Limiting Spending: Local voters lead the way

As state and federal lawmakers pass record spending bills, New Hampshire voters are showing much more fiscal restraint at Town Meeting. Both the Union Leader and Nashua Telegraph note this year's streak of yankee frugality:

Union Leader:

There is no reason to think the voters would hold a different opinion when it comes to the state budget. The evidence suggests widespread disapproval of higher taxes and spending across the state. (City officials ought to take notice of this public mood as well.)
If legislators were listening at all on Tuesday, they couldn't mistake the message: No new spending; no new taxes. The only question is: Were they listening?

Nashua Telegraph:

The headlines in Wednesday's Telegraph said it all: "Kindergarten flunks / Hudson voters nix plan to fund program;" "Most articles rejected / Litchfield voters not in spending mood Tuesday;" "Modular classrooms voted down / (Milford) voters narrowly reject $1.7m bond for half-day kindergarten classes at Jacques;" "(Lyndeborough) voters reject adding kindergarten space."

Of course, when it comes to town spending, one taxpayer's loss is another taxpayer's gain. It all depends where one stands on the issue at hand.

The big losers Tuesday night were supporters of public kindergarten in Hudson, proponents of bonds to build public kindergarten space or to repair municipal roads, and town employees who were up for raises in new labor contracts.

The big winners? At least in the short term, taxpayers who didn't want these costly items to impact their next tax bill.

Town Meeting Day

As New Hampshire voters head the polls for our annual rite of democracy, the Union Leader editorial page urges fiscal restraint:

Last week he changed that plan. He now says federal stimulus money will pay for the increased education aid, and he'll let localities keep $120 million of the money he was going to take for the state. But that still leaves towns with less money than they normally would have received from the state this year.

That loss comes on top of whatever losses local governments already experience because of the recession.

The safest assumption for voters is that their towns have less money than local budgets project. Therefore, the safest bet is to cut spending.

A good plan for the future would be to set firm restraints on the growth of local government. Voters in 10 towns have the chance to request such restraints today. Warrant articles on the ballot in Allenstown, Conway, Hampstead, Hudson, Kingston, Plymouth, Rindge, Rumney, Salem and Strafford urge town officials to limit the growth of spending.