A Republican plan that aims to limit local spending in New Hampshire by forcing cities, towns and school districts to vote every two years on whether to cap property taxes was met with plenty of criticism during its first public hearing Tuesday.

Critics of the bill, which is the latest in a series of proposals from GOP leaders that aim to rein in local spending, questioned if it was constitutional for the state to force communities to vote on a cap — or any measure, for that matter. They also raised concerns about the mechanics of implementing such a cap, as well as its effect in an economy where labor and healthcare costs are growing faster than any community’s tax base.

“You put this cap on a town, you know what’s going to happen? You are going to lay off police. You are going to lay off the fire department. You’re not going to get your streets plowed,” said Rep. Kristine Perez of Londonderry. “This is a crisis.”

Perez was among the 22 House Republicans who bolted from their caucus earlier this month to vote with Democrats to derail a separate GOP effort to impose a cap on local government spending.

Rep. Ross Berry of Weare is lead author of this new proposal, which he repeatedly told colleagues on Tuesday to see as a work in progress. But Berry said a key priority is to ensure voters get to consider a tax cap during high-turnout state general elections in November, rather than during town elections. Berry said he is also committed to making sure any mechanism for voters to override an approved tax cap would require more than a simple majority vote.

“What we have is a framework. We are still developing it,” Berry said.

Limiting local government spending and taxes has been on the agenda for Republican leaders in the New Hampshire House for some time. Before the local spending cap bill that failed during the House’s first meeting this year, there was the failed plan to cap local spending in the state budget Republicans adopted last year. Before that, there was the 2024 law they backed to allow citizens to propose per-pupil caps in school spending. Seven school districts considered adopting such caps last year, and in every case, support fell short of the required three-fifth vote of support.

The prospects of this latest bill are uncertain. No one but the proposal’s sponsor spoke on its behalf during Tuesday’s hearing, while critics lined up.

“This simply defies our system; it assumes that information is known when it is not,” said Margaret Byrnes of the New Hampshire Municipal Association.

Byrnes pointed out that the local tax rates this bill aims to cap aren’t determined until well after municipalities and school districts decide on spending.

Others offered broader critiques, including leaders of Merrimack’s school distinct.

“The state is expanding funding for Education Freedom Accounts and cutting revenues, and is still failing to meet its constitutional obligation to adequately fund education,” said Heather Robitaille, who chairs Merrimack’s School Budget Committee. “We are failing to address the fundamental issues, which is how we fund education.”

Lawmakers will consider a number of school funding bills this year, but no major change in approach is expected. While backers of the local spending and tax caps see getting local spending in hand as a critical step in stabilizing school funding during a time when overall student enrollment is dropping in New Hampshire, critics of the cap argued that spending time blaming local decisionmakers for rising property taxes misses the point.

“It is not the selectboard, and it is not the counties that are causing this problem,” said Democratic Rep. Tom Schamberg of Wilmot. “It is located right here, under the golden dome.”

Are Republicans becoming inconsequential in the Garden State?

Ben Dworkin, director of the Institute for Public Policy and Citizenship at Rowan University, said while Republicans have had trouble breaking through at the federal and state level for decades, the GOP has not become irrelevant.

“Government in New Jersey extends far beyond Trenton,” he said. “We have 564 municipalities, many of those are led by Republicans, so there is a vibrant and engaged Republican Party in the Garden State.”

Bucco said he worked with Sherrill when she was in Congress representing the 11th District, which overlaps his 25th legislative district in Morris County. They were able to get a lot accomplished together, and he said he’s hopeful they can continue that relationship, giving Republicans a meaningful seat at the table.

“There will be times when we agree on things, and we’ll be able to get it done. And there will be some times I’m sure when we’ll disagree, but we’ll do it in a manner in which is respectful to both sides,” he said.

McClellan agreed it’s important for Democrats and Republicans to work together for the betterment of New Jersey residents.

“We definitely need to talk, work across the aisle, to make sure that everybody’s needs are met,” he said. “Every issue is not the same, but there is common ground that we need to work on and work towards.”

Dworkin said it will be challenging for the GOP, as the minority party in the Legislature, to make a real difference as policy is developed.

“Many times they [Republicans] are just going to be trying to point out what they believe are the oversteps and mistakes by the Democratic majority,” he said. “You have to look for partnerships in trying to find compromises, since Democrats don’t need Republican votes, they’re not necessarily looking for it.” He noted Republicans in the Senate have a little more clout because of the political tradition [it’s not a law] of senatorial courtesy.

“This allows for any state Senator, regardless of party, to effectively put a hold on a gubernatorial nomination if that person is from their home county,” he said.

Q: The report suggests that more than a dozen Pennsylvania hospitals could be at risk of closing over the next five years, and Pennsylvania has already seen some hospital closures in the last few years. If there are some more hospital closures, what would that do to access for Pennsylvanians?

A: “Access in Pennsylvania has already been strained, and so if we continue on this current trajectory, unfortunately, we will see service closures and hospitals closed. And that also means not just access to health care being impacted, but jobs and economic activity in our local communities would also be impacted. So this report, we believe, is really a call to action that we can do something about this trajectory and better support our hospitals and their sustainability.”

Q: Well, the report seems to suggest that Pennsylvania hospitals are facing significant challenges, but perhaps challenges that are maybe even more daunting than hospitals are facing in some other states. Is that your perspective?

A: “Yes. We commissioned this report to better understand how the strain that our hospitals were facing compared to those and other states, and the report clearly demonstrates that Pennsylvania’s hospitals are more challenged. It’s more difficult to operate in Pennsylvania than many other states, and the result is really serious financial strain that could impact access to care into the future.”

Q: Was that surprising? Because, it’s one thing to suspect that maybe Pennsylvania hospitals are facing different challenges, but was it a little bit surprising or even just sobering to see that play out in the report?

A: “Our members have been raising these concerns for quite some time, but it was important for us to bring in an outside expert to really validate what we believe to be true. But yes, it was sobering to see how far below our Medicaid reimbursement is to that of our peer states, to see how low our commercial reimbursement is compared to others, our regulatory environment, our medical malpractice environment, all of these things together are really painting the picture of the reality for Pennsylvania’s hospitals.

“But this report also wanted to take that important look forward and to say, without change, if policymakers don’t put things in place to more closely align reimbursement to the cost of providing care, what does that mean for hospitals, for access, for jobs and for local economic activity?”

Q: I’ve been talking to a number of hospital leaders that say they’ve already been taking steps to deal with some of those Medicaid changes that are coming in the next few years. Some are ratcheting back on programs, some are doing layoffs. What are you hearing from Pennsylvania members in terms of how they’re preparing to deal with the changes in Medicaid?

A: “All of our hospitals are evaluating a variety of scenarios and making plans which can include, unfortunately, service reductions, labor reductions, and even perhaps closure.

“I think what this report, though, points out is that Pennsylvania’s hospitals have been doing their part with respect to identifying cost containment and efficiencies. The report demonstrates how efficient Pennsylvania’s hospitals are. The report demonstrates the high quality of care across our hospitals, but it also aligns with that sobering fact that reimbursement is so far below. So Pennsylvania is really falling behind.”

Q: We talked already about the possibility of more than a dozen hospitals closing over the next five years, if some of these trends aren’t addressed. Beyond the threat of closure … you also have the potential that hospitals may be scaling back some of those services, due to financial stress. Is that a real concern that even if some of the hospitals were able to keep the doors open, they might have to really significantly curtail some of the programs they offer?

A: “Yes, we tend to see the need to scale back services over time before a hospital ultimately has to close. But let me be clear, our hospitals are doing everything that they can to continue to provide those services to the communities that they serve. It’s our hope that policymakers will also do what they can.”

Q: Is there something else affecting the financial landscape of hospitals in Pennsylvania that we didn’t want to leave off the table?

A: “I think I would just kind of restate that this report demonstrates that it’s significantly more challenging in Pennsylvania to operate a hospital. No one wants Pennsylvania to continue to fall behind, so we look forward to partnering with the administration and with lawmakers to put appropriate policies in place.”