violates the Claremont decision from the 1990s, which ruled there is a constitutional right to adequate education and that the cost needs to be shared equally.

“No resident should have a greater burden of funding that constitutional right than another,” Jaoude said.

SWEPT started in 1999 as a response to the Claremont decision, which found the state has a constitutional obligation to fund adequate education. The money raised, more than $360 million estimated in the coming year, is used to fund state adequacy grants. 

Senior Assistant Attorney General Sam Garland said ruling for the Grafton County plaintiffs would have disastrous impacts on local town and school budgets. Garland said the plaintiffs have not shown that the SWEPT system is unconstitutional, and their arguments don’t hold up.

“We don’t think they’ve made that showing, and we don’t think they can make that showing as a matter of law,” Garland said.

Garland said even if the 2011 law creating the SWEPT exemptions might be unconstitutional, the tax itself is not, and Ruoff should allow the rate to be set.

Ruoff indicated the whole SWEPT issue might be moot depending on his eventual ruling in the ConVal case.

Call it the “Don’t Let the Door Hit You” Defense.

During oral arguments in a lawsuit over its policy of keeping parents in the dark about their children’s behavior, the Manchester School District’s attorney told the state Supreme Court that parents shouldn’t be able to challenge the district’s policy. Instead, they should pull their kids out of public school and go somewhere else.

“If the parents want to make a different choice, they can homeschool, or they can send their child to a private school; those are options available to them,” said attorney Meghan Glynn.

The district is being sued over its policy of keeping students’ behavior related to sex and gender secret from their parents.

Richard Lehmann, the attorney for the Manchester mother going by Jane Doe, who filed the lawsuit, said parents have the right to know if their children are being socially transitioned in schools with the aid of school staff.

Manchester School District lawyer Meghan Glynn told Supreme Court justices that parents who don’t like the district’s policies can send their kids to private school.

“The real issue is not a school reporting on what a student is doing in school, but for the school to report what the school itself is doing in school,” Lehmann said.

Lehmann rejected the argument that Doe’s lawsuit was an attempt to force the district to out LGBT students to their parents. He argued that it is about a government entity usurping parental powers and making decisions in place of a parent.

“This is the government substituting its own judgment over a parent’s judgment when it comes to gender identity,” Lehmann said. 

Jane Doe stated in her original complaint that she found out in the fall of 2021 that her child was using a different pronoun and gender identity at school. The school’s name was withheld in court documents to protect the child’s identity.

The mother spoke with school staff, including the student’s guidance counselor. According to the lawsuit, the mother made it clear she wanted her child to be called by the name and pronouns the child had at birth while in school.

Even though the staff she spoke to initially agreed, the mother received an email from the school principal stating that the mother’s instructions were being overridden due to the district’s policy. According to the lawsuit, the principal stated that the district’s policy requires school staff to keep such matters secret from parents if the child so chooses. Even if staffers agree to use the child’s true gender identity when speaking with the mother, they would be obligated to not tell the mother if the child wished to be identified as something else.

The policy states teachers and staff are not to tell anyone about a child’s gender identity without the express consent of the child. School employees are also directed to use the child’s biological pronouns and given name when talking about the child to people who do not know about the nonconforming gender identity.

Last September, Hillsborough Superior Court Judge Amy Messer ruled in favor of the school district, declaring parents ultimately do not have the right to direct how their children are to be educated in public schools.

“(T)he right to make decisions about the care, custody, and control of one’s child is not absolute,” Messer wrote.

Because Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi has recused herself from the case without giving a reason, the court may issue a 2-2 tie decision. If they do, Messer’s original ruling will stand.

On Friday, Glynn maintained the Manchester school staff, and officials did not lie to Doe about her child’s gender identity. They simply followed policy.

“If the issue, in this case, is truly that the district has a constitutional duty to report what the school is doing, the school has met that burden,” Glynn said.

Glynn said that parents have the right to have their voice heard when the district crafts policies, and they have the right to vote out school board representatives who pursue policies they do not support. A comment from Justice James Bassett seemingly rebuked this line of reasoning.

“Constitutional rights are not up for a vote,” Bassett said.  

In fact, parents’ rights are coming up for a vote in the New Hampshire House. Last week, the House Education Committee cast a 10-10 party-line vote on SB272, the Parents Bill of Rights. The full Hous is expected to vote on the legislation, which is supported by Gov. Chris Sununu, later this month.

Glynn cautioned the justices that if they decide in favor of Doe and parents’ rights in this case, more lawsuits will likely come.

“The next case up is going to be the case of a student,” she said.

Math class is hard. Just ask Deb Howes.

The head of New Hampshire’s American Federation Teachers chapter, Howes garnered attention last month when she filed a lawsuit against Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut claiming he was breaking the law by using lottery revenue to fund the Education Freedom Accounts.

But the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office Howes’ arithmetic is all wrong. According to the state’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Howes didn’t come close to proving any actual violation of the law or the New Hampshire Constitution, largely because her numbers don’t add up.

“The Court should dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety because the plaintiff fails to state a claim for either a constitutional or statutory violation,” the state says in its motion to dismiss.

The state is funding the Education Freedom Accounts with the Education Trust Fund. Howes based her lawsuit on the fact the fund takes in lottery revenue, and uses lottery money for anything other than public schools violates the law.

The problem is Howes never cited any evidence showing that money going to the EFA program is lottery money. The reality of the funding makes it unlikely she could, according to the state.

“The burden is not on the state to prove that lottery money is not used for EFAs; rather, the burden is on the plaintiff to allege and prove that lottery funds are used for EFAs,” the state’s motion says.

In 2022, the state sent $125 million in lottery revenue to the Education Trust Fund. That same year, the EFA program used $9 million of trust fund grants for parents who want to send their children to a private school or homeschool program.

The problem for Howes is the fact that the Education Trust Fund was budgeted at more than $1.2 billion in 2022 with revenues that come from a variety of sources.

The state’s Education Trust Fund got $128 million from the business profits tax; $265 million from the business enterprise tax $10.3 million from the rooms and meals tax, another $108.9 million from the tobacco tax; $65.3 million from the real estate transfer tax; $38.2 million from the tobacco settlement fund; and $40.6 million from the utility property tax.

The statewide property tax generates another $363 million for education, though that money does not go into the trust fund.

“Lottery money is one source that makes up a small portion of the education trust fund,” the state wrote.

Nearly all the money raised for education through the trust fund goes back to local public schools, according to the state. In 2022, that amount was $1,084,530,891, just shy of the $1.1 billion total fund.

Without a direct link between EFA funding and lottery revenue, Howes was unable to demonstrate Edelblut broke any law, according to the state.

“The plaintiff advances no allegations capable of showing that this $9 million comprised any letter dollars rather than being paid entirely from business profit tax or enterprise tax dollars or another education trust fund revenue source,” the state’s motion said.

Teachers unions and their Democratic allies have been working to kill the popular school choice program since Gov. Chris Sununu first signed it into law. They have repeatedly claimed the program takes money from local schools, a factual error that has been repeatedly pointed out. In fact, the EFA program gives local schools more money per pupil when a student chooses a different education option.

In their latest move, Democrats in the state House used a temporary majority last week to pass a bill mandating EFA recipients who are not entering school for the first time must have spent at least one year in their assigned public school if they want to access EFA funding.

That bill is unlikely to make it through the GOP-controlled Senate.