The State of New Hampshire has until Thursday to agree to mediation through the Supreme Court for its appeal of the ConVal School District lawsuit decision, but won’t be opting for mediation, ConVal’s attorney Michael Tierney said last week.
“The obligation is on the state to confirm that all the parties agree to mediation. They let us know about an hour after the order was released that they have no interest in the mediation,” Tierney said. “We never would have refused to sit down with the state and discuss possibilities and see what can be done.”
Kate Spiner, director of communications for the N.H. Department of Justice, said in an email on Monday, “As the matter is pending before the court, we are unable to comment.”
Tierney said if the Supreme Court doesn’t hear from the state this week, it will move forward with setting deadlines for briefs to be filed in the case and will likely ask outside groups for amicus briefs.
“Typically what happens in important cases with broad-reaching implications, interested parties point out in briefs perhaps things the court wasn’t considering,” Tierney said. “We suspect there will be multiple parties that will be requesting the ability to file an amicus brief. … It could be school districts. It could be other interested parties. … Anyone with a particular interest in how this case gets decided.”
Tierney said while the court could render a written decision based on what is filed, again due to the wide-reaching implications of the case, it is likely the court would want to hold a hearing. “I would anticipate this particular appeal would be something the Supreme Court would request full oral arguments before the court.”
On Sept. 11, the New Hampshire Supreme Court accepted the state’s appeal of the Cheshire County Court’s June 5 decision that sided with the ConVal School District’s assertion that the state is not fulfilling its constitutional obligation to fund an adequate education. ConVal’s counterappeal was also accepted by the Supreme Court’s order that found the case “appears to be eligible for mediation.”
In the appeal dated Aug. 28, the state questions whether its funding is “unconstitutional” when the state law is applied to the ConVal School District and the other school districts named in the original lawsuit. The state is also questioning if it is unconstitutional for it to not fund school expenses such as transportation. And the state is appealing the Superior Court’s decision that the state is now responsible to pay for the school districts’ attorney fees, which is about $130,000.
The original lawsuit filed by the ConVal School District on March 13 argued that the state does not fund a constitutionally adequate education. The Mascenic, Monadnock and Winchester school districts later joined in the legal fight.
The complaint said using the state’s own formula and the state’s own data, the state’s base adequacy funding falls far short of constitutionally sufficient funding for the children of the ConVal, Mascenic, Monadnock and Winchester school districts as well as throughout New Hampshire.
ConVal claimed in its March petition that the actual cost of an education, based on Department of Education data, is about $18,901 per student and asked the court to set the base adequacy amount at $9,929 per student for fiscal year 2020 and $10,843.60 for 2019.The state currently sets the base adequacy aid award for all schools at $3,562.71 per student.
Ruoff said in his 98-page decision on June 5 that transportation costs, among other costs, are to be paid by the state per the state constitution. However, he only ordered that the state pay the school districts legal fees and said it is the legislature’s job to fix the underfunding of education.