If you could control the size of your tax bill, would you take that opportunity?

Few people actually do, but all voters have the ability to both question and change the amount of money being spent by their local town and school officials through the budgeting process, Town Meetings and School District Meetings.

“To sit back and wait for your Dec. 1 tax bill, there’s a disconnect,” said Goffstown Town Administrator Sue Desruisseux.

“You vote in February and March, but you don’t see the impact until your second tax bill. People wonder why their taxes went up, and it’s because of their vote in March, or because they didn’t vote in March.”

Christine Fillmore, a staff attorney at the Local Government Center, said it’s critical for residents to voice their opinions.

“It’s always important for residents to get involved in the process,” said Fillmore. “In a Town Meeting town, the voters are the legislative body. They say what form the budget will take and who takes office. If they don’t participate, they’re not exercising their right to vote.”

Hopkinton Town Administrator and Bow Selectman Leon Kenison said officials feel the impact of resident decisions immediately.

“It gets to the bottom line real quick,” said Kenison.

“Whatever people do results in an appropriation approval that needs to be reconciled. That’s when people essentially determine what that next tax bill will be.”

The tax bill is determined by the Department of Revenue, which analyzes the budget that has been passed by each town, and also factors in common revenues raised through the town clerk/tax collector’s office.

“In the fall the Department of Revenue comes and looks at things,” said Kenison. “They sit down and say that the difference is (a certain amount), which needs to be raised by taxes. Then they leave town, and local officials disburse that cost.”

SB-2 vs. traditional meetings – does it matter?
Not every town operates in the same way.

Areas with traditional Town Meeting and School District Meeting formats are presented with a budget at the meeting, and often warrant articles as well. Voters can approach the microphone to voice their pleasure or displeasure with the topic, which may result in a change in the amount of money approved. The vote takes place at the meeting.

Under the official ballot law, commonly referred to as SB-2, residents attend a “deliberative session” to give input on the wording of articles, and then have a ballot vote several weeks later. Wording and dollar amounts can be changed, but the vote comes later, not at the meeting.

Under either form of government, only a tiny percentage of residents attend either the traditional meeting or the deliberative session. Often attendance at a deliberative session is even lower than that at a traditional meeting.

Cindy Chagnon, however, who has been on the Bedford School Board for 12 years, said she has been pleasantly surprised with how SB-2 has worked on the school side of the ballot.

“In the beginning, I was very cautious to how SB-2 would work,” said Chagnon. “Some people go to the trouble of getting informed, and I was afraid we’d have people voting who didn’t understand, and who could be swayed by bumpersticker kind of campaigns. That hasn’t worked out as I’ve feared. People in Bedford are very educated, hard-working voters. They seem to listen and try to get the facts on the decisions we have to make.”

Some people complain that voters may be uninformed when heading to the polls without attending the informational meeting.

Others argue traditional meetings only work for those who have time to attend. Such meetings can last from an hour to two days in some instances.

Epsom switched from Town Meeting to SB-2 format in 1995, led by the efforts of resident Les Cash, who jokes on his answering machine that due to the economy, he is being forced to live up to his name.

“I don’t like what I see at the regular Town Meetings,” said Cash. “I don’t like the intimidation that goes on at Town Meetings. I don’t think people have enough time to think things over between the discussion and the vote. You’re only talking a couple of minutes.”

On this year’s ballot, Epsom Selectman Joanne Randall is sponsoring a petitioned warrant article to rescind SB-2, although as a resident, not a town official.

“I would call our situation desperate,” she said. “I feel, as many people do, that SB-2 has put Epsom in the financial trouble we are currently facing, as it discourages people from understanding exactly what they are voting for. SB-2 has caused us to pass over town employees for normal cost-of-living raises for four years straight.”

Simply saying ‘no’ doesn’t necessarily save you money While many times SB-2 voters are voting no “just to vote no,” Desruisseaux said she has not seen that to be the case in Goffstown.

“I think we saw a substantial dropoff in participation at the deliberative session. There are much fewer people in attendance than at the traditional Town Meeting,” said Desruisseaux.

“We make an effort to inform the voters on what they’re voting on, and the impact of their vote. We let them know what the consequences are of their vote.” Voters should be aware that on occasion a proposed budget is lower than a default budget and saying no will result in higher taxes.

Pelham is another town voting under an SB-2 structure, and Town Administrator Tom Gaydos said residents have come to the voting booth informed.

“A lot of people thought by enacting SB-2 that people would just come out and vote no. We haven’t seen that,” said Gaydos. “We’ve seen people interested in a certain topic, they come out and support it. There’s a group of people who do vote no, but you do have other groups as well. I think you’re getting a bigger population to weigh in.”

Bedford Town Manager Russ Marcoux said the turnout at the annual meetings in Bedford, a Town Meeting town, hinge on one important factor.

“It’s like any other community. If the budget is fairly level and there’s nothing extraordinary, then there’s generally very little input,” said Marcoux, who said there are usually about 100 people at budgetary Town Meeting.

“I would imagine that there would be a bigger turnout this year because of the economy. In general, it’s just that if there is really a problem, then there’s people who show up.”

Kenison has seen first-hand the effect the annual Town Meeting can have on a town. Bow’s budget was cut significantly for two straight years.

“It’s a little frustrating, because what I think we witness as selectmen is a lack of understanding of the budget process,” he said. “There are always interest groups. For instance, a neighborhood may decide ‘we’re going to go and show them we’ll minimize the tax rate.’ They ask for a reduction, make their plea, convince their citizens and have at it.”

Although Marcoux said the turnout isn’t always huge at meetings, residents are still keeping a close eye on the budgetary process.

“It shows you that if 100 people show up at a meeting, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of interest,” said Marcoux. “That doesn’t mean that people aren’t interested, it just means that they have enough information and are happy with their level of service and their form of government.”

Bedford residents have an advantage of being kept informed through programs broadcast over Bedford Community Television, BCTV, which airs all town government and School Board meetings. In addition, the BCTV Web site, www.bctv.com, offers on-demand viewing, especially helpful to those who cannot attend meetings while they are out of town.

“BCTV has greatly expanded the public participation in meetings because people aren’t going to have time to attend all these meetings,” said Chagnon. “Anytime you sit and listen to the discussion on TV, if you hear both sides of the discussion, you have participated even if you weren’t there in person.”

Pelham’s Gaydos said the system is shaped properly, it’s just a matter of the way residents approach whatever type of vote their town holds.

“People say yes, we can afford it, or no, we can’t, and that’s how it should be,” said Gaydos. “It’s a matter of being informed.”