Local Control Prevails
NH House Abandons Effort To Dictate School Spending
Also on today’s menu at the News Café:
Rockingham Court Hears Challenge To Property Taxes
NH House Defeats Increase In Per-Pupil Spending
New Hampshire’s House Bill 675 would have imposed budget caps on school districts across the state, but a floor amendment that passed, 182-163, on January 8 limited the cap to administrative expenses. The change alienated the original supporters and the amended bill failed nearly unanimously on an “ought-to-pass” vote. That was followed by a vote to prevent reconsideration of the bill.
The original bill would have prevented school districts’ annual budgets from increasing beyond the increased rate of inflation, but it allowed an override by a two-thirds vote by residents. “The number one issue I hear from voters and residents and neighbors is that our property taxes are just getting out of control,” said Representative Joe Sweeney (R-Salem). “It’s pricing seniors out of their homes. It’s making it harder for young families to buy into the New Hampshire market.”
Mary Hakken-Phillips (D-Hanover) countered, “The real harm done by this bill will be felt in the overcrowded public school classrooms by … the 90% of Granite State kids who are there, where they have fewer educational opportunities despite their community’s desires.”
Discussion: Granite Staters have a tradition of supporting local control over the decisions that affect them, and HB 675 would have taken away that local decision-making.
Rockingham Court Hears Challenge To Property Taxes
Rockingham County Superior Court Associate Justice Lisa English heard arguments on January 8 in Regina M Barnes-Player, et al v Hampton NH Board of Selectmen (Assessors) in which Hampton taxpayers posed a challenge to the legality of the state’s property tax assessments, arguing that they are based on a “speculative ‘market value’” that “allows towns to tax homeowners on unrealized, hypothetical gains — not actual income, not real ability to pay, and not true value.”
The hearing on Thursday was to determine whether to grant the town’s motion for dismissal of the case. With a large contingent of residents attending the hearing, Judge English allowed the parties to argue at length their reasons for halting or letting the case go forward. After hearing the arguments, the judge thanked both sides before taking it under advisement. “I do want to say I’m going to look at the constitutional provisions that have been cited. I’m going to look at the statute.” She said, however, “My rule, as I am not a legislator, I am not the legislature, I’m not the executive branch, I’m a superior court judge, and I take that very seriously.” Her role, she continued, “is limited by both the Constitution and the statutes, but I’m going to look at everything.”
She added, “I will say that, as the 250th birthday of the New Hampshire Constitution, I believe, was on Monday, and to have such an engaged citizenry just makes me proud to be a Granite Stater. … I’m applying the law as I see fit, but a record has been made here today, and I just want to appreciate everyone’s participation in this process.”
Discussion: Property assessments are a thorny issue and, because New Hampshire puts most of the tax burden on property-owners, rather than spreading the cost of government over a broader segment of the population, there are bound to be complaints. The solution has been to leave it up to assessors to determine the value of the properties, and they have settled on formulas that base the taxable value on what other properties are selling for. That formula taxes property on an assumption of its market value, rather than on its actual use — a situation that is partially ameliorated by “current use” legislation designed to prevent property-owners with agricultural and forestry land from being forced to sell to developers. It does not protect less-affluent people on smaller tracts from seeing their property assessments double, triple, or go even higher, putting them at risk of losing their family homes. That is the basis for this court action (although the case also brings in the increases in town budgets, which is an entirely separate issue). The best solution, in my opinion, would be to tax all properties on their current use, which avoids forcing people to sell until they are ready, and allowing towns to collect the excess value when property does sell. That, however, would create other problems. Judge English has a difficult task ahead of her.
NH House Defeats Increase In Per-Pupil Spending
The NH House of Representatives made sure property taxpayers would continue bearing the lion’s share of educational costs by defeating House Bill 651, which would have increased state funding as ordered by the NH Supreme Court and Rockingham Superior Court Judge David Ruoff, who determined that the state would have to provide at least $7,356.01 per student to fulfill its duty to provide an “adequate education”. The bill failed on a 190-155 vote on January 7.
Representative Rick Ladd (R-Haverhill), chair of the House Education Funding Committee, said the court should “stay out of the legislative lane,” adding, “Trains sometimes jump the tracks, causing disastrous wrecks, and that is exactly what will occur in New Hampshire if the cost to provide a K-12 student education is left to the judicial branch.”
Senate President Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry) hinted that the Republican Senate majority was working on a bill to address the court ruling, saying, “I’m going to ask you to hold tight and watch.”
Discussion: Unless the legislature rescinds the statewide education property tax, which is a masked tax that pretends to be a state tax but actually is simply another local property tax, it doesn’t matter what amount of “state aid” the legislature settles upon. Local taxpayers are footing the bill.
