001system. The the the we have the deliberative session. I just checked with the checklist. We had 123 people here at this deliberative session. That's the most we've ever had in an SB2 session. >> 126. >> Uh the supervisor of the checklist corrects 126 people in attendance today. >> Thank you for the update. Three more came in. So we had and they're not all here obviously, but at one point there was 126. So we have a lot of people coming in. people want to learn, but there are a lot of people that can't be here. They they're disenfranchised. They can't be here because they they have to take care of children. They have to work. They um served in the military. And myself, I'm a veteran. I served in the Air National Guard and Air Force
002Reserve for over 30 years. And I had to miss some of these meetings. And my voice was not heard those years. I couldn't make it. There's no absentee ballot. Under SP2, there is. I was able to vote when we had SP2. So, you know, we get 100 120 some people here, but then on election day, we get a turnout that could be a thousand people voting. And I do believe in the power of the ballot box. I believe in voters making their voice heard. I believe that voters are smart and voters can research what the articles are about. They're not dumb people going into the ballot box and just checking things. they're they're they're intelligent and so when you have that many more people at the meeting and then you have that many more people
003voting it's a much superior outcome. I also serve on the Brooklyn planning board uh going into my sixth year. We have hearings on zoning a amendments but there are very few people that attend those but those are on the official ballot just like SB2. So people need to get informed on those. We don't even have a deliberative session. We don't even talk about those. That just goes on and you vote on it. So I think, you know, SB2 has a lot of merit. I think if you're watching this at home, you probably are going to vote no on this article because you want to keep SB2. You want to keep your right to vote on March 10th all day. Or if you're a snowbird out of state or some other reason, you can't make it
004here. you're still going to get your voice heard. And I'd rather have more people weighing in than people a lot of people just don't like these long meetings, you know, and so they don't they don't come because they choose not to, but there's a lot of people just can't. For those reasons, I would recommend people vote no and keep SB2 because it's working for Brookline. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Any further discussion on article 8? Seeing none, we'll close on article 8 and we will open up on article 9. Article nine, uh, petition warrant article, uh, shall the Brooklyn School District rescend authorizations under RSA 1984-B Roman numeral 2 so that the Brookline School District no longer retains any unassigned general funds under RSA 1984-B Roman numeral 2 and returned all unassigned general
005funds to taxpayers. Estimated tax impact $0 out of 10,000. The school board does not recommend this article 5000. The finance committee recommends this article 2110. Mr. Power, would you like to introduce your warrant article? >> Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Yes, I would like to um introduce this warrant article. If you can move to the next slide that's the reading of the article and Mr. Moderator, I missed what was the recommendation of the finance committee. The finance committee does uh the finance committee recommends this article 2110. >> Okay, thank you very much. So the finance committee had a majority vote to recommend it. Thank you. Let's go to the next slide. So if the people at home and people here don't understand, we have we've given authorization for the school board to return to retain if
006there's unexpended funds at the end of the year about two and a half% of the net assessment and rough estimate it's about4 million dollars of unexpended funds can be retained by the school district yeartoyear um to be used on expenses the next year. And um this warn article actually seeks to resend that authority so that the extra money that's left over actually goes back to reduce the tax effort of the next year. So it would result in a lower tax rate when we pay our tax bills in December. And I know everybody thought the tax bills were large. So this would definitely help. The point I want to make out is besides this retain funds authority, there's much better tools for such contingencies. Next slide. So a more appropriate provision is a contingency fund that's
007available under a warn article RSA 1984b Roman numeral one and I have the uh the law listed there but basically you can have a warrant article each year with a fixed dollar amount and you can put it in front of the voters saying we want to put $50,000 into a contingency fund for an emergency. and let the voters decide that year if it makes sense. Um that way you know you have it or you know you don't have it. So you know each year that the voters can determine if and how much they want to support in the contingency fund based on current conditions. Next slide. Also we have uh two other ways of doing this. uh capital reserve funds under RSA35 are available. Very useful mechanism and the thing that's nice about that is
008you can designate a purpose for the funds so that they get used on what you want instead of just a contingency fund which is any purpose. The other one is an expendable trust fund and I believe we have some of those in the Brooklyn school district I think for special education and we also do this for maintenance. That's under RSA 31919A. So that's also these are much these are much uh better ways to do um planning for contingencies and so they and this also is more transparent to the voters and you know what you're voting on each year. It's it's a dollar amount you know the tax impact. Next slide. So the conclusion here is to support transparency and property tax relief. um encourage the the use of the contingency funds by a Warren article,
009capital reserve funds and expendable trust funds over over the process of retaining the unexpended fund balance. That's a much better procedure, clearer to voters and we know each year we can make a decision on it. So I'd ask for your support on warrant article 9. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Sorry, just giving him the clicker so that he can control the slides. Um, all right. Opening discussion under warrant article 9. >> Ed Perry, Musketanis Road. I understand that people don't like sitting through long long meetings. I'd like to call the question. >> All right. There's a request to call the question. Um, it's non-debatable. Twothirds majority vote. All those in favor of ceasing debate uh and letting those in line speak, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, please raise your
010voting cards. The motion carries. Uh debate is restricted. >> Did I get a second for that? >> No, I didn't get a second for that. >> It still needs a second. I'm sorry it is late. There's uh Judy Cook is willing to second it. Will people allow that? Um all those just uh say I. >> I. >> Thank you. All those opposed. Fabulous. All right. Opening discussion under article 9. Uh Rob Rushton, Flint Meadow Drive. Um I note that in the presentation that was given uh there was a reference to what might be considered a a general contingency fund. However, the article as presented does not establish such a fund. Uh we do have specific purpose uh funds uh I believe in the school system but uh we do not have anything under this article
011that would substitute for the ability of this uh endofear buffer that um uh that we normally have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. Mike Pelto, Westview Road. Um, I I stand in oppos I oppose this article. Um, and for the reasons I'll I'll state. Uh, we elect our school board and and utilizing underruns like this is is part of their job. We elect them and we trust them to do their job. I in a in my town I previously lived in SAU87. I served on the school board for two terms. And and we take that responsibility very seriously. When we have unreserved funds, you know, and for for things that come up, unexpected expenses, be they whatever, the school board has an honest debate. And this takes away one tool of the school board
012to do the job that we elected them to do and we trust them to do. And through the due diligence I've seen here for my first attendance in in this town, I I see a very regimented rigor put into this budget. And I think this this seeks to restrict a tool that's available to the board that we elected them and we we put the our trust in them. And it's and it's another tool to micromanage when you're non-elected to a position. So I oppose this. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Discussion on this article is closed. So, we're going to close on article 9 and open up under article 10. Article 10 is another petition warrant article. Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 32 col5-e and implement a budget cap whereby the school
013board or budget committee shall not submit a recommended budget that is higher than $25,000 per pupil cost times the average daily membership in residents of the school districts as of October 1 of the year immediately preceding the proposed budget year plus an annual increase for inflation using CPI-U for the Boston Cambridge Newton Mass New Hampshire area published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics ICS as of October 1st requires a three-fifths majority of the school district. Uh the school board does not recommend this article 5000. The finance committee does not recommend this article 2110. This is largely statutory language. Only certain things may be amended. Mr. Power, would you like to introduce your article? Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Eric Power, Westview Road. This is the language that the moderator just read. No tax impact. So,
014what is a school district budget cap that's proposed by this Warren article? So, the school district budget cap limits an increase on the um actually on the spending. That's a typo there, not tax effort. So, it's a budget cap. So, you when you adopt your adopted cost per pupil each year, that number you you've adopted by this warrant article is multiplied by the number of students. There's a metric called average daily membership and residence published by the department of education every year and that's how you come up with your cap. So it's based on that cost per pupil. It gets updated each year with inflation. Um you choose the inflation index which is allowed. So it's CPIU northeast is what's been proposed. And if you want to go over the budget cap um there is
015an override mechanism. every cap budget or tax cap has to have that and it and it's done by a three-fifth majority vote on the Warren article. So, here is some numbers on um our spending and you can see that we've had some years where it's been up quite a bit. Um we're we've had some years where it's under 5% but then you have 10% and 8.7 and we're proposed to be 5.9. So it would the the cap that you would be getting would be going up by the inflation, but it would also be going up if you have more students or be going down by the percentage you lose students. So it helps it helps keep taxpayers into a more uh taxpayers expecting a more reasonable budget and um and you have an override if
016there's truly urgent needs in your school district by a three-fifths vote. So you can see here spending has has been higher than the change in inflation and enrollment in five of the past six years and we continue to lose students. That's not a surprise because that's the that's what's happening across all of New Hampshire. So, the inflation and enrollment adjusted school district budget cap provides common sense and affordable guard rails for the district total spending uses the inflation index CPIU Northeast. Enrollment is based on ADMR from the Department of Education, which is your average sely membership and residents. And also note that this can also coexist with our current 8% local tax cap. So, you would just have to meet both of them. Please support the school district budget cap provides reasonable and sustained spending
017for the Brooklyn school district. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Power. Uh discussion on article 10. >> Uh yes. >> Um yes, I if you want to correct the numbers that were in there. >> Yeah. Um Mr. power your slide that showed the enrollment numbers. Those enrollment numbers are not accurate. Um, I just want to make sure just I feel like maybe it's a little misleading and I want to just make sure we have accurate information that's being >> the the numbers that are in there came from the Nest report. >> Okay. But we have our actual enrollment numbers. So I I mean does it matter? >> I'm just using the NASDAQ numbers. Oh, I mean I I do think it's important that we have accurate information. So, if we would
018like to offer the actual enrollment numbers, I think that voters, as we've heard, are very capable of making um doing their own research and decisions. So, I think we should offer the actual numbers so that there's a comparison. Can >> Can we just pull up your slide real quick with the enrollment numbers so that I can just read through them in comparison just so we have accurate information for our community? >> Yeah. Uh that one. Yes. So in FY2021 it was I'm just going to go straight across. It should be 572 580 582 558 556. Thank you. >> Thank you very much board for that correction. Uh opening the floor for discussion. Sir, >> Rob Rushton, Flint Meadow Drive. Um, I was a bit confused on this article. So, uh, being the nerd that I
019am, I did look up the RSA. And what I found interesting is that, um, this article as written mentions a $25,000 uh, base amount, whereas the RSA itself does mentions a calculated value of cost per pupil. then adjusted for inflation. Um I'm not sure that this article is written actually conforms with the RSA. Uh I don't know what kind of >> if I may. >> Yes. >> Uh there are two wordings under NHRSA uh Roman numeral 4 that you may choose from. One appears to be an annual increase for inflation and the other one is the annual increase according to an inflation index. We are using the second wording there. Is that correct? >> Yes. That's a respect for the uh annual change. I'm talking about the original $25,000 amount that was in the article
020that that is based on the initial uh value of current pupil per pupil cost uh defined herein. uh according to the RSA, uh I did not see in my reading of that article any mention of an arbitrary value for the uh for the initial uh base for this uh calculated number. >> I I believe it is a fill-in- thelank value there. Um but I have the RSA in front of me. I don't uh I don't see that. >> Okay. Um >> uh oop sorry. Bear with me one second. I just >> I defer to council on this one. >> I'm in the town version, but in >> Yeah. Dash E. >> Yes. >> I did it again. um in RSA 32 col 5-f under Roman numeral 4. There are two versions. The second version says,
021"Alternatively, if an annual inflation index is used, the wording of the question shall be, shall we adopt the provisions of 325 colon or hyphen E and implement a budget cap, whereby the board or budget committee shall not submit a recommended budget that is higher than blank dollars per pupil cost. The statutory language has a fill in the blank for the >> This is for the U language of the adoption of the of the article. >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm looking at -ash E which uh seems to conflict with that >> E is the provision that applies if the budget cap is adopted. So in order to adopt >> yes the procedure is one thing the statute that's being referenced here is different. There's a conflict between uh the adoption language and the language of uh
022-ash e. The language in this petition warrant article is consistent with the language to adopt RSA 325-e and that language is in RSA 325-f Roman numeral 4. Well, I'll defer to councel, but uh I will find that that is was very confusing to me uh in that uh it it looks like this uh this is an amount that has actually more than the uh current cost of uh per student uh in our schools. Um it's different. Thank you. Isn't the law fun? All right, next up, Keith Bean, 37 Westview Road. Um, just in general, I'm not in favor of capping the the budget. Um, I think our school board has demonstrated a lot of research and time invested to try to get to the numbers that they have. They've pointed out where they've tried to
023be lean, uh, where they've tried to recognize the sentiment in the town where folks are, you know, upset about rising tax rates and things like that, but at the same time, they're trying to do right by our teachers, by our community. Um, I'm not in favor of anything that's going to hamstring those kinds of efforts by limiting them to certain dollar amounts. We could have a boiler explode tomorrow and suddenly have a whole bunch of new expenses. um capping it at that point may not allow for some of those expenditures which may be required just so that our kids have a warm room to attend school in. Um I I think it's shortsighted and basically I'm against Warren article. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes sir. >> Brendan Deni 31 Mason Road and first
024of all Mr. moderator doing a great job. So um >> thank you. [applause] >> That's what my mom said too. [laughter] Um I want to um agree with the previous speaker about not um liking budget caps. I think um we have we have controls on budget that we don't need an artificial cap put on. Um we have a great school board and school uh administration that does the work that we're asking them to do. We have a finance committee that can provide a recommendation to the uh school board on what they think should be, you know, the right amount. And most of all, we have this deliberative session. I want to have the school board explain to us the budget they need. I don't want to hear these, oh, well, we had to make it
025work in these artificial constraints. If those folks who were here eight, nine years ago when we put in the first budget cap, it was in at it came the petition came in at 4%. And then people got up and amended it said well let's bring it up to 8% because that you know this such a ridiculous thing to put in a budget cap and then COVID happened and the world happened and you know 8% budgets are becoming a norm because the world has changed to put in this budget cap that is based on all these weird things that nobody can understand easily and then to have that budget cap existing on top of another budget cap that we already exist is just cause going to cause shenanigans because people are not going to understand why
026we have an 8% cap and then this cap and the budget came you know the this cap came in at 6% but they're bringing in a 7% budget and I'm going to call my lawyer. It just it's going to cause confusion. This should not happen. And finally, I'm going to bring this back. This is why we should get rid of SB2 because if somebody brings up a petition or an article for a something that's where you can sit on the floor and say yes let's we need to change the world the rules budget cap to have this budget cap. >> We did that one already. >> I know we're on article 10 now. >> That's why I'm explaining that this is a good reason why to have that one. Thank you sir. >> Thank you.
027>> Yes sir. Um can we move back to the one with the chart? Is this the one that controls the >> It entirely depends on what your name is. >> Oh, sorry. Brian Rder. Still of Still of Mason Road. >> Thank you. >> We'll see if that continues. [laughter] Um, where was it? Article 10. The Nope. Must go the other way. Uh, here we go. So, I am fundamentally um opposed to data charts where the axes don't start at zero. um with certain charts here like the left side of this goes from 7 million to 16 million. The right side goes from 520 to 660. They don't start at zero. They're not showing you the whole thing. This zooms in at the top level of a bar graph and so that changes that think ch
028things that are fairly stable or have minor changes become much more exaggerated when you zoom in like this. So, I'm fundamentally opposed to that and I'm particularly disappointed the state is now requiring the schools to produce certain data charts that do this and don't start at zero. Um, I find that I'm not going to suggest it's intentional, but it is nevertheless misleading. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes, sir. Tom Soul on Shady Rock Road. Um, I'm going to preface this by saying I I wish we weren't discussing this article. I wish it didn't exist, but we are. Uh, is this the one? I'd like to make a motion to amend. >> A motion to amend. All right. What is your motion, sir? I want to change the number 25,000 to 100,000 and add that
029it's per pupil cost per DOE. >> Uh, unfortunately, you can't change anything other than the number or the inflation index with the Warren article that's been >> You can't change the number. >> You can change the number. >> Okay, I'll change >> You can't change any of the other texts. I move to change 25,000 to 100,000. >> All right. So, there is a motion to amend article 10 to change the number $25,000 per pupil to $100,000 per pupil. Is there a second for the gentleman's amendment? Oh, I have my choice. All right. You got one. >> All right. All right. >> Speak to my speak to the motion. >> Uh, you may speak to the motion um in three minutes or less. >> Yeah. As absurd as this sounds, uh, I made the mistake in
030a previous meeting of going from 4% to 8%. I'm trying not to make that mistake this time. Thank you very much. We are now discussing the motion to amend article 10. Are you here to speak to the motion to amend? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. >> Uh, Jesse Mayor, Parker Road. Um, I am absolutely supporting this amendment. Um, this is SP2. This is the game we're playing here, right? So, we can effectively neuter this cap by changing the number to a higher number. So, support it. All right. Uh, you're here to discuss the motion to amend. >> Yes, Mr. Moderator. Eric Powless. >> Yes. Um, I'm speaking against this amendment. So, we saw earlier in the Warren article for the operating budget that we're spending uh $19,967 per student. So, putting the uh cap
031at the original $25,000 as plenty of headroom. And um so, you know, by putting it to $100,000 doesn't really make a lot of sense. It doesn't really do anything. So, I would vote against this amendment so that the voters can have a chance on uh election day to vote on the 25,000. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Is there any further discussion on the motion to amend article 10? >> Yes, sir. >> I'm in favor of this because it absolutely represents what the voters are intending. If we vote for this based on the 100,000, that's what we that's what we choose to not consider it or be against it is basically just supporting the cap. >> If you if you vote for this, it will change the number that will go on the warrant
032article or on the on the ballot. >> Yes. Further discussion on the motion to amend. >> I I would like to rise in opposition of the idea of this amendment >> and your name is Tyler >> Tyler Freddiani Westview Road. >> Um yes. So I believe a gentlin had just mentioned this idea of well we had to go through a song and dance with a previous cap and saying what's the number let's just raise the number. The problem with just amending a warrant article and raising the number to something that we feel is arbitrary such that it won't be a law anymore is that it is still there. We're picking that number arbitrarily and we expect to not encounter it and then suddenly who knows what could change. It's unfortunately a reckless approach to handling
033legislation and I can't support it. Sorry. >> Thank you very much. Speaking to the motion to amend >> Ash Skidmore Oakill Road. >> Yeah. Um, I agree with the guy before me. You know, this is ludicrous. It's a bad show of the legislature here, and you are the legislature. It's a bad show of what we're doing. And I hope the people watching take note of this, you know, because this is a this is not a good way to do this. Now, if there was this were like a town meeting where you're going to vote on something here tonight, you'd crash and burn the whole thing and nobody else might be the wiser. But if you do change a number like this, as Eric pointed out, you know, it's got plenty of headroom here against the
034actual operating budget that's been proposed. It's a reasonable number, you know, to just to just quadruple it. Well, I can't use the words here. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Moderator. I know you understand. >> So, I oppose the amendment. >> Thank you very much. Further discussion on the motion to amend article 10. >> Yes, sir. >> Move the question. >> Uh, move the question. All right. Well, you are the only person in line. Do you still want to move it? >> Yes, I am. >> Uh, is there a second for the gentleman's motion? There's a second for the gentleman's motion. Um, all right. Non-debatable, two-thirds majority to move the question. All those in favor of moving the question, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, please raise your voting cards. It passes.
035All right. Uh, that ceases discussion on this and we will now vote. The vote is to amend article 10, the text of which is up on your screen, changing the value of $25,000 per pupil to $100,000 per pupil. All those in favor of the amendment, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, please raise your voting cards. I believe that is in the affirmative. The motion carries. The text is amended. All right. Any further discussion on article 10 as amended? Brady Alligan 17 Birch Hill. I would strongly advise this get voted down on uh March 10th. Um we're this is really what's happening right now is exactly why SP2 has issues. um and really illustrates that it's a two-way street. So maybe this is the second way that this needs to be voted down on
036March 10th overwhelmingly. Thank you. >> Any further discussion on article 10 as amended? Hearing and seeing no further discussion, we will close under article 10 and we will move on to article 11. We are almost there folks. Article 11 is a petition warrant article which reads, "Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 325-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, this year's tax base?" I'd like to raise a point of order before we move to article 11 to restrict further reconsideration of article 10. >> There's been a motion to restrict reconsideration. I was looking down, not looking up. Is there a second to the gentleman's motion? There's a second. Uh Brian Rder has seconded.
037Um this is a debatable thing. So before I move on to article 11, does anybody wish to speak to restricting reconsideration on article 10? Hearing no discussion on the motion to restrict reconsideration, we shall put it to a vote. All those in favor of restricting reconsideration on article 10, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, the motion carries. Article 10 is now restricted. All right. Should I start that one over or can I start from the middle? Start from the middle. Start from the middle. Okay. I see nods. Enough nods for me to go forward. Increases the amount to be raised by local taxes. This year's tax base that is higher than the prior fiscal year's actual amount of local taxes raised. last year's base adjusted for inflation using the inflation index CPI-U for
038the Boston Cambridge Newton Mass New Hampshire area published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and the change in population in accordance with RSA 325-B, Roman numeral 1-B. Uh estimated tax impact is $0 out of a thousand. The school board does not recommend this article 5000. The finance committee does not recommend this article 2110. This is another one where it is largely statutory language, but there are certain parts of it that can be modified. Mr. Power, would you like to introduce your Warren article? >> Thank you, Mr. Moderator. Eric Power, Westview Road. Uh, Mr. Moderator just read the language of the Warren article, no tax impact. So, in New Hampshire currently there, uh, we have a local tax cap that exists. There are six towns that have the local tax cap and there are two
039school districts including Brooklyn and you might have seen some cities have tax caps like Manchester and NSHA. Those are different than these because cities have different rules with charters and such. So these this is a local tax cap. So, the RSA was changed in 2025 that allows if you you're a town or school district with an existing cap, local tax cap, you can propose directly a new local tax cap, which is what this warn article does. So, if the Warrant article passes, the new local tax cap goes into effect for the next year. If it fails, you just keep the current tax cap. So, a tax cap is a limit on the tax effort, which is your appropriations minus revenues. And each year the tax cap is the prior year's tax effort adjusted by the
040change in inflation and change in student enrollment with this method. You saw this chart earlier. Uh I know people don't think the numbers are right on the enrollment. We'll double check that later. Um this is the tax effort you see going up. We had a very large tax effort increase in FY24 both because of spending and also the year the revenue from the state was a little lower. Um same thing last year spending went way up and then we talked about that earlier. We went up over a million almost a million dollars in spending over the tax cap. So that we are above the tax cap last three of the last five years uh with declining enrollment. And the other law change that happened this year is that overriding a local tax cap is now
041a three-fifths vote instead of just being a simple majority. So that's why those were overridden by the by the voters. So the inflation enrollment local tax cap provides common sense and affordable budget guard rails for our district spending. It's based on the inflation proposed uh inflation method, the CPIU Northeast and the enrollment again is based on the ADMR metric that's published by the Department of Education average daily membership and residents. So I recommend supporting the inflation enrollmentbased local tax cap that will provide reasonable and sustainable spending for the Brooklyn school district. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Power. We are opening discussion on article 11. >> Yes, sir. Keith Pepin, 37 Westview Road. Basically, my objections to this warrant article are similar to the ones on the previous motion uh or previous warrant
042article. Um, with respect, I'm not in favor of trying to govern our um school board or other elected officials through Warren articles. If you want to be involved with impacting the budgets, if you want to be involved with generating the numbers and the data, join the school board. um these votes are are just a way of handcuffing our own elected officials with artificial constraints that they're already they've already got a tough enough job. Uh that's it. >> Thank you very much, sir. Yes, sir. >> Hi, Michael Pelo, Westview Road. Uh similar sentiment, so I'll be short. Um this is this is an fancy wording, lots of research charts to go into it and but tax cap. Oh, tax cap is good. It's gonna save my my property taxes. This is a way to hamstring the
043elected school board. You want to play with it. You want to play in this game, run for the school board and get elected. You want to fix the funding. You want to fix our property taxes, talk to your representatives in conquered to follow the law of the of the New Hampshire Supreme Court and fund education properly. >> Yes, sir. Speak to me, please. Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> Ray Alligan 17 Burchill. A question for uh legal ease. Um if this is defeated at um all day voting, does the existing tax cap disappear or does it just so this replaces the existing tax cap >> or if it's defeated, the existing one remains? >> Yes. If this passes, it replaces the current tax cap. If it's defeated, the current tax cap stays in place. >>
044Okay. Um, is there a way to even determine a percentage that this would be? Are we going to have to do a whole bunch of math in the wording in this RSA? The only modifiable portion of it is the index and uh uh uh language. I I'm I'm curious with this existing language. Does anybody know what the percent would be? >> So it changes. >> Yeah. >> Year like for next year. >> For next year, Lance, we calculated that. What was that? >> I was on a sticky note. [laughter] >> Too tired to think about where that is. >> I believe this is the change in population. >> Sure. The population is relatively stable. I think there was a decrease of four or five um students and it was really I think it came down
045to the CPIU which was roughly uh 3 >> something% so >> 3.3% you say >> so this would this article in practice if you cut out all of the mumbo jumbo would you like to replace our 8% tax cap with a 3 point something% tax cap that's then going to adjust in the future Based off of all of that, >> I can I just comment one piece, one aspect that I was discussing with um the business administrator about this particular one this year. Our hands were tied uh when negotiations were occurring. We were negotiating two contracts. We were building a budget and we didn't know where the target point was uh because we're waiting for revenue estimates to come in. We were waiting for more additional information and we were wasting time while waiting for
046that information. and we couldn't really build the budget that we that we felt we needed until we had more information. So, if we were waiting for a CPIU index, um that would just where we we don't even know if it's 8% and I can estimate it's going to be about this much money, but it really could fluctuate. I I wouldn't know if I was cutting the budget or adding to the budget in any given year. So it really makes the job of the school board and um the business administrator and myself nearly impossible. >> Okay, that's good information. Um so my final question um my it's my understanding that Warren articles raise a topic. Is it possible to amend this since it raises the topic of tax caps? Two, should the Brooklyn School District eliminate
047the existing tax cap period >> in Bear with me one second. I'm just getting to the correct page, but I don't believe that you can because there is a prescribed wording to resend a tax cap in RSA 325 C Roman numeral 6. Since this raises the topic, can I amend this Warren article to that statutory language and resume the tax cap? >> I would be of the opinion that would not be permissible. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes, sir. Tom Solon, Shady Rock Road. Couple of questions. Um when it talks about Is is this talking about tax effort? Even though it doesn't use the word tax effort, is that really the the amount when it says the the amount to be raised by local taxes, is that what we call
048tax effort in our when we show charts? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. Um when when and how is that established? When when does the tax effort actually get locked in? >> Um, November when the DR puts out the final >> November before or after the budgeting and meetings and process. It happens after our meeting, right? So, how do you create a budget that has a cap on it that is ba that caps something that isn't known at the time you're making the budget? That's question one. And question two, I'm just curious which which population is this referring to? Is that just the uh average daily membership or is it town population or what population? >> Population is actually defined in RSA 325. B, Roman numeral one, one hyphen B, sub paragraph B, number four, as
049the annual population figures for the town or district calculated by the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, Office of Planning and Development Pursuant to RSA 78- A 25 Roman numeral 1. >> So it's the it's the town population, not the school population. Correct. >> Correct. Attendance is the average daily membership in residents. >> So it's not attendance, it's population. >> Correct. It's population in this article. Yes. >> Okay. And how is that factored into the calculation? >> It is it's part of the calculation. It would you would use this year's population divided by last year's population. >> It's a straight percentage >> part of it. >> Probation. >> Uh yeah. I mean I don't know the numbers but yes the calculation would be this year's population >> if you had 100 people in the in
050the town last year and 101 this year would be 1%. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um but I am really curious is how you implement the cap how you use it if the thing that you're trying to cap isn't known for almost a year later. I just don't know how that works. I don't understand how it works. It's not a year later. It's um the November. So, we knew about this information in November and then we had to amend um we couldn't make any commitments to negotiated items, but we had to take a look at sort of what was left available within the tax cap to amend the proposed operating budget. >> So, tax effort of the previous year. >> Yes. And and it's based on all estimates. So, it's not really um what we are
051held to because there's a lot of fluctuations with what we're estimating to be in terms of revenues and um aid >> and what are the repercussions of a improper estimate? >> It would depend on the amount of the like if the improper estimate ended up being ultimately over then it would depend on how much of the population approved the articles. There's an override provision, >> but would you have to have another would you have to have another meeting or something to so let's let's say that the estimate there's there's some change in revenue stream that wasn't anticipated and all of a sudden tax effort changes dramatically from what it was you what was used in November to build the budget so that the budget that gets approved in March now no longer conforms to the
052tax cap. Do you just live with it? There's a provision within the statute that essentially explains what happens if it is over the tax cap and it will depend on if there's a majority a three-fifths majority um that voted to approve the warrant articles or not. >> The budget the budget you mean? Yes. >> So if the budget, does the budget require a three-fifths to pass or only a simple majority? >> The budget itself requires a three-fifth uh sorry a simple majority. >> So if it passed by simple majority but not the three-fifths and then the ultimately the tax cap is being violated per the calculation once you have hard numbers then what >> then there's reductions in the budget to meet the through the department of revenue administration numbers to meet the tax. Thank
053you very much. Is there any further discussion on article 11? Yes, sir. >> Yep. >> Larry Clay, McDaniel's drive. Did I miss the the the the fact that there is an override mechanism in this? Is there an override mechanism in this? >> The override mechanism is in the statute. >> Thank you very much. Any further discussion on article 11? Seeing sir, are you walking to discuss article 11? He's petering out. I don't think so. Okay. Oh, yes. I knew there would be somebody. Ashmore. Uh 42 Oakill Road. Um first a question with the council, please. Uh the parenthetical this year's tax base. Just clarify that they would be working only with their portion of the property tax, the school districts. Not the entire property tax. >> Yes. >> Okay. Right. >> You said yes. >>
054That's how we do it. Yeah. That's >> good. Okay. >> Secondly, just for the voters, think about this. All right. It's complex and I agree with the superintendent. You know, this put a real hamstring on their timing for working out the budget. But more than that, um, if you think about the inflation index, a voter will probably be thinking to themselves, what do I expect in the near term, future years? What do I expect in the long term? Um, are we going to have high inflation like we've experienced recently or is that inflation going to come down and is our economy going to boost up? And the voters will think about that. All right. But I'm not sure I would like this because of the complexity of it and the timing for trying to work
055that out. And as a voter, I would look at this and I'd say, let's just stay with the % for now until we see what's going to happen in the next year or two. That's just my comment. >> Thank you very much, sir. Yes, sir. Article 11. >> Yes. Uh Terani, Westview Road. >> I'm rising with a question for council. Um would it be permissible to amend the language of the warrant article to adopt the provisions of RSA 325B? However, proposing that we instead of using this index use a new percentage rate. >> You can choose a different index or you can choose population versus attendance, but those are the choices that are limited in the form of this article. >> One moment, please. Thank you very much for the uh for the quick pause
056after conferring with council. um it is uh the subject is to adopt the tax cap with inflation rather than adopting the flat tax cap. So it you can choose uh only the things in the second version the tax cap and the multiplicative factor um rather than adopting a fixed dollar amount or a fixed percentage. Okay. >> Thank you very much. Any further discussion on article 11? Mr. Yes. I'd like to make a motion to amend population to attendance. That would probably be more appropriate. >> All right. There is uh is there a second to the gentleman's motion? Second to the gentleman's motion from uh Ruie. >> All right. He knows your last name. All right. Uh so the motion is to amend article 11 to change the word population to attendance. So uh and the
057change in attendance rather than a change in population. Is there discussion on the motion to amend? I see discussion about to happen. I know you have your card. I've seen it five times tonight. Ju only. No. >> Twice. Twice. Twice. Don't get me in trouble. >> Feels like five. Yeah. All right. >> This change, >> I suspect would make things much more volatile because the changes in population percentage-wise move a lot more than town population. Is that intuitively? Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Further discussion on the motion to amend article 11. Seeing no further discussion, let's put it to a vote. All those in favor uh or the motion to amend is to change the word population to the word attendance. And the last sentence, um all those in favor of the motion
058to amend, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, please raise your voting cards. The motion is defeated. The original language stays. Any further discussion on article 11? Seeing no further discussion on article 11, we will close and we will move on to article 12. >> Yes. >> Would you would you like to make a motion to adjurnn? >> Is there a second? Oh, yes. All right. So, motion to adjurnn, uh, non-debatable. All those in favor of adjourning the session, please raise your voting cards. All those opposed, please raise your voting cards. The motion passes. We are adjourned. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you for making my first time so special. I've appreciated spending all this time with you.