This story was originally produced by the Valley News. NHPR is republishing it in partnership with the Granite State News Collaborative.
If Claremont voters approve the school budget cap question on the March 10 ballot, it could be challenged by the school district.
The petition article asks voters to implement a budget cap by requiring the School Board to submit a budget (for 2027-28) that is not higher than the 2025-26 per pupil cost times the average daily enrollment plus the annual inflation increase for the Boston region.
The SAU 6 administration said based on this year’s budget, the cap could mean up to $9 million in cuts for the budget year beginning July 1, 2027.
The petitioned article in its current form does not conform to the relevant state law because the law requires a budget cap to be set at a dollar amount, the district’s attorney, James O’Shaughnessy with the firm Drummond and Woodsum wrote in a memo School Board Chairwoman Heather Whitney read aloud at last Wednesday’s public hearing.
“The current wording on the petitioned article does not contain an amount that is known and therefore voters do not know what they are voting for or against,” O’Shaughnessy said. “If it passes, I will likely advise the board that it is unenforceable.”
He argued that the fiscal year reference included in the petitioned article is not allowed under state law. He went on to say that there is no single definition of the cost per pupil by the Department of Education and the cost per pupil in Claremont for the current fiscal year ending June 30 is a “guess” and won’t likely be known until the summer.
Tom Luther, one of the residents behind the article, disagreed with O’Shaughnessy’s interpretation of the law on budget caps.
“This is perfectly legal and is covered by state law,” Luther said after the hearing where the only ones who spoke were opposed to the budget cap article. “We had no choice because of the way the law is written we had to use this year’s (per pupil) numbers.”
Luther said because of the district’s financial crisis — including a $5 million deficit — there was no reliable figure.
“We can’t go back to last year because we don’t know what happened,” Luther said, referring to financial mismanagement under previous business administrators.
During the public hearing, several people urged the administration to be more public about the potential spending cuts under the budget cap.
Leslie Peabody, a science teacher at Stevens High School, said the administration and School Board need to do their part to educate the public on what she said would be “detrimental consequences” if the budget cap, which needs a 60% approval, passes.
“So many don’t know what this means,” Peabody said. “This is going to be so bad if it passes.”
Resident Ken Lownie was critical of the petitioners, accusing them of purposely obfuscating the impact of the budget cap.
“It is not a 3% cap, it is a 20% budget cut,” Lownie said, referring to the estimated $9 million that would have to be slashed from the budget when it is proposed for the 2027-28 fiscal year, according to interim Business Administrator Matt Angell.
Officials have cut the current year’s budget from $43 million to around $36 million in order to address a $5 million deficit discovered last August, Angell said.
Angell also said Wednesday that closing the district’s two elementary schools, providing bus transportation only up to the eighth grade and closing the Dow Building where the SAU offices are located are likely scenarios.
“No sports, no tech center. People don’t know that,” Lownie said. “It was written on purpose to mislead.”
Lownie said residents are the ones, not the School Board, who have to take the lead and get their message out to vote down the budget cap. Several people opposed to the cap at the hearing wore buttons stating SOS (Save Our Schools). Interim Superintendent Kerry Kennedy said the administration would put on the SAU website what it sees as the ramifications of the budget cap.
Luther said he believes petitioning for a budget cap encouraged the board to present a “responsible budget” for the voters on March 10. The $42.9 million budget represents a $200,000 decrease from the current year and is projected to cut the school tax rate by 18 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation.
“If nothing else happens and we get an honest budget, it will be the first honest budget we have had this century,” Luther said.
