SB2 and Town Meeting

Since my property taxes have skyrocketed this year I've become a more involved citizen. I've been attending selectman meetings and budget committee meetings, and Hopkinton-Contoocook Taxpayer Assn meetings. I see SB2 as a win-win situation for all the taxpayers. Town Meeting and the School meeting can run on for hours and by the final vote, they've lost half the audience. It's not fair to the seniors, those with children, or those who just can't sit there on the bleachers hour after hour. I'd like to see the Town & School Meeting or the "Deliberative Sessions" as they will be called televised and available through our cable TV. Then the vote will take place 30 days thereafter; giving all of us a sufficient amount of time to study all the articles and make good decisions in the privacy of the ballot booth. It will also give those who cannot get to the polls the ability to have an absentee ballot and vote on every issue. Thank you, Joan Flood

I can vote for candidates to state and federal office, regardless of how informed others think I am on the issues, and despite the fact that I have never attended political rallies or watched all the debates. But I can't vote on local issues because I don't attend the deliberative session and therefore am not informed enough to vote? This is subjective and exclusionary and stinks of old-boy-network town politics. I am troubled that a selectman from my own town wants to bring back the oligarchy by promoting the repeal of SB2 under the auspices of restoring democracy.

I find that SB2 is an interesting concept designed to compromise the dilemma of continued falling participation in voting in towns and across the nation. Lack of participation is a conundrum to me because there certainly isn’t a lack of complaints about the government from all parties that make up a community. I have heard some strongly advanced statements by many people who didn’t vote.
It’s interesting that there was a recent Geico commercial where there lizard stated that it wasn’t very likely that someone would deny standing up in order to save money, saying “no thanks, I have enough money already”. Isn’t that what we are doing with our vote. People are actually saying, “no thanks, it isn’t worth the effort to get up one day a year and go vote for the policies, budgets, and people that are going to effect my community for the next year.
I understand that people lack the time to fully participate. I understand that it can be difficult to get and maintain the information necessary to make an informed decision. I know that some people feel intimidated, or don’t believe that there vote will matter, or that there vote will even be counted. But, I believe that a citizens vote isn’t a right that comes without responsibility, and that the benefits of being a citizen of the United States carries the responsibility of participation.
I have been focused on how to get people to vote, what privileges we could put in the balance to make it worth their while, as if freedom wasn’t enough.
SB2 seems to provide at least a partial positive solution to the problems facing voters. There is still a problem with who shows up at the deliberative sessions, because how are we to ensure that all of the perspectives are represented. There is discussion, there are points of view deliberated, all still have the right to present viewpoints, and a document to the effect of the outcome of the discussions sis disseminated to the voting public. Are there still issues? Yes. This release has to be unbiased, un-skewed, and must represent all available positions in an unbiased and thorough fashion. And, the information has to be delivered to ALL registered voters.
Our communities are getting larger and more diverse. Our individual concerns and exploits have become more divergent from each of our neighbors. Our minds must confront and deliberate information on a world-wide basis that moves us further from a community perspective. But this is the twenty-first century with all of its communications technology, and it is more a matter of making sure we make the effort to encourage our citizens to participate and give them the resources to do so. After that, those who participate should reap their rewards, and those that don’t participate have other things to be concerned about.
It’s a start, an effort, and god bless those that try.

It was a good show, but there were some incorrect impressions left by your guests, regarding the switch to SB2, and its effect on tax rates.

First, although only 57 towns (out of 200+) and 69 school districts that had town meeting switched to SB2 in the last ten years, those towns were the larger ones. Therefore half of the townspeople in the state that were formerly covered under town meeting, now are in an SB2 town.

Second 31 towns adopted SB2 in the first year, and 14 more adopted SB2 in the next two years. Three towns have rescinded SB2 in the last ten years. The pattern is even more 'front end loaded' for the school districts - 53 out of the 69 that now have SB2 adopted it in the first two years, and no school district has rescinded SB2.

So the comment made that SB2 is showing increasing interest is just not true. One or two towns per year have adopted SB2 in the last few years.

Third, I looked at the equalized 2006 town tax rates for the SB2 and town meeting towns, and there is little difference. In 2006 the SB2 towns have an average tax rate of $17.90, while the town meeting towns have an average tax rate of $16.57.

My guess is that the slightly higher tax rate for SB2 towns is due to the fact that they ARE larger towns, and have to provide more services. The 'no meeting' cities (Manchester, Concord, etc.) have an average tax rate of $21.22 in 2006, seems to back up that assumption.

Sincerely,

Dennis Delay
Deputy Director
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
One Eagle Square, Suite 510
Concord, New Hampshire 03301-4903
phone: (603) 226-2500
fax: (603) 226-3676
ddelay@nhpolicy.org