Chapter 3 Before You Vote March 11th

Chapter 3: Finale

If you were unable to attend the Town and School District Deliberative Sessions, allow me to fill you in before we move on to the Citizen Petition quoted below. On February 3 at the Town Deliberative Session (DS), where articles can be amended, one voter rose to zero out an article basically eviscerating that article. Another attendee rose and pleaded for reconsideration in the name of democracy. The mature voters were moved by the argument and the motion was withdrawn. That unamended article will come before the voters allowing their voices to be heard on March 11th.

The next evening, at the School District Deliberative Session, the very same person who had touted “democracy” the evening before, along with others, chose to eviscerate Article 06: the Citizen Petition asking voters if there was an interest in considering a school district tax cap in accordance with RSA 32:5-b. Fifty-one registered voters within a 10-day period had signed the citizen petition showing interest in the idea going on the March 11th ballot.

The impetus for the citizen petitioners’ tax cap article is based on the perpetual millions of dollars in budget increases year after year, the hiring of 80 more employees since March 2024, and a decline of 612 students from 2018 to 2026. As shared in Chapter 2 Patch article, BSD has 836 employees of which there are about 300 classroom teachers.

It was obvious that there was an orchestrated effort by several opponents to ignore the ideals of democracy in an attempt to remove the voters’ right to have a say on spending caps on March 11th. The school moderator restricted the citizen petitioners’ spokesperson to a 5-minute presentation preventing thorough explanation of the law and its rationale for Bedford voters’ consideration. Several attendees including a BSB member said they were offended that a tax cap article was even brought forward. A couple of vocal opponents of the petition voiced the opinion that those distressed by increasing tax burdens should consider moving on. “Maybe Bedford isn’t for you anymore.” The 51 signers of the petition represented all Bedford demographics including many young families with school-age children.

What was the end result of the attendees’ vote? Overwhelmingly, the attendees voted to amend the article by inserting 20% tax cap language basically eliminating the true intention of reasonable spending practices. That was not good enough though. A repeat vocal opponent came to the mic and made a motion to increase the tax cap to 50%. That is what you will see on the March 11th ballot.

As the spokesperson for the 51 residents, witnessing the voiced hostility toward those who support our schools and teachers but are asking for more sustainable financial stewardship, was such a disappointment. It is suspected that the majority of opponents in attendance were those who were there to protect Article 2: Full Day Kindergarten and Article 3: the 3-year, 16.9% teachers wage increase. No amendments were made on these articles. Our teachers have an excellent work environment. When you divide our 3985 students by our 300 teachers, it is about 14 students per teacher. That’s just a way to see that both the teachers and the students have a favorable academic environment.

Here is the intact Article 06: RSA 32:5-b followed by the amended article.

Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 32:5-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 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 the Boston-Cambridge-Newton MA-NH area published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and the change in attendance, in accordance with RSA 32:5-b I-b? (⅗ ballot vote required)

Deliberative Session amendment:

Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 32:5-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, based on the prior fiscal year’s actual amount of local taxes raised, by more than fifty (50) percent? (The School Board recommends a no vote upon this question.) (3/5 ballot vote required.)

Please vote March 11th or by absentee ballot.

Linda Rea Camarota