Once a year, on a specific Saturday when the winter weather starts to thaw and the sap in the maple trees begins to rise, the residents of this small town in central New Hampshire gather at the only public school for the annual school district meeting. This meeting is unique to the New England region and allows the citizens to discuss and decide on various education-related matters that affect the town’s youngest residents. Should they invest in a new school? Should teachers’ salaries be increased? These questions, along with others, are all open for discussion and deliberation during this meeting.
In this town, where public services are limited, the school district meeting holds significant importance as it determines a large portion of the property-tax rate. In fact, according to R. Andrew Robertson, the chair of the town council, the decisions made at the school meeting can account for up to three-quarters of the property-tax rate. While Deerfield has a long history of holding regular school meetings, this year’s meeting was particularly historic. It marked the last traditional-style school meeting for the town, signaling a major change in the local education system.
Under a law passed in 1997 known as Senate Bill 2, towns have the option to split their public-voting meetings into two separate events: a hearing where citizens can discuss the issues and decide which ones will be put to a vote, and a separate session where voters can come in throughout the day to cast their ballots. By a small margin, the residents of Deerfield voted in favor of embracing this new system, leaving behind the old-fashioned town meeting. Unless the town decides otherwise in the future, this signifies the end of an era for this New England town.
The day of the final traditional school meeting arrives with perfect "sugaring" weather, characterized by cold nights followed by warm days that melt the snow. Inside the gymnasium of the Deerfield Community School, tarps are placed on the floor to protect it from damage caused by the metal folding chairs. Technicians are setting up microphones, and the custodian has prepared the bleachers.
By 8:30 a.m., the residents start to trickle into the meeting, some carrying their knitting supplies or collapsible lawn chairs. George F. Clark, a 77-year-old native of Deerfield, shares that the town meeting and school meeting are often the only times they get to see certain people. George and his wife, Beryl, who are regular attendees of these meetings, express sadness at the end of this tradition. George attributes the change to the town’s growth and evolving demographics. Once predominantly a farming community, this 50-square-mile town is now becoming a residential area for those commuting to nearby cities like Manchester, Concord, and Portsmouth.
This sentiment is echoed across the state, as experts from the University of New Hampshire’s Center for Public Policy Studies observe a decrease in interest and participation in town meetings throughout the region. Many people prefer not to spend an entire day at a town meeting and choose to distance themselves from local affairs. This change in attitude towards community involvement reflects the changing nature of towns like Deerfield as they evolve and adapt to new circumstances.
9 a.m.
Douglas Leavitt, the person in charge of the meeting, approaches the microphone.
"Good morning, it is now 9 a.m., Saturday, March 19, at Deerfield Community School, and the Deerfield school meeting has officially begun," says Leavitt, who was elected to this position for a single day each year.
One of the first matters up for discussion is whether or not to approve a contract that would result in a 6 percent salary increase for teachers. Harriet Cady, who is often present at Deerfield public meetings, is among the first citizens to question the proposal.
"In a year when people have been hit with numerous costs and taxes, and when we know that the state has less money to provide, can someone explain to me why you are proposing this increase?" she asks.
Deerfield residents listen to arguments for and against various school budget proposals before casting their votes.
Cady later explains in an interview that she doesn’t have anything against schools. She simply doesn’t believe that spending more money necessarily leads to better education. "What worries me is that I see too many people expecting schools to take on responsibilities that should belong to parents," adds Cady, whose own children have already graduated.
Many people in Deerfield share Cady’s concerns about rising property tax rates forcing long-time residents and senior citizens to leave their homes and farms. These concerns are echoed throughout New Hampshire, primarily because property taxes are the only means of funding education since the state does not have any other options. In a state that prides itself on individual freedom, proposing an income tax is political suicide, and sales taxes are heavily restricted.
The burden of property taxes is particularly evident in Deerfield since the December tax bills included a substantial $4.61 increase in the town’s property tax rate of $27.81 per $1,000 of property value.
Cady is relieved to see the traditional school meetings come to an end because she believes that they give an unfair advantage to school proponents. "When you have 120 school employees present with their spouses, and only 246 people voting, they can control anything," she says. Like other supporters of the new structure, Cady hopes that more townspeople will participate in voting if they do not have to endure a daylong meeting to do so.
9:40 a.m.
Voting commences on the teacher pay issue. Deerfield citizens can indicate their vote by raising their hands or holding up voting cards. However, at Cady’s request, this vote will be conducted by secret ballot.
At the moderator’s instruction, seven designated vote counters distribute cardboard shoe boxes around the room, passing them along the aisles. Voters place colored ballot cards into slots cut into the lids. When the results are tallied, the teachers’ contract is approved with a vote of 139-107.
10:18 a.m.
The right side of the bleachers becomes noisy.
"Atta girl," a man shouts when a woman from that section of the room makes a strong point critical of a school board spending proposal.
"Typical town," someone else calls out in disapproval of the moderator’s decision regarding a parliamentary procedure.
11:40 a.m.
The most contentious item on the school district’s agenda, a proposed expense of $161,000 to plan for the future needs of the district’s facilities, is now being discussed. According to Kevin J. Barry, the chairman of the school board, the board had initially intended to bring forward a proposal for a new school in this year’s meeting. However, they postponed that idea due to the shock of the high costs revealed by the December tax bills.
A school bus sits unused in a field owned by the Deerfield school district. Previous attempts to construct a school on this land have been consistently rejected by voters. Photo by William B. Plowman.
The current plan devised by the board allows for the examination of various options to address the growing school-age population in Deerfield. However, one citizen after another rises to question the necessity of such studies. After an hour, when the secret ballot vote on the proposal concludes, the district faces its first setback of the day. The article fails to pass with a vote of 126-76. As the crowd begins to thin out, the debate continues on other school board proposals. Then, a supporter of the school makes one final attempt to salvage the defeated study proposal. He argues that new information disclosed during subsequent discussions changes the perspective of the proposal and calls for a revote. After consulting a legal advisor, the moderator agrees. Hoots of disapproval resound from the right side of the bleachers. "Of course, now that everyone’s gone," a man shouts. "Apologies, but I cannot control that," the moderator responds. "You should never leave a school district meeting until Article IX is voted on." However, the effort proves futile as the measure fails once again when voted on by a show of hands.
2:08 p.m.
The meeting concludes. The O’Brien family, who are relatively new to town, gather their two children and prepare to go home. For Julie O’Brien, it will be a relief to not have to attend the school meeting next year. Both Julie and her partner work in the retail industry, making it challenging for them to attend meetings due to conflicting work schedules. Julie recalls attending the meeting alone during her first year here, while simultaneously taking care of a newborn. "I appreciate the concept of community involvement," she says, "but I believe that many people are unable to vote because they cannot attend the meeting." Across the room, Donald Gorman, a school board member, feels a sense of nostalgia. Having moved from Boston, Gorman vividly remembers his first town meeting in New Hampshire during the 1960s. He recalls how a farmer stood up at that meeting and asked the town to reimburse him $35 for a chicken that had been killed by a neighbor’s dog. The farmer wanted to sue the dog’s owner for the damages, but refrained from doing so as the neighbor was also the local judge. "That was mind-blowing," says Gorman, who used to own a chimney-sweep business before retiring. "A farmer can actually request $35 from the town? Ever since then, I’ve been captivated by politics." In fact, Gorman has taken his passion for politics to the national level, having run for the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination in 2000.
As he heads over to congratulate the remaining individuals from the crowd on the right side of the bleachers for their victory in defeating the planning proposal, Gorman stops to chat. "It’s a small town; we all have to live here," he says. "You’re bound to encounter these people at the post office or supermarket." However, he is too late. The room has emptied, and the lights in the gymnasium dim around him.
Author
