If your community votes “yes” on Question 2 and caps funding for its local public schools on November 3rd, do you know what the school district could cut?
School sports. Arts and music programming. AP classes. Full-day kindergarten. Bus routes.
In New Hampshire, these programs may not be considered legally necessary to provide an “adequate” education. But ask any parent, teacher, or student, and you’ll hear what the law fails to capture: These are the opportunities that engage students, nurture their talents, and help them grow into well-rounded adults.
Question 2 isn’t just about a number on a spreadsheet. It’s about what our schools can offer our children–and who will be left to teach them.
Instead of fixing the broken school funding system that pits school districts against each other, State House politicians are pushing a gimmick that does nothing to fix the main issue–New Hampshire ranks last in the nation for state funds for public schools, which means property taxpayers are left footing the bill.
Families across New Hampshire–including educators–are feeling the squeeze as the cost of living rises. School districts face the same pressures. But an arbitrary funding cap tied to inflation won’t make rising expenses disappear. It will simply force districts to make difficult choices about what they can afford.
Districts can’t cut fixed costs for items like heating fuel and electricity, which continue trending up. Nor can they eliminate services required by state and federal law, like special education. When fixed costs rise and funding is constrained, districts will have fewer options.
Eventually, districts may have to make cuts where they matter most: their people.
New Hampshire educators are the heart and soul of every school. From the school bus to the hallways to the classroom to the cafeteria, teachers and education support professionals make our schools safe, supportive places where children can learn and thrive. But reduced funding can mean fewer positions, larger class sizes, less individualized attention for students, and reduced compensation for the people who help our schools succeed.
We cannot expect our schools to deliver for students if we fail to support the people who make learning possible.
Our educators deserve fair pay for the essential work they do. However, salaries are already struggling to keep pace with the cost of living, undermining school districts’ ability to recruit and retain qualified professionals.
A recent study by the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute found New Hampshire teachers earn about 33% less than comparable college graduates in other professions–even after adjusting for the contracted number of weeks worked in a year. And that gap has grown over time.
At $44,010, New Hampshire’s reported average starting teacher salary is the lowest in our region and falls well below what Granite Staters need to make ends meet.
The same study shows that workers aged 55 and older held 33.7% of elementary and secondary school jobs in 2025, compared to just 22.1% in 2004. Education bachelor’s degree completions at New Hampshire institutions dropped by half between 2015 and 2025.
Question 2 will add obstacles and limit school districts’ ability to respond to rising costs and recruit and retain talented professionals.
Even when districts want to offer competitive salaries, an arbitrary spending cap could leave them without the flexibility to do so. And salaries aren’t the only pressure point. Health insurance costs far outpace the cost of inflation, putting additional strain on school budgets. Districts may have to consider shifting more of those costs onto employees, effectively cutting take-home pay for educators.
The consequences reach far beyond educators’ paychecks. When schools struggle to attract and retain staff, students lose access to experienced teachers and consistent support. The remaining staff face heavier workloads. Class sizes grow. And opportunities disappear.
That’s the cost of treating public education as a budget line to simply be capped rather than a public responsibility to be cherished and fulfilled.
The choice on Question 2 is about more than spending limits. A “yes” vote on Question 2 risks fewer educators in our schools, larger class sizes, and less opportunity for students. A “no” vote on Question 2 preserves local control and allows communities to make informed decisions about how to best educate their children.
Our public schools should not have to choose between maintaining essential services and providing programs that help students reach their full potential. Our educators should not have to choose between serving their communities and earning a fair living.
On November 3, stand with New Hampshire’s students, educators, and communities. Vote NO on Question 2.
