By ANNMARIE TIMMINS
NHPR
Voters have a new tool for controlling school spending. Under a law that took effect in October, they have the option to cap how much districts spend for each individual student — rather than voting on the district budget as a whole.
Residents have proposed spending caps in at least seven New Hampshire school districts, with amounts ranging from $1 per student in Salem to $29,000 in the Hollis Brookline district. It’s too soon to know how many other communities will consider them, because residents can propose a cap up until 30 days before the district meeting.
So far, voters have largely rejected that option, choosing to leave budget writing to local officials. And in many cases, they’ve said the solution lies with more state support — not more constraints on local spending.
In five districts, voters have moved to defeat the proposed limits, mostly by increasing the cap high enough to all but ensure it will fail in March when the district votes.
That’s not what Eric Pauer of Brookline predicted when he proposed a $27,000 cap in the Hollis Brookline district. Pauer serves as president of the School District Governance Association, which has helped residents across the state propose school spending caps.
Pauer did not return multiple messages seeking comment for this story, but during the Hollis Brookline school district meeting earlier this year, he expressed optimism about the caps as a tool to control local spending.
“I think it’s going to resonate with voters,” Pauer said. “And I think it’s going to be a popular thing this year.”
Here’s what else to know about the new law, and what it could mean for your community.
Voters, not lawmakers, decide where to set the cap
The law sets a few requirements. Caps must include increases for inflation and they need a three-fifths vote to pass. Lawmakers left the amount of the cap to voters.
Most caps proposed so far have ranged from about $25,000 to $29,000 per student. Supporters say they came up with those figures by approximating their district’s budget, then dividing by the number of students.
In some districts, the proposed caps would have allowed school districts to increase per pupil spending, including in Weare, which would see its overall budget increase by $400,000 if the cap passes. In others, it would have cut spending. Voters in the Kearsarge School District soundly rejected a cap last month that would have reduced per pupil spending by $6,000 in a 1,435 to 113 decision.
Epsom is a particularly stark example. A pair of Republican House members who co-sponsored the spending cap legislation proposed a $25,000 per student cap. Residents increased that to $100,000 per student when they met this month to finalize the school district warrant that voters will take up in March.
Carol Zink-Mailloux, an Epsom resident for 12 years, proposed the higher cap not to increase spending but to defeat a cap altogether.
“The budget is your cap,” she said. “The message was, ‘Vote against this. It’s ridiculous. It’s absurd, and it’s not necessary.”
The House members, Carol and Dan McGuire, did not return a request for comment.
Voters are largely rejecting the caps as proposed
In Epping, voters amended the cap from $24,000 to $45,000. Voters in the Hollis Brookline district took a similar approach, moving a proposed cap from $27,000 to $35,000. In Salem, where the proposed cap would have slashed the school budget to about $4,000, voters did the same.
A proposal in the Timberlane Regional School District took a different approach to a similar end. A tax cap would have limited annual school budget increases to 2.5%. Voters countered, rewriting the proposal to study a budget cap instead.
Voters have opted to support caps as proposed in two districts, Weare and ConVal. In ConVal, a former Democratic state senator — who said she opposes the cap — lobbied against a proposal to raise the spending threshold from $29,000 to $59,000.
Jeanne Dietsch, of Peterborough, said in an interview that she thought it was inappropriate to change the proposed cap — and she is confident voters will reject it at the ballot box.
“I think by keeping it at $29,000, which cuts spending by $3 million, it makes it obvious that everyone needs to vote against it,” she said
Opponents want more state funding, not caps
In many districts, voters and local officials have said frustrated taxpayers should take their concerns to their lawmakers and the governor. They cited a drop in state reimbursement for special education funding and the state’s effort to overturn a court order increasing state spending on public education.
Nancy Brennan made that argument in Weare, with two of the town’s House members listening. Both of those lawmakers voted for the local spending cap.
“I have watched over the years as the people that we have sent to Concord have reduced time and time again, the state money that comes here,” Brennan said. “And when the state money is brought down, then the town has to pick it up.”
The argument did not persuade the crowd in Weare, but it did at the Kearsarge School District meeting.
“This petition is an attempt at an easy fix to a problem that we are all seeing, and that’s an increase in our property taxes. The root of the issue is at the state level,” said Bebe Casey, of New London. “Vote no on this petition, and on Monday, call your legislators and demand that they do the work that needs to be done to find another revenue source to fund public education.”
These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.
