LIBERTY: 1. the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
2. the power or scope to act as one pleases.
With town meetings and local elections on the horizon, there have been some school districts who have shown a “thumbs down” to putting spending caps on public school spending during their respective town’s public sessions.
The Republican majority, who wants control of public school spending, has introduced HB 675. Sponsored by Liberty Alliance and Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) members, Rep. Joe Sweeney, R-Salem and Rep. Jason Osborne, R-Auburn, (who is also a Free Stater), this bill “changes the formula for determining statewide adequacy aid, ties education funding increases to the Consumer Price Index, requires municipalities to remit excess education tax revenue back to the state, establishes a tax cap for local school districts, and increases the total revenue raised under the statewide education property tax.” (emphasis added)
The bill also raises per student spending from $4,100 to $7,356, which would come from property taxes.
Where is the state’s share of funding in all of this?
Fellow Liberty Alliance member Rep. Keith Erf, R-Weare, put forth an amendment proposal eliminating increased aid from the state while retaining the spending cap. Voters could override that cap, but would need a two-thirds vote to do so, and for some towns, practically impossible to do. In Oct., a new law went into effect giving towns the choice to cap how much districts spend for each student, as opposed to voting on the district budget as a whole. Voters have mostly rejected that choice, choosing to leave budget writing to local officials. Voters have also stated the solution should be more state support.
Erf has removed his proposal.
In Epsom, the school district increased a $25,000 per student spending cap proposed by Liberty Alliance member Rep. Dan McGuire. The district raised the cap to $100,000 knowing it will be voted down at town meeting. Naturally, McGuire supports HB 675, stating, “We need some controls on spending and this would give us that.”
Osborne, the other sponsor of the bill had this to say, “Perhaps, if [local voters] are unwilling to cap themselves, the state will step in and cap local taxes for them.”
Let’s say that again, “. . .the state will step in and cap local taxes for them.”
What happened to local control? What happened to: 1. the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
Sounds like the “Liberty” loving Republicans in the House, who carelessly throw that word around, are looking to take “Liberty” away from those who don’t agree with them. Hence: 2. the power or scope to act as one pleases.
This is NOT a “police state,” Jason. Nor do we, the people, want it to become one!