Brentwood candidates split on citizen tax-cap petition; legal wording and fund-balance questions raised

A citizen petition to adopt a local tax cap (referred to in the forum as Article 11) drew extended discussion at a Brentwood candidate forum held at the Mary Bartlett Library. The petition would implement a local cap mechanism based on statutory provisions and an inflation index; voters will decide town meeting adoption on March 15.

Why it matters: If adopted, the tax-cap provision would limit how much the town’s tax commitment can rise year to year based on the previous year’s tax commitment adjusted for inflation and population change. Candidates and officials said the measure would change budget planning and could be bypassed by warrant articles in special circumstances, but they differed on whether it should be adopted by petition.

What the petition says and how it would work

A participant reading the petition said it would “implement a tax cap whereby the governing body of Brentwood budget committee shall not submit a recommended budget or increases the amount to be raised by local taxes ... higher than the prior year’s actual amount of local taxes raised ... adjusted for inflation using an inflation index CPI-U for the Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH area published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and change in population in accordance with RSA 32:5-b.” (petition text read at the forum).

Positions on the cap

• Michelle Sudet (municipal budget committee incumbent) said she would prefer the budget committee voluntarily self-impose spending limits but would support a statutory cap if voluntary limits are not adopted: “I would like to see us self impose those kind of limits, but if that's not possible, then, yes, I would support the tax cap.”

• Jennifer Jones (Select Board chair) said she does not support the tax cap because the public already votes on the budget and can amend it: “The budget that we institute throughout the year is approved by the public. The public votes on it. They can amend it.” She warned a cap could limit the town’s ability to respond to unanticipated contractual or capital needs.

• Jim Hajar (municipal budget candidate) described detailed review of the statute and local numbers and said he supports the petition. He told the forum the cap “basically just limits the amount of growth that you could have in one year” by tying allowable growth to a CPI regional index and population change; he said he would present his findings at a public hearing and provide a short presentation to the budget committee and select board.

• Other voices, including George Koch and several residents, argued against an across-the-board limit, saying it could hamper the town’s response to emergencies or contract obligations and that voters already have the final say at ballots and town meeting.

Legal and implementation questions raised

Forum participants and a town official noted that petition language must match the relevant RSA precisely. One participant observing legal review said the warrant’s text may not strictly follow the RSA’s prescribed wording and that implementation details would have to be resolved by counsel if the petition passes. Forum speakers also discussed whether the cap would apply only to the municipal operating budget or to the total tax commitment (operating budget plus warrant articles); a town official clarified the cap as presented in discussion was based on the total prior-year tax commitment, which would include warrant-article appropriations and fund-balance offsets when calculating the prior year base.

Funding and fund-balance context

Candidates repeatedly noted the town’s fund balance and recent use of offsets when assessing the petition’s impact. Jim Hajar said Brentwood’s retained fund balance is about 4.5% of operating expenses — below recommended levels — and that prior use of large offsets can affect year-to-year tax projections. Speakers warned residents to consider both the cap’s short-term tax-limiting effect and long-term constraints on municipal budgeting.

Next steps and voter guidance

A public hearing and a budget meeting were referenced where the tax-cap proposal would be explained in detail; voters will see the petition on the warrant at town meeting March 15. Candidates urged residents to attend hearings and vote at both the election on March 11 and the town meeting.

Ending

Forum speakers agreed the petition raises important trade-offs between tax predictability and municipal flexibility; several candidates said the public should review explanatory material ahead of the vote.