When is "Local Control" not really "Local Control"?

New Hampshire has long prided itself on the principle of local control, the idea that decisions about town government, schools, and taxes should be made by those who live in the community. In theory, this is a noble and democratic concept. In practice, however, low voter turnout in town and school elections calls into question whether true local control exists at all.

Across the state, many of these elections see turnout rates hovering around 20%. In some communities, it’s even lower and as a point of reference, in the 2024 General Election we saw 84% turnout. When such a small fraction of voters make critical decisions about budgets, property taxes, and leadership, it is not local control—it is the rule of a minority. A small, highly motivated group of voters, often composed of those with a direct financial or professional stake in the outcome, is disproportionately influential. Town and school employees, for example, have every reason to be engaged in these elections and I do not fault them for that. Their salaries, benefits, and workplace conditions are often on the ballot in one way or another. The broader electorate, meanwhile, is often disengaged—not because they don’t care, but because the system itself has made participation confusing and cumbersome.

Unlike the more standardized process of state and federal elections, town and school elections operate under a patchwork of rules, dates, and formats. Some towns use traditional town meetings, others rely on official ballot voting days, and still others mix and match approaches. School board elections can happen at different times than town elections. Budget votes, collective bargaining agreements, and special warrant articles are settled far away from the much higher turnout general elections. For the average voter, this creates uncertainty: When do I vote? What positions are up for election? What issues are on the ballot? This confusion is not merely an byproduct of an unsynchronized system—it actively suppresses participation. And when fewer people vote, power consolidates in the hands of the few who do.

Even so-called "deliberative sessions," intended to encourage open discussion and debate, often fail to live up to their purpose. These sessions can last six to eight hours, effectively shutting out working families and those most impacted by the tax increases and budget decisions being considered. Those with the most at stake financially—town and school employees—are often the ones who can afford to stay for the entire duration, while busy voters are left out of the process entirely. A truly deliberative process should allow for meaningful participation from all residents, not just those with the ability to commit an entire day to town hall politics. The Weare School District deliberative session is a prime example, running well past 9 p.m. on—ironically enough—a school night, effectively shutting out the very parents the district is meant to serve.

Further complicating the process is the fact that these elections are officially "non-partisan." While political parties are actively involved behind the scenes, candidates do not run with party labels, making it harder for voters to discern their true intentions. Without clear party affiliation, voters must attempt to understand where candidates truly stand on critical issues—something many do not have the time or resources to do. Instead of running on clear principles or policy positions, candidates often resort to lofty slogans and feel-good messaging that convey little real meaning. This lack of transparency benefits insiders and those already engaged while keeping the broader electorate in the dark.

New Hampshire’s communities deserve a system that encourages, rather than discourages, participation. Simplifying election dates, making information more readily available, and fostering broader engagement would go a long way toward ensuring that local control is truly local. Democracy works best when more people take part, not when it is left in the hands of an engaged but self-interested few. The people of New Hampshire deserve a system that reflects the will of the many, not just the awareness of the few.

The Granite State thrives when its citizens are empowered, informed, and engaged. If we truly value local control, it’s time to make it easier—not harder—for local voices to be heard.

Rep. Ross Berry is the Chair of the House Election Law Committee representing the towns of Weare and Goffstown. He is a contributor to the Granite Eagle