RSA 31-A, commonly known as revenue sharing, ceased to exist in New Hampshire law on July 1, when House Bill 2, the budget trailer bill signed by the governor, took effect.
In 1969, reform in how the state taxed businesses led to the implementation of the Business Profits Tax, which eliminated many antiquated taxes more reflective of the agricultural economy of the past. These taxes, however, were assessed and collected by municipalities and were part of the property tax base for cities, towns, school districts and counties.
Revenue sharing was intended to help replace that lost local income. When RSA 31-A was enacted in 1970, then New Hampshire Attorney General Warren Rudman addressed concerns that future legislatures may choose not to honor this commitment.
“It seems quite doubtful to me that once this bill is passed that any legislator would go back on its pledge to return revenue to cities and towns that originally belonged to those cities and towns,” he stated, without irony. “And I might also add, in passing, that I could hardly see a governor signing a bill which would deprive cities and towns of the revenue which they once had.”
Despite assurances, the amount initially promised was modified the following year, with further reductions in subsequent years. This is not to say RSA 31-A wasn’t an important source of local funding for decades. However, initially motivated by the impacts of the Great Recession, revenue sharing was suspended in 2010 — and in every state budget thereafter — resulting in an annual loss of $25 million for municipalities and counties, a total of $400 million from 2010 to 2025. It’s worth noting again that this wasn’t a handout from the state — this was a replacement for revenue cities and towns once collected before their property tax base was reduced by law.
The story of a 55-year-old statute that never fully lived up to its promise is a sobering reminder that when we think of “State Law,” we must always remember that it is an impermanent thing, subject to the whims of those in office.
It’s also a cautionary tale.
A much older, more important law is currently the subject of a statutory commission charged with issuing a report in 2026. The open-ended charge given of the Commission to Study the Historical Evolution of New Hampshire’s Zoning Enabling Act is to “study the … Act as it turns 100 this year” and “consider and make recommendations for future legislation on the balance of zoning powers between the state and municipalities.”
With dozens of bills regarding planning, zoning and land use debated in 2025, the New Hampshire Municipal Association is concerned that this commission could serve as a convenient vehicle to provide cover for attempts to impose statewide central planning mandates on our diverse towns and cities. NHMA’s primary concern is the loss of local voter input — as voters approve or reject zoning in most municipalities.
Changes to the state’s zoning and land use laws have profound and long-lasting impacts on our municipalities and residents, affecting the quality of life in cities and towns for generations to come. As Sen. Debra Altschiller noted this spring, “Once you throw a blanket zoning ordinance on the entire state, if it doesn’t work out for one particular town it’s impossible for that town to get exceptions or to be relieved of that.”
The ship sailed on revenue sharing years ago, and its ultimate demise was only a matter of time. However, an informed, active electorate still has the chance to make the case for local decision-making when it comes to land use regulation, whether by following this commission (whose meeting are not livestreamed or recorded), testifying at House and Senate committee hearings next year, or simply speaking with your local legislators.
This won’t be the last time you hear this, but local voices matter. Use yours.
Margaret ML Byrnes is the Executive Director of the New Hampshire Municipal Association. She lives in Bow.