From the Concord Monitor…
If the Concord City Council does not reverse its decision to keep a proposed tax cap off the November ballot, the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition will file an injunction Friday, group leaders said yesterday.
“We feel (the statute) is pretty clear that… the city council in Concord has to order it to go onto the November ballot,” said Mike Biundo, chairman of the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition.
Originally, coalition members had planned to seek an injunction yesterday, one day after the council postponed action on the tax cap. The council decided Thursday to wait until the attorney general’s office, the secretary of state’s office and the Department of Revenue Administration reviewed the tax cap’s language and determined whether it conforms to state law.
But coalition attorney Rick Lehmann said that, by law, the council has seven days after the hearing to put the measure on the ballot. If the council does not reverse itself in that time, Lehmann said, “we’ll be in court Friday morning.” An injunction could ask the courts to force the council to put the measure on the November ballot.
If passed, the tax cap would limit the council’s ability to raise the property tax rate by more than the rate of the change in the Consumer Price Index, the national measure of inflation.
Because Thursday was the last day for the council to act to put the issue on the November ballot, deferring a decision means requiring a special election, which could cost city taxpayers $20,000.
Lehmann called it “outrageous” that councilors are considering a special election. “I can’t imagine why they would pay money to have a decision made by less voters,” he said.
Biundo said the delay is also unfair to the 1,200 taxpayers who signed the petition with the intent that it go on the general election ballot. “When the petitioners’ committee and volunteers were out collecting petitions, everyone was talking about putting it on the November ballot,” Biundo said.
Biundo called the decision to wait for a verdict on language “nothing more than a stall tactic.” He said the language is similar to that approved in Rochester and other cities. Additionally, he said, the council should have raised its questions in May, when the petition was submitted. “They had four months to get answers to all their questions,” Biundo said. “To wait until the last minute at a public hearing is nothing more than politics.”
Mayor Jim Bouley voted against the delay but said he does not believe the councilors who voted for it were trying to stall. “They were truly interested in . . . having the best possible discussion we can have in this community,” Bouley said. “No one on the council doesn’t want to follow the statute.”
Bouley said that although he and many other councilors disagree with the measure, “I don’t think anyone there was saying not to have a vote. It was simply when to put it on the ballot.”
Bouley said city officials need to consult with the city solicitor to determine the next step. If the measure goes to a special election, Bouley said he is not sure where the $20,000 for the vote would come from.