Lower Spending = Lower Taxes.

Nashua, NH – The call for controlled spending and efficient government from taxpayers across New Hampshire is getting louder and louder each election cycle. This year’s town meeting has proved to be no different. Tuesday’s resounding win in five of the six towns that spending cap warrant articles were on the ballot prove that taxpayers are tired of government continually reaching into their pockets and they are looking for relief. Spending cap warrants appeared on the ballot in the towns of Kingston, Hampstead, Allenstown, Salem, Hudson and Rindge. With only the Hudson warrant articles not passing.

“Taxpayers across this state are sending a clear message that an efficient government that spends their money wisely is the only path to lower taxes. We are facing very challenging times here in New Hampshire. The economy is down, property taxes are up, we have a record budget deficit on the state level and the federal government is spending at an unprecedented pace. Taxpayers are trying to control what they are closest to and that is their local government.” said Michael Biundo Chairman NHAC

The partnership between local taxpayers and local taxpayer associations, and the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition has been a successful one. With these results added to the impressive victory this past November in Rochester, the call for spending restraint and taxpayer relief from the grassroots’ can’t be ignored.

“The results of these warrant articles sends a clear message to elected officials at the local, state, and federal levels that people want controlled spending and lower taxes.” said  local Hampstead Taxpayer John McGrath

Former Deputy Speaker Ken Weyler of Kingston noted “In these fluid economic times, the public has clearly stated that spending must be capped at reasonable increases. …when the public, by two to one, tell you to cap your spending increases, you can expect further accountability, all of which you will ignore at your political peril.”

Here are the voting results by town:

Read more

STOP THE UNJUST VIEW TAX

    Like most people, I have an aversion to injustice. Here in the “Live Free or Die” state of New Hampshire, a glaring example of injustice is the levying of an odious view tax on property owners who have views from their property. It matters not to the Selectmen or contracted assessors that you neither own the view being taxed nor do you control it.

     Furthermore, they readily admit that determining a view’s value is subjective. I know this to be true. In October, 2008 in Grafton County Superior Court, Gary Roberge, Chief Executive of Avitar Associates of New England, who assessed the properties in Hebron, testified under oath that “regarding view assessments, yes, a lot about it is subjective but what isn’t?”

     What this means is that, hypothetically, if five non-collaborating tax assessors arrive at a given property on five different days to evaluate a view, it is not only possible but almost certain that five different tax values will result. The reason is simple. To this day, despite repeated requests from Tom Thomson and other Public Members of the Assessing Standards Board, the Department of Revenue Administration and the New Hampshire Assessing Standards Board have not issued a clear, concise definition of what constitutes a “view.” As Mr. Eugene T. Reed, Public Member of the ASB has told me, “Assessing properties with views is up to the assessing company or local assessors. There is no standard or guideline.”

     Widespread subjectivity has no place in fair taxation and that is clearly what we have today. Mad King George the Third of England would have rubbed his hands in glee at the thought of imposing such a tax on his subjects in the colonies.

      Adding insult to injury, the NHDRA claims that there is no separate view tax in New Hampshire. It is illegal. The DRA insists that it is a “view factor”, not a “view tax.” This is mere semantics. It makes no difference to any property owner, whether it is called a “view factor”, “view assessment” or “view tax”. The unalterable fact is that starting in 2005, the view’s assessed value is shown on a separate line on the tax assessment card, and it is assigned a very specific monetary value, which immediately translates into a higher property tax. Ergo, it is a view tax, period.

     Arbitrarily assigning an exact monetary value to a view that will vary widely depending on which assessor is doing the evaluating and what kind of a day it is, is wrong. It’s Un-American, and if it isn’t illegal and unconstitutional, it certainly ought to be.

Read more