Someone from another state was looking for information about our school funding lawsuit with the intention of doing something similar in his home state. I cautioned him, be careful what you wish for. The lawsuit filed by five property-poor school districts here was supposed to equalize the resources for communities to provide basic, adequate educational opportunities across our state. Claremont II was about taxes - it was about equitable and reasonable taxes to pay for schools. It really isn't that complicated.
Some communities have very little property per student and thus very high property tax rates.
Other communities have lots of property per student and can raise plenty of money for schools with very low tax rates. Thus a disparity occurs, not only with the level of educational opportunities, but in the tax effort for a community to raise the money to pay for public schools. The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled that public education is a state responsibility and therefore the taxes to pay for it must be uniform across the state. We needed a broad-based tax to pay for schools where every community had the same tax base and rate, or, as our constitution puts it, proportional and reasonable taxes. What we got was a giant temper tantrum from the Legislature and many citizens.