Brookline debate over adopting inflation‑and‑population local tax cap fails to change wording

Moderator read Article 11, a petition to adopt the provisions of RSA 32:5(b) and implement a local tax cap that would limit the amount to be raised by local taxes using CPI‑U Northeast and a population factor. Eric Power summarized that if the petition passes the new cap would replace the existing local tax cap and that the override threshold is now three‑fifths for changes in the law.

Multiple residents said they opposed imposing restrictions on an elected school board via warrant article and worried the statutory complexity, inflation index choice and timing would make budgeting and negotiations difficult. A vocal line of questioning focused on whether the petition uses town population or average daily membership (ADMR) for its population factor: counsel clarified the petition’s language uses town population (from the Department of Business and Economic Affairs) rather than student attendance, and that attendance and population are different statutory choices.

Eric Power moved to amend the article to change the word "population" to "attendance" (ADMR); the motion was seconded and voted. The moderator announced the motion to amend was defeated and the original petition wording remained. Counsel and district staff explained that the statutory calculation uses November figures and that if final tax calculations later show the approved warrant exceed the cap, statutory remedies and adjustments through the Department of Revenue Administration apply.

Discussion closed and the session proceeded to adjournment; Article 11 will appear on the ballot with the original petition language.