Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxes And Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bedford School Board urges 'No' on petition to adopt 50% tax-cap measure
Summary
At a Feb. 17 public hearing timed to comply with RSA 32:5-c, the Bedford School Board said the petition warrant article to adopt a tax cap is now compliant with state statute but unanimously recommended a ‘No’ vote.
The Bedford School Board held a public hearing Feb. 17 to meet a state statutory window for a petition warrant article that would adopt a tax-cap provision limiting a recommended budget’s tax increase to no more than 50% above the prior year’s local taxes.
The hearing was convened specifically to satisfy RSA 32:5-cscheduling requirements, Superintendent Mike Fournier said; the petition language was amended after the deliberative session and now aligns with RSA 32:5-c, rather than the prior language drawn from RSA 32:5-b. The board said it reviewed the revised language after the deliberative session and voted unanimously to recommend voters oppose the article.
Board Chair Sue Ginato read the petition text into the record during the hearing: the article would “adopt the provisions of RSA 32:5-b and implement a tax cap whereby the governing body or budget committee shall not submit a recommended budget that increases the amount to be raised by local taxes based on the prior fiscal year’s actual amount of local taxes raised by more than 50%.” The board recorded that a three-fifths ballot vote would be required for any action under the article.
Board members described the hearing as a formality to satisfy the 15- to 30-day public-notice window required by the RSA. Ginato said the board’s unanimous recommendation of “No” appears in minutes attached to the next agenda; she also said the board believes the district builds budgets “from the bottom up” to meet educational needs and that the proposed tax cap would be unlikely to affect the board’s actual budgeting choices.
No revisions to the article can be made at this hearing; the article will appear on the ballot as written or as amended at the deliberative session, officials said. Members of the public were permitted to speak but the board noted the hearing did not permit changes to the text of the warrant article.
The board adjourned the public hearing after recording its recommendation and a motion to adjourn passed with all present voting in favor.
Why it matters: If voters enact a tax-cap measure like the one described, it would impose a voter-approved constraint on what the governing body or budget committee may put forward as a recommended budget. The board’s recommendation is advisory; any final change would be determined by the public ballot and, if enacted, then implemented consistent with state law.
Votes and process notes: The board publicly recorded a unanimous recommendation to vote "No" and formally adjourned the hearing; the petition will appear on the ballot as written or as amended at the deliberative session.
