Paul Rossi: Spending on education doesn’t guarantee better results

To The Daily Sun,

Richard Dunnell argues that Concord has been “downshifting” education costs onto local property taxpayers, noting that since 2012 state support increased about 14% while local school taxes rose about 68%.

But those aggregate figures omit two important facts: enrollment has fallen substantially, and federal education aid has increased.

When state and federal support are combined, divided by enrollment and adjusted for inflation, government funding declined only about 3.4% per student from 2012 to 2025. And 2025 comes after the extraordinary pandemic-era federal education funding surge had largely wound down.

Making up that entire decline required only about a 2.6% real increase in local taxes per student. Instead, local school taxes rose about 39% per student after inflation — nearly 15 times what was necessary simply to replace lost state and federal purchasing power.

So “downshifting” explains only a small fraction of the increase in local school taxes.

The larger question is what taxpayers and families received for the additional spending. In 2024-25, only 11% of Laconia High School’s 11th graders were proficient in math. And more spending alone does not guarantee better results: on the 2024 national assessment, Utah matched New Hampshire’s fourth-grade math score while spending about $11,600 less per student — roughly half as much.

I am not suggesting every additional education dollar is unnecessary. But more state funding does not lower the underlying cost of education. It simply shifts part of that cost from local property taxes to state revenues. It also shifts decision-making away from local taxpayers and toward Concord. And it doesn't explain why families aren't receiving better educational services for substantially higher real spending.

Paul Rossi

Laconia