Recently in View Tax Category

SB198 Public Hearing

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On Tuesday, March 17,2009 a Public Hearing of importance to all property owners was held at the Legislative Office Building in Concord, New Hampshire. At that time, the Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee and Committee Chair Jacalyn Cilley presided over testimony on Senate Bill 198 (SB 198) that proposes changes to the existing Assessing Standards Board.

The Assessing Standards Board (ASB) is responsible for recommending property taxation guidelines for assessing standards throughout the state, including development of the manual used by local assessing officials.

State Senator Deborah Reynolds, sponsor of SB 198, explained that the bill increases the number of public members on the ASB from 3 to 5 members in order to include more NH residents who are not trained in any specific area and are just average NH property tax payers. Additionally, the Board should be a people's board and therefore the chair should not be a legislator.

Executive Councilor Raymond Burton supported the bill, noting that SB 198 is nonpartisan and expressing his concern that more citizens are not given an opportunity to become involved in their government, including such boards and commissions. Of the ASB, he explained that "this is a perfect example of where more citizens should be involved" and dismissed arguments that citizens might have an agenda or might not be sufficiently informed to make decisions. He reminded everyone that guidance is always available from the Attorney General's Office. Councilor Burton added that about 700 nominations of citizens to our government go through the Governor's Executive Council each year and 99 percent of the time they've been very successful and they are a compliment to the citizenry of our state.

(A Note to Moultonborough Voters: The condescending argument used by some that citizens might have an agenda or not be sufficiently informed or educated enough to participate in the decisions of their own government will sound familiar because this ruse was recently used in Moultonborough to defeat SB2 and exclude the majority of voters from exercising their right to vote on town warrant articles. Apparently this argument against more citizen participation is also prevalent at the state level.)

Concern was expressed by those testifying in support of SB 198 that the current ASB has a disproportionate number of assessors and selectmen acting in this capacity and insufficient public representation. Those testifying against SB 198 insisted that assessing professionals can provide the greatest technical expertise, citing other state boards where professionals predominate.

Those supporting SB 198 represented a diverse group of NH citizens, including two from Moultonborough, who believe in more citizens being allowed to participate hi the decisions their government makes. Those opposing SB 198 were two assessors, a lawyer for the NH Municipal Association and one state representative.

All property owners should consider the benefits of Senate Bill 198, as it promotes greater representation by property owners. After viewing this video, you may want to express your views to Senator Cilley and her committee that held this hearing and is now considering the future of SB198. You may also want to contact SB198 supporters Senator Reynolds, Senator Gallus and Executive Councilor Burton. If you believe that the fight for citizens' rights is ongoing, make your voice heard and protect your rights by contacting legislators. Your letter could make the difference.

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 the 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 the view 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, 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 different days to evaluate a view, it is not only possible but highly probable that five different tax values will result. The reason is simple. To this day the Department of Revenue Administration and the New Hampshire Assessing Standards Board have not issued a clear, concise definition of what constitutes a view despite repeated requests from Tom Thomson and other Public Members of the ASB to do so. 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 in my view. Mad King George the Third of England would have rubbed his hands in glee at the thought of imposing such a tax on his American subjects in the colonies.

Adding insult to injury, The NHDRA states that there is no separate view tax in New Hampshire. It is against the law. 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 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 property 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 made so.

Also consider this. Avitar Associates of New England has already assessed more than half of the towns in New Hampshire, (110 at last count), a fact that Gary Roberge is most proud of. Moreover, Avitar has sold, and is currently selling its assessing software to

many other towns in New Hampshire. So essentially, one company is setting the standard for how properties are assessed in the Granite State. Why is this allowed?

You may be thinking, "I am a property owner who pays taxes, but I don't have a view, so this doesn't concern me." That approach is wrong. It does affect you. If someone is being taxed disproportionately, it affects all other payers in the town or county as the budget must be borne by all. So, if one property owner is under-assessed for his view, and that can and does happen since there is no standard for assessing views, the others must make up the difference.

Astonishing as it may seem, in NH a barber must have a license to cut your hair, yet an assessor evaluating real estate, sometimes valued in the millions of dollars, does not. Furthermore, there is no ethics board to reprimand or discipline assessors who make bad value decisions, whether deliberate or not. Given the importance of property taxes, New Hampshire owners should demand that assessors be required to be licensed by the state.

These view taxes, and that's what they are, (despite the DRA's insistence on calling them view factors), are nothing less than backdoor increases that give government officials no incentive to rein in their spending. Frankly, I am sick and tired of government, local, state and federal, dipping further and further into our pockets, all as a direct result of their wanton spending.

Finally, I encourage all of you reading this to contact Governor John Lynch and tell him that he should ensure that more Public Members are appointed to the NH Assessing Standards Board, the ASB, and the Board of Taxation and Land Appeals, the BTLA. The reason is simple; both boards have too many assessors and appraisers serving on them and not enough Public Members, leaving the biggest stakeholders in the appeal process, the property owners, seriously under-represented. It's an unfair system that will not change until that happens.

Who was it who said, "For evil to triumph, it is only necessary for good men to stand by and do nothing."?

Frank M. Handibode Hebron, NH


 

 

Jaden2-small.jpg

Source: Thomas N. Thomson, Direct to the MCA September 15th, 2008

 

 

Jaden Thomson, is a great grandson of the late
Governor Meldrim Thomson, Jr.
Will he need a DES permit to dig and build his Sand Castle ?


 On July 1, 2008 the new Comprehensive Shore Land Protection Act (CSPA) went into effect. A “state shore land permit” will be required  after July1st for many construction, excavation or filling activities within the  protected shore land. The New Hampshire statute covering CSPA is RSA  483-B and the Department of  Environmental Services (DES) shore land website is
www.des.nh.gov/cspa. I encourage you to review the new CSPA. Below I   hope to peak your interest  to do so.


These new amendments and or additions were passed by the New Hampshire Legislature and signed into law by Governor John Lynch and went into effect on July 1, 2008 just three days before we celebrated our Independence  Day, July 4th and at the peak of construction season. But for many NH landowners there won’t  be much celebrating once you learn of the impact to your property values and rights if your property is within the shore land protected area. I have, for years, gone out of my way to protect our water quality on the 2,400 acres of farm and forestland that we own and manage in NH; this is the same land that we share with the general public and our state. I am a Conservationist
, one who lives, practices and protects the environment each and every day on our Tree Farm like nearly every other forest landowner and farmer in our state. We do  the right thing because we are good stewards of the land. We don’t have to  have big brother, our government, looking over our shoulder to tell us what to do. Let me make a suggestion to our elected officials in Concord, lets think outside of the box; let us try to “Educate rather thanLegislate” on issues such as this!

I believe the original intent of the new CSPA was to control large development on our congested water ways such as Lake Winnipesaukee. An example might be an 8 acre lot that narrows down to a 50 foot water frontage  and a developer wants to put in 75 condominiums. In this case I think there should be oversight by the state and I am sure most would agree with me. But, suppose you owned a 4 acre parcel with 290 feet of water frontage on a river, great pond or lake in NH that is now under the new CSPA and you wanted to sub-divide and give half of the water frontage and land to your son or daughter. As of July 1, 2008 you couldn’t do it, thanks to our Legislature and Governor Lynch. Under the new law “any new lots will need 150 feet of shore line frontage per residential unit whether or not there is on-site septic”. This new CSPA law supersedes any local regulations or ordinances and this should be of great concern to our NH citizens as our local control is in jeopardy. It is my opinion that the new CSPA is nothing more than state wide zoning and a taking of land owners property rights and values from our family assets by the state without any consideration of compensation. This is unacceptable in the “Live Free Or  Die” state!

 You may want to check to see if you are within the CSPA. This year an additional 1400 miles of NH water frontage will fall under the protection of this new law; if you are not included at this time, just wait, DES and the state are looking at taking another bite out of the apple. Stay tuned. After studying the new CSPA laws one concerned shore land owner said thefollowing: “Under this new law, the state has taken total  control of our land, our buildings, and our trees and vegetation. We can  be  required to go to the DES to get a permit to:
 1. Dig a hole – including our children building a sand castle on the beach
 2. Plant a tulip - if it is not in a state approved location
 3. Remove poison ivy that may be a health hazard
 4. Repair a washed out area
 5. Move a rock – that may be in our children’s play area”

 If you are so “lucky” to be within the CSPA then your property has a 250 foot set back (on each side of the water body) with very  restrictive uses of what you can do within that 250 foot buffer on your property. The 2005 Commission (a total of 24 members) that worked on and came up with these new ideas of regulations was made up of  legislators and bureaucrats of state agencies, as well as some non-governmental organizations, but only two represented private land owners; when private landowners should have made up the majority of this commission as they are the true stake holders on this issue. I have suggested to the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Services, Thomas Burack, and Governor John Lynch to request that the NH Legislature place a one year moratorium on the CSPA and put together a new commission made up of no less than
50% of private landowners to correct this unfair taking of property rights and values. Remember, between now and November many folks who are running for state offices will be asking for your vote. Ask them if they support a one year moratorium on the CSPA and a new commission, with the majority made up of the true stake holders, you the landowner. If they don’t agree with you, vote them out of office.Your family assets and  property rights are a stake!

Thomas N. Thomson
Orford, NH 03777


HOME

 

SB 491 – AS INTRODUCED

2008 SESSION

08-2852

10/09

SENATE BILL 491

AN ACT excluding the value of a view from property tax assessments.

SPONSORS: Sen. Kenney, Dist 3

COMMITTEE: Ways and Means

ANALYSIS

This bill prohibits the appraisal of a property for property tax purposes from using the value of the view.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

08-2852

10/09

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eight

AN ACT excluding the value of a view from property tax assessments.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Appraisal Of Taxable Property; Full and True Value; View Excluded. Amend RSA 75:1 to read as follows:

75:1 How Appraised. The selectmen shall appraise open space land pursuant to RSA 79-A:5, open space land with conservation restrictions pursuant to RSA 79-B:3, land with discretionary easements pursuant to RSA 79-C:7, residences on commercial or industrial zoned land pursuant to RSA 75:11, earth and excavations pursuant to RSA 72-B, and all other taxable property at its market value. Market value means the property’s full and true value as the same would be appraised in payment of a just debt due from a solvent debtor, provided, however that full and true value shall not consider any value of a scenic view or other view external to a property. The selectmen shall receive and consider all evidence that may be submitted to them relative to the value of property, the value of which cannot be determined by personal examination.

2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect April 1, 2008.

About this Archive

This page is a archive of recent entries in the View Tax category.

United States Senate is the previous category.

Vision Appraisal is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

View Tax: Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.01

Categories