Greenfield resident Jarvis Adams described the proposed school tax cap on the Nov. 3 ballot as a two-year experiment.
“This is not the end of the world,” he told the Contoocook Valley School Board at a public informational hearing about the tax cap on Monday. The ballot measure, if it passes, would restrain school spending.
Adams, a Republican candidate for state representative, said Greenfield traditionally votes down its school budget and that the tax cap vote could send another message to the board about the district’s costs.
“What are we getting for the money we’re spending?” he asked.
On Election Day, voters from the nine towns in the ConVal district will decide whether to approve a local property tax cap that will not exceed the prior year’s levy and a six-percent cap on administrative spending for two years. While supporters view the measure as a necessary check on rising property taxes, the ConVal school board unanimously opposed the cap, warning it will require classroom cuts, undermine local control and fail to address the root causes of rising property taxes.
“One of the big problems that I have with this cap is that it does nothing to really solve for the reasons why property taxes are rising,” board member Curtis Hamilton said. “That is revenue loss and costs, pieces of our budget going up much faster than inflation.”
For the ConVal district, the board focused on the local property tax cap. If the ballot question passes, the six-percent administrative cap would not apply because the ConVal SAU accounts for 4.74% of the budget.
Hamilton said property taxes are up because of reduced contributions from the state to the district, which requires local taxes to make up the difference.
From 2015 to 2025, ConVal’s expenditures have increased by 35.6%, closely in line with inflation, which rose 32.7%. Over the same period, revenue from the state fell by 4.6%, while total local contributions rose by 59.2%.
The district will also lose approximately $302,861 in state grants when a phase-out hits again in the same year the proposed cap would be introduced, fiscal year 2028.
An additional influence is the increase in districts’ costs, including special education, health insurance, transportation, heating oil and utilities and building materials for repairs.
If voters pass the tax cap, school officials said state law prevents them from cutting required special education services, existing contracts, transportation or health insurance, which would leave staff, classes and extracurriculars on the chopping block.
Superintendent Ann Forrest said the wording in question two is misleading because it states the cap will not affect “classroom instruction” and “school-based services.”
“There is no way for us to completely isolate administrative caps from the experiences and opportunities we offer our students,” she said.
Hamilton said the cap would greatly affect budgeting practices by limiting the ability to commit to multi-year contracts for transportation, technology or teachers due to the cap’s unpredictability.
“It is very difficult to negotiate a multi-year agreement when you don’t know what you’re legally going to be allowed to raise in a coming year,” he said.
The tax cap needs at least 60% of votes in support across the school district to pass.