Wilton-Lyndeborough Cooperative School District warns the new law mandating residents vote on a district tax cap in November could force drastic cuts.
Signed by Gov. Kelly Ayotte in July, House Bill 1300 requires ballots on Nov. 3 to have a standardized question asking whether or not to enforce a tax cap on district spending. This includes a limit on property tax growth for school districts, calculated using the prior year’s numbers with adjustments for inflation and new construction, as well as a 6% limit on School Administration Unit (SAU) spending of total district appropriations, excluding bonded capital costs.
The goal of the law is to provide some stability for taxpayers as property taxes continue to rise in the state and limit spending by school administrators. Opponents of the law argue that the aim to give voters a voice in the school budget actually restricts local control, and that applying the limit to all districts in the state does not address the cost or funding issues for public schools.
To pass, the tax cap will need a three-fifths majority among all voters in the district. The law also requires that the question return to the ballot in November 2028.
Before this law passed, citizens had the option to propose their own tax caps at district meetings.
The WLC School Administration presented its understanding of the local impacts to the school board on Tuesday.
While the administrative team explained there’s a lot still unknown about the law, Peter Weaver, superintendent, advocated continuing collaboration between the school board, budget committee, and administration.
“We can’t allow a law that we have no control over to fracture the progress that we’ve made as a school district,” Peter Weaver said.
Kristie LaPlante, the district’s business administrator, explained that property tax calculations are based on estimated figures from the 2026 Property Tax Bill. She stressed that the tax cap is based on the recent tax bill (tax levy), not the prior year’s approved appropriations, which subtracts estimated fiscal-year revenues, unspent budget, the state education tax, and the adequacy grant.
If the cap passes, the district would have to watch anticipated increases in the budget closely when deciding what to cut, including retirement costs, electricity and fuel, transportation, special education, salaries, maintenance, technology and health insurance.
Weaver shared that last year the budget planned for a 15% increase in health insurance, preparing for the worst, but in reality the increase came close to 35%.
LaPlante pointed out if the cap passes in November and the cost does exceed the cap, the only way to override it is with 66% support at the district meeting in March.
Without an override, the district will have to consider delaying purchases, reducing staffing, increasing class sizes, postponing maintenance, reducing programs, limiting new initiatives, deferring curriculum adoption, and possibly closing Lyndeborough Central School.
Weaver and LaPlante both said the administration has worked hard to keep the budget tight as a small district, but this tax cap could affect their ability to provide quality education.
“Every dollar goes to someone with a face because we’re a small district,” LaPlante said.
As for administrative costs, Weaver explained the 6% applies to all districts in the Granite State, including smaller districts like WLC and larger ones like Manchester. No matter the size, Weaver stressed the district needs a superintendent and business administrator.
The school board shared their concerns about planning for the 2027-2028 fiscal year budget, not knowing whether the voters would support the tax caps.
The administrative team said they haven’t fully decided how to address this issue and plan to work closely with the budget committee.
Prompted by the school board, Weaver questioned aloud whether to plan for the budget as if the tax cap is in place, “or do we move forward with the budget that you need for our students and our school district and then start reducing it?”
Either way, Weaver assured the board that the administration always plans for the worst-case scenario.
Weaver and LaPlante plan to attend a workshop led by a law firm for school administrators in New Hampshire and provide more information to the school board at the next meeting.
When the discussion turned to the school board, Brianne Lavallee, vice-chair, said, “Not one of the benefits that is listed tonight, or from people that I’ve talked to, will improve education in this state, which is our goal. Our goal is to educate our students and to do it well.”
Lavallee called the proposed purpose of the legislation to save taxpayer money “ironic” as it required the administration team to dedicate 10-15 hours a week since July to figure out the law and how to present it to the board.
“If they were really concerned, they would do something about our rising health care costs,” Lavallee said.
Multiple members of the board also shared concerns about the state’s restrictions on local control, noting that residents could present tax caps of their own accord under the previous law, but this legislation sets a 6% limit for all school districts in the state.
“This is very concerning because it is taking away our local control. Town meetings in the state of New Hampshire are a centuries-old tradition that allows the people in our small towns to have control over our tax dollars,” Lavallee said.
The board plans to continue this discussion at the next meeting on Aug. 25 and host public hearings to inform the community of the new question on the ballot.