For years, teacher pay in New Hampshire has remained low, with new teachers facing average salaries of $41,590. And for years, Democrats, teachers unions, and other advocates have urged increased state investment in public schools to direct money to teacher salaries. 

This year, Republicans are raising their own concerns about low teacher salaries. But conservatives see a different culprit: administrator pay. School districts are spending too much of the money they do receive on school administrators, Republicans argue, and should reduce that spending and direct it to teachers instead. 

Starting in the 2026 town meeting season, a new law will require that school districts provide salary data to their residents every year. Republicans hope it will inspire residents to push for school budget changes at the local level.

Signed by Gov. Chris Sununu this month, the law, passed under House Bill 1265 and known as the Students First Act, requires school districts to produce four charts at least a week before their annual budget meetings in March. The list includes three line charts: one to show the average teacher salary over the past 10 years; another to show the average administrator’s salary over the same period; and a third to indicate the annual cost per pupil at that district over the same time period.

The fourth item is a chart showing the salaries of the top four highest-paid administrators in the school district. 

To critics of school spending, the charts – which must be presented by the school district without additional context or commentary – will help town residents more clearly see any discrepancies in teacher and administrator pay for themselves. But the bill also seeks to highlight the pay of “directors or coordinators of diversity, equity, and inclusion”; if a school district employs administrators with those roles, they must include them in their calculations of administrative pay, the new law states.

The legislation is one of a handful of bills signed by Sununu and pushed for by Republicans that strengthen fiscal oversight for schools.

House Bill 1195 allows voters in multi-town school administrative units to vote to adopt different ways to apportion budgets among towns. And Senate Bill 383 creates a specific process for voters to adopt school district tax caps – and requires that those tax caps rise with inflation, and not due to student enrollment increases.

Together, the bills seek to address what Republicans are increasingly calling a problem in New Hampshire: school budgets that increase as average school enrollment drops. Democrats argue that those increases are due to increasing costs for schools and a high demand for teachers, and note that many New Hampshire schools in “property poor” towns are struggling to maintain staff and programs. But Republicans say they are indicators that school budgets can be cut.

And conservatives have zeroed in on school administrator pay.

Data released by the state Department of Education in January indicates that superintendents make an average of $124,777 per year; at the high end, the Oyster River superintendent made $200,357, according to the department.

The average teacher salary in New Hampshire in the 2023-2024 school year is $67,096.40, according to separate numbers from the department.

Further data suggests Massachusetts pays its teachers more than New Hampshire, despite the states spending similar amounts per student in schools. Massachusetts spends an average of $23,941 per student, the sixth highest in the country, according to a 2024 national survey conducted by the National Education Association, a teachers union. New Hampshire spends $21,082, the seventh highest. But the average teacher salary in the Bay State is $92,307 – about $25,000 more than New Hampshire’s, the survey shows. 

Rep. Kristin Noble, a Bedford Republican, cited those numbers to argue that Massachusetts school districts are devoting a higher share of their budgets to teacher pay than districts in New Hampshire. 

“These administrators are not just profiting from taxpayers; they are profiting on the backs of teachers,” Noble said in a speech on the House floor.

Representatives of New Hampshire school boards and administrators say the administrative pay in New Hampshire is justified – and not out of the ordinary. 

Mark MacLean, the executive director of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association and the former superintendent of the Merrimack Valley School District in Penacook, said administrators make up a smaller proportion of overall school staff than other industries, such as health care.

School district administration, MacLean said in an interview, is “highly nuanced.” New laws and regulations from the Legislature and the State Board of Education can increase strain on superintendents and assistant superintendents and drive some districts to add more positions. The increasing needs of students after COVID – including efforts to address mental health problems and learning loss – have required many schools to launch entirely new programs, which can also increase staff, MacLean added.

“My experience is that school administrators work 365 days a year, all year round, to make sure that they’re serving the needs of their communities and their districts and their students first,” MacLean said.

Barrett Christina, the executive director of the New Hampshire School Boards Association, noted that teacher pay and administrative pay could differ in part because they are set by different processes at different times of the year.

Teacher pay is negotiated by teachers unions during collective bargaining, which typically takes place in the fall and early winter each school year. That process determines a contract with salaries for the following school year, and the school board then incorporates the contract into their budget process through the winter. 

Administrator pay, meanwhile, is negotiated directly between the prospective candidate for the job and the school board. Those negotiations occur whenever a new person comes into the role, and without direct regard to the collective bargaining contracts, Christina noted.

Competition for talent – particularly in the aftermath of the pandemic – gives candidates for superintendent the bargaining power to negotiate higher pay and benefits, Christina noted. 

But advocates on the right say school boards could devote more to teacher pay and less to administrators and are deliberately choosing not to.

“Our school system exploits the real crisis of low teacher pay to get taxpayers to keep forking over more money,” said Ian Huyett, associate director at the conservative advocacy organization Cornerstone, in an email. “But even though taxpayers keep agreeing to these increases, none of it has gone to teachers in twenty years. Instead, we get this larger, better-paid, and more powerful class of school administrators at multiple levels.”

Cornerstone heavily advocated for the Students First Act; an earlier version, under Senate Bill 219, would have barred school districts from hiring new assistant superintendents unless the district also paid teachers according to a salary floor, set at four times the average cost per pupil – or $84,328 on average in 2024.

HB 1265 does not take effect until July 2025, meaning the charts will not need to be released until one week before annual school meetings in spring 2025. But Huyett said Cornerstone hopes the charts can change the conversation around school funding and teacher pay.

“If voters see these charts in the local grocery store and demand change, we can offer teachers a more competitive salary while stabilizing out-of-control spending at the same time,” he said.

“We also hope to show conservatives that teachers are not really the archenemy. The Republican activist class has this tendency to say ‘it’s good (that) teachers are poor’ and bash them for getting summer vacation. This is tone-deaf and alienates normal independents, who like some of their kids’ teachers, and diverts attention from this huge, underlying fraud in education spending.”

To MacLean, the concerns around administrative pay are overblown; schools face budgetary strains that go well beyond the size of the superintendent’s office. 

​​”I don’t think that there’s bloat, but I think that you can make numbers and percentages – without digging into the details – say essentially anything you want,” MacLean said. 

But he said the new law would force school boards – and administrators – to communicate to their voters about why the budgets and funding are important. 

Christina agreed. 

“Whether or not it’s administrative load or any line item in the budget, the school board has to be able to justify to the voters that expense. Why are we spending money on this many administrators? Why are we spending money on a new football field? Why are we spending money on any number of things?”