from the Union Leader…
MANCHESTER – In the wake of a vote by Manchester aldermen to deny a proposed tax-cap amendment a place on the November general-election ballot, cap supporters say they will seek an injunction in Hillsborough County North Superior Court tomorrow morning to force the issue onto the ballot.
But the New Hampshire Coalition, the organization promoting the tax-cap proposal, isn’t stopping there.
According to Mike Biundo, chairman of the coalition, a similar suit will be filed in Merrimack County Superior Court to force the issue onto the ballot in Concord, as well.
Meanwhile, the Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen is scheduled to meet tomorrow at 5 p.m. to set a date for a special election to vote on the issue.
That meeting might not have been necessary if cap supporters hadn’t picketed in front of the home of one alderman. Last week a group of people holding signs stood outside the home of Ward 10 Alderman George Smith, urging him to support putting the tax-cap amendment on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Smith was out of town, but his son drove by the home, saw the picketers and called his father, as did several of his neighbors, Smith said.
Before that, Smith said, he was considering a vote to put the issue on the ballot, but “when they picketed my home, that was it.”
If Smith had changed his vote, what turned out to be an 8-6 majority instead would have been a 7-7 tie, with amendment supporter Mayor Frank Guinta given the opportunity to cast the deciding ballot.
Instead, Smith remained opposed to voting in November, and the issue died at the end of Friday night’s special Board of Mayor and Aldermen meeting.
The board had to act Friday to meet the deadline in state law to place the tax cap on the general-election ballot.
At the meeting Friday afternoon and evening, Guinta repeatedly urged “just one member” among the eight Democratic aldermen to change his or her mind and “do the right thing,” but the aldermen stuck to their positions.
“I certainly wish that picketing had not taken place,” Guinta said yesterday.
But, he added, the issue really comes down to the requirements of the state statute. “Every aldermen has a responsibility to his oath and, in this case, to follow the law, and that was not done by the eight aldermen, in my opinion,” Guinta said.
Biundo acknowledged that a group of Manchester residents stood on Smith’s street and held signs, but called Smith’s citing of the picketers as an influence on his vote a “red herring.”
“He could have decided to go with the 4,036 voters who signed the petition,” Biundo said of Smith. “But because a few people upset by his original vote made phone calls and stood outside his house … that’s nothing but a red herring and an excuse in my opinion.”
Biundo said six Manchester residents will file an injunction against the city tomorrow morning. He said supporters of the tax cap will ask for an expedited hearing before the court.
“I do think the court will see it our way. We believe we have a very good case,” Biundo said.
Aldermen had two opportunities to act in the seven-day window after the public hearing, Biundo said, “and the only reason they did not make a decision was for political purposes.”
Opposing the November vote were: Mike Lopez, Bill Shea, Betsi DeVries, Smith, Russ Ouellette, Mark Roy, Jim Roy and Dan O’Neil.
Favoring the November vote were: Mike Garrity, Kelleigh Domaingue, Ted Gatsas, Peter Sullivan, Ed Osborne and Real Pinard.
The cap would limit city spending to inflation plus growth with a two-thirds majority to override. The cap would not go into effect until 2011.
More than 80 comments on the board’s action were posted on UnionLeader.com yesterday, a vast majority chastising the eight aldermen for subverting the will of voters and calling the board’s action an embarrassment.
A number of people suggested a recall election.
“Since we now have to have a special election, how about having a recall election at the same time?” wrote Jeff Comeau of Manchester.
Not everyone was upset with the board’s decision.
“Don’t tie (the cap proposal) to the presidential election because the focus of the ballot is not on the issue. This issue is too important to ride side car to the presidential election,” wrote James Colby of Ward 2 Manchester.
Board chairman Lopez said yesterday, “As a board, most of the people would put (the tax cap) on the November (2009) election when more people come out.”
But, he noted, there is some question as to whether the board can do that because the date is outside the 365-day guideline in the state statute. Lopez said the board will wait for the city solicitor’s guidance tomorrow.
Gatsas, who supported putting the issue on this November’s ballot, said that did not happen so he supports a special election next November during the city’s general election.
If there are no primary contests in September 2009 for city offices, he said, there won’t be an election.
“We ought to do what’s right for all of the people and put the question on the November ballot. If that means holding another public hearing as aldermen, we should do that and then vote to put the (issue) on the November ballot,” Gatsas said.
Guinta said that while his first choice is the upcoming general election ballot, next November would be his second choice.
###
Note: The tax cap must be placed on the ballot by law.