Concord city councilors voted last night not to place a proposed tax cap on the November ballot. Instead, councilors decided to postpone action on the matter until officials in the attorney general's office, the secretary of state's office and the Department of Revenue Administration decide whether the language in the proposed tax cap conforms with state law.

The council's decision means that, if those state officials deem the language valid, the city would have to hold a special election on the proposed tax cap.

"I'm very interested in pushing this thing out as far as we can - in the end, it's probably money very well spent given the implications for our community," said Ward 10 Councilor Fred Keach, referring to the cost of holding a special election. Holding a special election would likely cost about $20,000, according to city officials.

The New Hampshire Advantage Coalition - the group promoting tax caps in several New Hampshire municipalities - plans today to file an injunction against the council decision, said Tammy Simmons, the group's executive director.

By law, Simmons said, the council has just seven days to act on the matter. State officials, meanwhile, have far longer than seven days - they have until late September - to decide whether the proposed language is constitutional. As a result, by voting to postpone action until state officials make a decision, the council flouted state law, Simmons said.

The proposed cap - which would change the city charter - would keep Concord officials from increasing the amount raised by property taxes each year for the city by no more than the rate of change in the Consumer Price Index. The exception to that financial constraint would be if city councilors decided to override the tax cap.

The cap wouldn't apply to the school or county portions of Concord residents' tax rates. The city portion makes up about one-third of the total local property tax rate.

Not all councilors supported the decision to put off action on the tax cap following last night's public hearing on the proposal. Several councilors - including Mayor Jim Bouley - advocated that the council order the tax cap proposal be placed on the November ballot, rather than spend $20,000 for a special election.

"I'm really torn; I think it is terribly important that we have as much time as possible to have a healthy debate on this," Bouley said. But, he said, "I'm terribly concerned about where we'd get the money for a special election."

Any action councilors took was dependent upon state officials deciding whether the language in the proposed tax cap conforms with state law. If state officials deem the language unconstitutional, the matter wouldn't go before voters.

Last night's public hearing drew impassioned supporters and detractors of the proposed tax cap, with proponents arguing that the issue should go before voters in November and opponents saying that voters should have more time to study the issue.

Many councilors raised questions about the state law governing ballot petitions, and not all of the answers were clear last night.

The law states that within seven days of holding a public hearing on a proposed charter amendment, municipal officers shall order that the amendment go on the ballot for the next municipal election. But in Concord's case, there won't be a municipal election within the necessary timeframe, as outlined in the law. As a result, officers are ordered to place the proposal on the ballot for the next state election, which is coming up in November.

Under the law, however, yesterday was the last day for councilors to act in order to get the proposal onto November's ballot. So by postponing any action, they essentially decided to have a special election on the matter.

At last night's hearing, tax cap supporters said that the proposal would assure voters about city spending.

Single page