THE SOAPBOX

Stand up. Speak up. It’s your turn.

For years, New Hampshire conservatives and libertarians have wrapped themselves in the language of “local control.” They warn against government overreach, defend the authority of local communities, and condemn top-down mandates from Washington.

But perhaps the greatest assault on local control in modern New Hampshire history is not coming from Washington at all.

It is coming from Concord.

Over the last several legislative sessions, the Republican/Libertarian majority has passed — or attempted to pass — wave after wave of legislation overriding local zoning ordinances, weakening municipal authority, and shifting more financial burdens onto local taxpayers.

The irony is hard to miss.

The same lawmakers who condemn centralized government are increasingly centralizing power at the state level whenever local decisions conflict with their ideology.

The latest example is House Bill 1681, legislation establishing statewide standards for tiny houses, tiny houses on wheels, and yurts. The bill would allow these structures to be used as single-family homes or accessory dwelling units in residential zones throughout New Hampshire.

Supporters argue the bill addresses the housing crisis. But the larger issue is what it represents: another state mandate overriding decades of local planning and zoning work performed by towns and cities across New Hampshire.

Communities spend years developing master plans through public hearings, infrastructure studies, environmental reviews, and citizen input. Local zoning reflects decisions about traffic, density, water and sewer capacity, emergency services, school impacts, and neighborhood character.

HB 1681 is not an isolated proposal. It joins a growing list of state efforts limiting municipal parking requirements, forcing broader accessory dwelling unit allowances, expanding developers’ ability to challenge local decisions, and requiring denser housing development in areas local officials may not believe can support it.

One does not have to oppose housing development to recognize what is happening.

This is state preemption.

This is Concord telling local communities that their decisions matter less than the ideological preferences of legislators far removed from the consequences.

And while the state increasingly dictates what municipalities must allow, lawmakers often leave local officials to manage the fallout.

HB 1681, for example, failed to establish clear taxation standards for many of these structures, almost guaranteeing inconsistent assessments, disputes between municipalities, and likely litigation.

The same contradiction appears in education funding.

For years, the Republican/Libertarian majority has attempted to impose statewide school budget caps and other restrictions that weaken traditional local governance over education spending. This year, lawmakers advanced legislation placing school budget cap questions on general election ballots rather than traditional school district ballots.

That matters because local school meetings and municipal elections are designed for voters directly engaged in their communities and schools. Moving these decisions onto high-turnout general election ballots fundamentally changes the process and weakens informed local participation.

Again, the message from Concord is unmistakable: local control is acceptable only when local communities make decisions the majority agrees with.

At the same time, the state continues to underfund its constitutional obligation to provide an adequate education. Court decisions repeatedly have found New Hampshire’s education funding system unconstitutional, yet the state still pays only a fraction of the actual cost of public education.

The result is predictable: rising local property taxes.

Meanwhile, the state has reduced business tax rates, cut the rooms and meals tax, and eliminated the interest and dividends tax — changes that overwhelmingly benefit wealthier taxpayers while costing the state more than a billion dollars in potential revenue over the last decade.

That lost revenue did not eliminate public needs. It simply shifted more costs downward onto municipalities, school districts, and local property taxpayers.

Then local officials are blamed for the consequences.

If property taxes continue to rise, voters should understand why. It is not simply because school boards, select boards, city aldermen, or planning boards have suddenly become irresponsible. It is because the state has increasingly shifted responsibilities downward while simultaneously stripping away the authority communities once had to manage growth and budgets responsibly.

New Hampshire cannot continue claiming to value local control while systematically dismantling it whenever it becomes politically inconvenient.

That is not local control.

That is centralized ideology imposed from above.

NH State Rep. David Preece represents Manchester in the New Hampshire House of Representatives and is a longtime urban and regional planner who previously served as executive director of the Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission.

Beg to differ? Agree to disagree? Comment below using our DISQUS app. Got issues of your own? Submit to The Soapbox using our DIY feature here.