Vanessa Saunders: Laconia already has a tax cap. What would another do?

To The Daily Sun,

This November, Laconia voters will be asked whether to approve another tax cap, although Laconia already has one.

Since 2005, the city charter has limited increases in net spending for city, school and county budgets, with adjustments for inflation and new construction. HB 1300 proposes something different: a cap on growth in the local school property-tax levy, plus a 6% limit on SAU central-office spending.

Would it change anything here? Possibly. Possibly not.

The law does not replace Laconia’s cap. It requires every applicable limitation to be satisfied and preserves any more restrictive provision. One cap might be redundant one year and controlling in another.

As of this writing, the Department of Revenue Administration has published its legislative analysis, but not implementation guidance. Local officials are being asked to explain overlapping formulas before the state has finished explaining how it will administer them.

These calculations do not exist in a vacuum. Changes in state education funding or new state mandates could alter local costs without altering the cap. Voters deserve to know what happens then.

This matters particularly to homeowners on fixed incomes. A house can appreciate considerably, but appreciation does not pay a tax bill. Yet HB 1300 would not freeze an individual bill. Revaluations could still change a homeowner’s share, while other property taxes remain outside this cap.

Before November, Laconia officials and DRA should compare both formulas using local figures. What would each have permitted recently? What happens if state funding falls or mandated costs rise? When would an override be necessary?

This is not about choosing between schools and taxpayers. Sensible people care about both.

Vote yes or no, but first insist upon the local mathematics.

Vanessa Saunders

Laconia