What is Wrong with Freedom and Prosperity?

Some in town lament libertarians and the Free State Project.  Let us talk about freedom and what some libertarians and a republican lead house, senate, governorship, and executive council has helped New Hampshire to become. 

I borrowed this from Carla an outspoken proponent of freedom. 

New Hampshire is 

"#1 in social and economic freedom even beating Florida. 

Expanded school choice, monies follow the child. 

Unemployment rate 2.5%.

Cuts in interest and dividend taxes.

No sales or income taxes .

Best quality of living. 

Third highest median household income. 

A decrease in property taxes for business. "

If high taxation is what you desire and you find freedom abhorrent there are plenty of states from which to choose.  

When the $800,000 budget remains in place on May 7th.  There are plenty of other cities with higher taxes if that is a desire of my readers.  Now is a good time to sell before the housing market crashes there will be plenty of people who will want to move to the lower property tax town of Croydon, New Hampshire.   Have you checked out housing sales and the history in Croydon?  Could be a good time to get top dollars for your home. 

Cathy Peschke 

Using Children As Political Pawns Appeal to Emotion instead of Facts

The following piece appeared on Granite Grok.   Click the title to head to their website.    

Choose to stay home May 7th, if you want to keep the school budget at $800,000.

Cathy Peschke

A School Hijacking, Amanda Leslie of Croydon? Hardly, and Stop Making Kids Your Political Pawns

by Skip / 8 April 2022

A headline in the UL yesterday read, “Amanda Leslie: Undo the hijacking of Croydon’s schools.” My retort is that the “hijacking” was done, not by those who showed up, but by those that didn’t bother to show up.

Her first paragraph is the summary of the continuing saga of lazy no-show voters in Croydon although that’s the opposite of what she wrote. No, that’s not what it says explicitly, but frames it as some kind of evil cabal that hates kids (emphasis mine):

THE EDUCATION BUDGET in Croydon was dramatically slashed at this year’s annual school district meeting, which I attended on March 12. I was one of the 14 voters who objected to the irresponsible cut, which ultimately passed, leaving our community unable to meet our obligation to offer a fully funded, adequate education to our children. The unethical decision made by only 20 Croydon residents has threatened some of our most precious and vulnerable citizens. I reached out to some of those students recently to gather their thoughts about education and what they stand to lose.

Not sorry – the only unethical thing about that “20 Croydon residents” is that you are calling them unethical.  THEY showed up. They voted. While you did as well, folks like you effectively sat on their hands and did nothing.  While you choose to exercise your right to vote, those as like-minded as you decided to stay home and not take care of the business that interested, involved, and informed citizens do – participate in self-government.

Ya screwed up by not getting those folks to show up (regardless of anything else including bad weather). It happens in my town as well – all kinds of reasons why “my side” takes a vacation on a day from that responsibility on the single day when they shouldn’t. But you, and others, keep missing the point so let me reiterate what so blinkers you:

Those 20 people aren’t the evil ones – your friends are for not doing THEIR civic duty. Your like-minded friends screwed up royally but you can’t find it within yourself to blame THEM! They are the ones responsible for any such hijacking.

What ticks me off, if you haven’t figured it out by now, is the utterly misguided fact that ANY of Croydon’s voters could have chosen to attend. They didn’t. ANY of Croydon’s voters could have plotted / conspired / gathered together and agreed to pass the school budget. They didn’t. ANY of Croydon’s voters could have recognized that Town Meeting IS a big deal and shown up. They didn’t.

And the biggest thing, in my mind, is that when you don’t vote, you don’t get to complain that others did.

Well, we all know that isn’t true – of COURSE you get to complain. But the chagrin in this case is that I didn’t hear much as much “we didn’t do what we were supposed to do” except in passing. Instead, it’s all about those that DID show up, DID think about the motion about spending other peoples’ money, DID decided that perhaps that needs to be taken into account, and DID vote to take less money from others.

Certainly a far different spin, eh? And Amanda et al think THEY are the bad ones, the evil ones, the unethical ones?

Again, the angry ones like Amanda are trying to put aside where the real blame lays – on them in that they failed to do their civic duty. And those 20 other voters are responsible for that?

Informed and involved citizens would instantly realize that THEIR decisions have consequences, especially decisions to do nothing. And would also realize, immediately, that blame first should be on themselves. That they aren’t is the worst of all consequences and just furtherance of a too oft version of “The Blame Game”.

---

Amanda Leslie: Undo the hijacking of Croydon’s schools

THE EDUCATION BUDGET in Croydon was dramatically slashed at this year’s annual school district meeting, which I attended on March 12. I was one of the 14 voters who objected to the irresponsible cut, which ultimately passed, leaving our community unable to meet our obligation to offer a fully funded, adequate education to our children. The unethical decision made by only 20 Croydon residents has threatened some of our most precious and vulnerable citizens. I reached out to some of those students recently to gather their thoughts about education and what they stand to lose.

Taylor Fellows is a freshman at Newport Middle High School, but she attended Croydon Village School kindergarten through fourth grade. There, she appreciated “Miss Wendy…an assistant teacher and bus driver,” noting she “was always there for me with whatever I needed…Croydon Village School was a huge part in teaching me how to be social and…interact with the kids around you.”

Taylor worries that if the budget cut isn’t reversed at the special meeting scheduled for May 7, “I would be separated from my friends, teachers, and coaches that I now have strong bonds with.”

Taylor objects to the school board’s suggested “micro-schools” alternative. “No kid wants to spend their time doing online schooling for the rest of their high school career and miss out on all the opportunities that a high school student would normally receive.”
Taylor’s twin brother, Aaron, is also a freshman at NMHS. He fondly recalls learning social studies at Croydon Village School, noting “Mr. Henderson taught us a lot.” Like his sister, Aaron worries about what the budget cut could mean for him. “We wouldn’t have opportunities to do tech classes…I hope we can get those votes,” he said.
My daughter, Chloe Leslie, is an eighth-grader at Sunapee Middle High School where, she says, “all of the students are really close and willing to help each other readily at basically any time.”

“Teachers at Sunapee really care about their students and go beyond expectations to make sure that students are really learning and comprehending the topics…If I were not able to go to Sunapee next year I would miss all my friends…and also the way that Sunapee teaches, fun, but also engaging,” she said.
Addy Pifer attends SMHS as well. She is in tenth grade but reflected on Croydon Village School. “At CVS I always enjoyed knowing that I was cared for and that my opinion mattered.” She added that CVS “helped shape me to be the person I am today. CVS was not only a school, it was like a second home where you were taught simple life lessons.”

Of her school, Addy shared, “my biology teacher has helped me in so many ways. She always wants what is best for me, answers any questions I have related to the class work… and she makes sure that every student knows that she is going to do whatever is needed to get to where we want to be in life.”

Colin Spiker, a fifth-grader in Newport, also weighed in. Reflecting on CVS, he shared, “my teachers were cool…and made learning fun. Richards School [in Newport] is bigger…having a gym for health class and phys ed is better… It’s cool that we got to change to the bigger school to learn new things after starting out small.”

Croydon residents have the opportunity to revisit and reverse this drastic cut, restoring the originally proposed budget and fully funding education for Croydon students. There will be a special budget meeting held at Camp Coniston on Saturday, May 7, at 9 a.m. Residents must attend in person to cast their ballots. Those outside of Croydon who are concerned by this move and the larger attack on education it represents must also stay vigilant and involved: attend meetings, run for open seats, research current issues and proposals, and reach out to those in power, both locally and at the state level.

What Happens if the $800,000 Budget Stands on May 7th?

The sky will not fall, your taxes will not go up twice as much next year.  I believe that to be a scare tactic.   It could be the School Board will be successful at getting close to the $800,000.  Best not to guess, but see what actually happens with time.  If the school board is not able to get down to $800,000, they do have the option of going to Superior Court and asking for more money for the school system via a special meeting.  Don't believe rumors, your property tax bill will not double if quorum is not reached on May 7th and I believe it will not be reached.  

With regard to the "We Stand Up For Croydon Students" crowd.   There are people who have children in Croydon who do not support the ~ 1.7 million budget.    Don't feel badly about the logical fallacy  "it is for the children," that is appeal to emotion.  Stick to the facts, not fear, not emotions. 

Cathy Peschke

    197:3 Raising Money at Special Meeting. – 
I. (a) No school district at any special meeting shall raise or appropriate money nor reduce or rescind any appropriation made at a previous meeting, unless the vote thereon is by ballot, nor unless the ballots cast at such meeting shall be equal in number to at least 1/2 of the number of voters of such district entitled to vote at the regular meeting next preceding such special meeting; and, if a checklist was used at the last preceding regular meeting, the same shall be used to ascertain the number of legal voters in said district; and such checklist, corrected according to law, may be used at such special meeting upon request of 10 legal voters of the district. In case an emergency arises requiring an immediate expenditure of money, the school board may petition the superior court for permission to hold a special district meeting, which, if granted, shall give said district meeting the same authority as an annual district meeting. 

Live Within Your Means

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Union Leader on March 21st. 

‘Live within your means’ is message that Croydon sent

To the Editor: Ransom or budget? This was the question posed at the annual Croydon school board meeting. Would we pay the $1.7-plus million demanded by the school district, or would we give the district a budget and instruct them to work with it?

On March 12th, Croydon voters presented a true “live within your means” budget to the school. The 2022 Croydon School budget allocates $10,000 per student, or $800,000 total. Adjusted for inflation, this number exceeds per-pupil spending across the state for most of our history.

Meeting this budget may be challenging, but it represents an incredible opportunity.

Cutting waste on this scale cannot be accomplished through minor changes. Our district can and must reinvent itself to deliver quality education at a sensible cost. Today, countless private and charter schools are meeting this cost target. Not long ago, public schools did the same.

To longtime Croydon residents, shrieks of “impossible”, “can’t be done” and “people don’t want it” are nothing more than unimaginative déjà vu. We started down the path of school choice back in 2006 to this defeatist chorus, sung by many of the same actors.

Today, Croydon school choice is a reality. It is used by many residents, some of whom actively opposed this same choice program only a few years earlier. Croydon forever changed education for the better. We can do it again today.

JIM PESCHKE

Croydon

Artificial Stupidity you Bet!

It is funny this article came to my attention after yesterday's town meeting. There is no doubt in my mind that those who put forth the 5000 dollar amendment and supported the amendment and budget would probably sign a petition to ban dihydroxymonoxide. After last year's budget savings the educrats and their mindless supporters packed the Town Hall yesterday to ensure the tax and spend crowd would dominate the meeting. Costs are going up 23% and surely there was not a 23% increase in student to performance.

What I found most appalling is the reckless way the tax and spend crowd is willing to spend other people's extremely hard earned money but are so unwilling to donate funds that are beyond the basic educational needs. The entitlement mentally of this group is appalling in my book.

The following piece appeared in the Washington Examiner.

Oh and kudos to our Selectman for keeping town spending in check. I could only imagine if the selectmen had as much control over school spending as they do city spending, educational costs would be much lower and student performance would greatly improve.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

"Forcing one person to bear the burden of educational costs for another is not only a moral question but a major threat to personal liberty. " -- Cathy Peschke, Mom, Tax Fighter and Education Reformist

“One of the consequences of such notions as "entitlements" is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence.”
Thomas Sowell

“The assumption that spending more of the taxpayer's money will make things better has survived all kinds of evidence that it has made things worse. The black family- which survived slavery, discrimination, poverty, wars and depressions- began to come apart as the federal government moved in with its well-financed programs to "help."
Thomas Sowell

Having someone else pay for your child's education virtually guarantees inflated educational costs. . Nothing would lower costs more quickly than having parents pay for their own children's education. And nothing is less likely to happen." Cathy Peschke a twist to one of Thomas Sowell's quotes

Thomas Sowell: Artificial stupidity
By: THOMAS SOWELL
Examiner Columnist
March 8, 2010
A woman with a petition went among the crowds attending a state fair, asking people to sign her petition demanding the banning of dihydroxymonoxide. She said it was in our lakes and streams, and now it was in our sweat and urine and tears.

She collected hundreds of signatures to ban dihydroxymonoxide — a fancy chemical name for water. A couple of comedians were behind this ploy. But there is nothing funny about its implications. It is one of the grim and dangerous signs of our times.



This little episode revealed how conditioned we have become, responding like Pavlov's dog when we hear a certain sound— in this case, the sound of some politically correct crusade.

People are all born ignorant but they are not born stupid. Much of the stupidity we see today is induced by our educational system, from the elementary schools to the universities. In a high-tech age that has seen the creation of artificial intelligence by computers, we are also seeing the creation of artificial stupidity by people who call themselves educators.

Educational institutions created to pass on to the next generation the knowledge, experience and culture of the generations that went before them have instead been turned into indoctrination centers to promote whatever notions, fashions or ideologies happen to be in vogue among today's intelligentsia.

Many conservatives have protested against the specifics of the things with which students are being indoctrinated. But that is not where the most lasting harm is done. Many, if not most, of the leading conservatives of our times were on the left in their youth. These have included Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan and the whole neoconservative movement.

The experiences of life can help people outgrow whatever they were indoctrinated with. What may persist, however, is the lazy habit of hearing one side of an issue and being galvanized into action without hearing the other side— and, more fundamentally, not having developed any mental skills that would enable you to systematically test one set of beliefs against another.

It was once the proud declaration of many educators that "We are here to teach you how to think, not what to think." But far too many of our teachers and professors today are teaching their students what to think, about everything from global warming to the new trinity of "race, class and gender."

Even if all the conclusions with which they indoctrinate their students were 100 percent correct, that would still not be equipping students with the mental skills to weigh opposing views for themselves, in order to be prepared for new and unforeseeable issues that will arise over their lifetimes, after they leave the schools and colleges.

Many of today's "educators" not only supply students with conclusions, they promote the idea that students should spring into action because of these prepackaged conclusions— in other words, vent their feelings and go galloping off on crusades, without either a knowledge of what is said by those on the other side or the intellectual discipline to know how to analyze opposing arguments.

When we see children in elementary schools out carrying signs in demonstrations, we are seeing the kind of mindless groupthink that causes adults to sign petitions they don't understand or— worse yet— follow leaders they don't understand, whether to the White House, the Kremlin or Jonestown.

A philosopher once said that the most important knowledge is knowledge of one's own ignorance. That is the knowledge that too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach our young people.

It takes a certain amount of knowledge just to understand the extent of one's own ignorance. But our "educators" have given assignments to children who are not yet a decade old to write letters to members of Congress, or to Presidents, spouting off on issues ranging from nuclear weapons to medical care.

Will Rogers once said that it was not ignorance that was so bad but "all the things we know that ain't so." But our classroom indoctrinators are getting students to think that they know after hearing only one side of an issue. It is artificial stupidity.

Examiner Columnist Thomas Sowell is nationally syndicated by Creators Syndicate.

2010 Town Hall Meeting

For the first time in years, Croydon has more than one school board candidate on the ballot. Gayle Hedrington has been a regular at board meetings as both contributor and reporter. As a board member, I know where Gayle stands.

Like many in Croydon I know little about Meshial Wittasek, so I am grateful that she chose to define her position in a mailing. What I read disturbed me.

Meshial's mailer could best be summarized as "Vote for me, vote with me, so we can get back to spending your money". The attitude seems to be a call for all residents to put the financial whims of the school district ahead of all else, including one's family. Time will tell, but I believe her outlook is seriously out of touch with the concerns of Croydon residents.

Amid dry statistics, Meshial seeks to convince voters that public ed in Croydon is a bargain, that Newport district gives Croydon a good deal, and that last year's modest reduction of the school budget INCREASE was a catastrophe. None of these claims holds water.

At $9,724 per student, there is nothing "only" about Croydon's tuition. Check private schools in the area if you're unsure. There is nothing "only" about a 5% increase in the Croydon budget, 7-8% annual education spending increases, or 10% teacher raises in Newport. How many of us received 10% raises last year?

What Meshial fails to mention is that much of our budget woes stem from Newport's inability to control spending. Newport's high school tuition increased approximately 25% this year for no apparent reason. We're supposed to believe that $14,586 per year is some sort of bargain. For this reason, it is vital that Croydon pass Article 5 to form a committee to modify or scrap our AREA agreement with Newport.

Also conveniently omitted is the reason that "Newport was required to raise student test scores". Newport has failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for SIX YEARS IN A ROW! Is that a bargain for our $14k+?

Not surprisingly, last year's budget (which was an increase, not a cut as Meshial claimed) did not bring the catastrophe that some high spending proponents promised. What industry besides public education demands 7-8% annual spending increases during the worst economic downturn since the 1930s?

Once again, we're told that the sky will fall if we don't pass the board's budget as is. I voted against this budget and urge residents to do the same. Homeowners sacrifice too much already; a 25% tax increase cannot be justified.

Jim Peschke
Croydon School Board Member

The NEA Is Not about Education it is about Unions

Parents need to wake up, public schools are about meeting the greedy desires of most of the educators, administrators and other interests groups within the schools that suck off the teat of the taxpayer. Most don't give a darn about your child's education or your desire to educate your child as you see fit or allowing you to take your child's tax dollars to the institution of choice. Just look at what Michelle Caccavaro and the other Newport bullies are doing to try to derail the town's desire to break the agreement with Newport. They don't care that the majority of the town would like to get out of the agreement. They also think that those that choose to get out of the agreement just do not know what is good for them. Educators care about themselves they have hijacked public schools as their own entitlement program.

Don't believe me just wait for the town meeting.

Cathy


The following piece appears on Hot Air.com. Feeding the beast at the local level, feeds the beast all the way to DC this is one case where trickle up economics works.


A Less Perfect Union

POSTED AT 6:06 PM ON FEBRUARY 11, 2010 BY DOCTOR ZERO


John Stossel reports on the forced unionization of day-care centers in Flint, Michigan:

"Michelle Berry runs a day-care business out of her home in Flint, MI. She thought that she owned her own business, but Berry’s been told she is now a government employee and union member. It’s not voluntary. Suddenly, Berry and 40,000 other Michigan private day-care providers have learned that union dues are being taken out of the child-care subsidies the state sends them. The “union” is a creation of AFSCME, the government workers union, and the United Auto Workers."

Stossel explains that AFSCME receives about $3.7 million from the Department of Human Services. It achieved its conquest of the Michigan day-care industry through a mail-in vote, which included votes from only 6,000 of the 40,000 day-care providers in the state. You can expect much more aggressive unionizing if some version of the Card Check bill ever manages to slither past Congress.



The current tribute unions demand from their Democrat servants is the “High Road Contracting Policy,” which would give preference for federal contracts to companies that pay a government-defined “living wage,” which would be suspiciously close to the wages unions already demand for their members. As with all subsidies, this living wage would be extracted from the pockets of taxpayers, who will be expected to go on living while their take-home wages shrink, and their jobs evaporate.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with the concept of private-sector labor unions. Every worker is the vendor of his own time, and since individuals have the right of free association, there’s nothing immoral about a group of people with related skills banding together to engage in collective bargaining. Over the past century, however, unions have bathed in the radiation of centralized State power, and mutated from defensive alliances of exploited workers, into de facto arms of the government.

In order to prosper, a union requires two essential advantages: solidarity and exclusivity. Solidarity means the members of the union must remain loyal, provide a steady stream of funding through payment of dues, and obey the instructions of the union leadership. There’s not much power to be gained from calling a strike, if half the union membership decides to go into work anyway, and collective bargaining agreements must be honored with minimal debate.

Unions also require privileged access to labor markets, or else independent workers willing to hire on for lower wages will undercut them. A company paying for expensive union labor cannot compete with an open shop that doesn’t have to pay artificially high wages, or provide elaborate benefits. A union could gain exclusivity by providing a vastly superior work product, providing value equal to their high wages. Naturally, the public-relations arms of labor unions like to claim this is the way they operate… but in the real world of 2010, it’s rarely the case.

There is a much easier way for unions to gain exclusive control of labor markets: they can barter the money and voting power they gain from the solidarity of their membership, to politicians with a ravenous appetite for these delicacies. In exchange, the politicians can use the compulsive power of the State to create monopoly playgrounds for the unions. The teachers’ unions are a particularly grotesque example, pushing an obviously inferior work product onto a captive population of students, while politicians patrol the schoolyard fence with truncheons of rolled-up campaign donations.

The National Education Association is the largest union in America, and one of its most powerful political forces, donating millions to Democrat candidates and spending millions more in lobbying… including over a million dollars in donations to the criminal organization ACORN over the last two years. The NEA also provides invaluable political indoctrination, inserting propaganda for statist causes like global warming into education curricula. In exchange, the Democrats are universally sworn to oppose vouchers and school privatization, no matter how much it hurts other constituencies they profess to care about. There are many fine teachers among the ranks of the NEA, but their individual merits vanish beneath the vast corruption of the union establishment.

We’ve also seen billions of taxpayer dollars spent to bail out General Motors, for the benefit of the labor unions whose parasitic embrace ended its free-market life. The unions set a wage level that rendered GM unable to turn a profit, becoming what Mark Steyn describes as “a vast welfare plan with a tiny loss-making commercial sector.” Every American taxpayer was fleeced by the Obama Administration to rescue the unions from the consequences of their actions. Why should they mediate their demands or become competitive with independent labor, when they can hire politicians to follow them around with a club in one hand, and lifesaving cash transfusions in the other?

These events are entirely predictable, because where the supply of votes and political cash from unions meets the demand from Big Government, a transaction is bound to occur. In a centralized state, the power of a political collective is vastly greater than individuals, or most corporations. Plenty of big companies spend cash buying political influence, producing all manner of mischief… but they can’t deliver the kind of packaged voting power that a labor union or racial grievance organization can provide, because they cannot compel – or even encourage – their employees to vote a certain way. The NEA and AFSCME have a lot more than dollars to spend in the political marketplace.

This kind of thing is inevitable, as long as we allow political control over industry, and place huge amounts of tax money in the hands of our government. The depth of corruption can be measured with the value of a congressional vote… or the presidential seal. Despite its overwhelming presence in every aspect of our daily lives, Big Government acquires many characteristics of anarchy, in which the diminishing resources of a moribund economy become the spoils for feuding warlords. One of the hallmarks of civilization is that no one should ever discover they have involuntarily been conscripted into a gang, or the government that increasingly resembles one.


Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

FEC Fails To Investigate

I am getting a little tired of hearing it is not the union members fault it is the union leaders fault. Yes, in some cases it is the union leaders fault but the unions members are to blame too. They have made no attempt to stop the problem and jump on board when they can screw the taxpayers who pay them or the companies for which they work. Math teachers worth the paper their degree is written on should be able to figure out they work in an unsustainable system. If they don't they should not be teaching or luckily the greedy people in the end will get what they deserve. When you decide to lay down with the devil ....... well you know the rest.

The following piece appears on the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc. website.


Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

FEC Fails to Investigate Teachers’ Complaint of NEA Union Money Laundering Scheme
Employee rights advocate weighs federal lawsuit

Washington, DC (January 5, 2010) – Apparently without conducting a field investigation, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) dismissed a complaint against one of the most politically active unions in America after evidence surfaced that union officials deposited illegally laundered dues money into its political action committee (PAC).



Citing in part lack of sufficient funding to enforce the law, the FEC junked a complaint filed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and two Alabama teachers who discovered a union scheme to divert convention reimbursements into the National Education Association (NEA) union’s PAC.

When attending the NEA’s 2004 national convention, Daphne Middle School science department chair Claire Waites was deceived into supporting the NEA’s PAC and was determined that it would not happen again. However, Waites and Assistant Principal Dr. Jeanne Fox, both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA unions, discovered the practice continues.

In July 2008, Waites and Fox attended the NEA’s annual convention in Washington, DC as delegates of the BCEA. According to their sworn testimony, BCEA union president Saadia Hunter informed the educators that contributions in their names were made to a “children’s fund” using money included in their expense reimbursements for their trip to the convention.

Although Hunter told Waites that these contributions were not political in nature, they actually went to the NEA’s PAC. Hunter later admitted that the money would be contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. AEA union bosses also admitted to the educators that the PAC contributions were paid with BCEA members’ dues.

Foundation attorneys are considering a lawsuit against the FEC for shirking its duty of upholding the integrity of the political system, particularly since it is suspected this scheme affected many other teacher delegates to the union convention.

“The FEC made a conscious decision to not take these charges seriously,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We suspect this scheme could involve many more teachers – potentially to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

It is illegal for union officials to encourage and solicit contributions under false pretenses and without informing workers of their right to refuse to contribute without any reprisal. Federal law also forbids campaign contributions made in the name of another person.

Everyone has the Right to Know

Everyone has a right to know how their taxes are being spent. Every school, city and town as well as the federal government should allow access to the taxpayers via a website how the people's tax dollars are being spent. Peyton Wolcott's website will show you how to ask your school to be fiscally transparent. Too bad it is not happening here in Croydon, Jim has asked numerous times for the information but Jim Vezina has not given him said information.


Hurrah for the State Supreme Court ultimately these monies started out as tax dollars and we should know how they are being spent.


The following piece appears in the Union Leader. Be sure to visit the Union Leader website to see the great links.



Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Benefits manager ordered to unveil payroll
By TOM FAHEY
State House Bureau Chief



CONCORD – A state Supreme Court ruling yesterday forced the Local Government Center to disclose salary information revealing 18 of its top employees make more than $80,000 a year.

The Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire fought the center, which manages health insurance for about 76,000 New Hampshire public workers — including local police, firefighters and teachers — for the information.

In a unanimous decision the Supreme Court agreed with the firefighters that the center, funded by member towns and cities, is a public agency covered by the state’s Right-to-Know law.



“Knowing how a public body is spending taxpayer money in conducting public business is essential to the transparency of government, the very purpose underlying the Right-to-Know law,” the court said in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Broderick.

He noted the center “is subsidized by money generated through tax collection.”

►List of Local Government Center salaries
►State eyes court fight with Local Government Center

In 2007, the center released general salary information to the firefighters group that showed 112 full-time workers made salaries totaling $6.1 million.

The center’s entities include the New Hampshire Municipal Association, LGC HealthTrust, LGC Real Estate, LGC Property-Liability Trust and LGC Workers Compensation Trust.

Seven center executives make more than $100,000, including Maura Carroll, interim executive director, $189,200; Sandal Keeffe, chief financial officer and deputy director, $171,960; Wendy Parker, assistant executive director for risk services, $166,994; Jonathan Steiner, assistant executive director for member relations, $138,775; and Judy Silva, assistant director for legal services and government affairs, $122,000.

Carroll said yesterday the case was about providing more clarity on the center’s status.

“It’s never been about hiding anything. It’s always been about making sure we follow the law appropriately, and in several instances the law has not been clear,” Carroll said.

The firefighters won a Supreme Court case in 2004 that gave them access to the records. The center held off releasing information, however, after it reorganized itself internally shortly after the decision and raised questions about which of its new entities were subject to the public records law.

“We need to open the doors, throw the curtain back and let the sunshine in to let the public have access and look at where they are spending their money,’’ Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire President David Lang said. “My fear is this is the tip of the iceberg.”

Lang said he wants to look at how an operation that collects less than $1 million in dues from member cities and towns can have a payroll that exceeds $6 million. He said it seems to him that money towns pay for health insurance is going toward other costs, including lobbying the Legislature.

Carroll said the center provides coverage to 76,000 public workers and collects more than $300 million in premiums annually.

The center transferred $14.5 million, about 1 percent of employer insurance premiums, out of HealthTrust between 2004 and 2008, Carroll said. The transfers funded a strategic review of operations, marketing and membership work and development of new programs, she said.

Lang argues the transfers were illegal and that all the money needs to be put back into the HealthTrust account.

Now that the court has ruled the center and its other operations are public, Lang said, he will file more requests for information, including details about benefits and retirement packages.The center’s former executive director, John Andrews, retired recently after overseeing much of the growth of the New Hampshire Municipal Association and then the center.

In addition to the firefighters’ suit, the center is under scrutiny by the state Bureau of Securities Regulation, which subpoenaed three years of the center’s records.

The bureau is investigating a private complaint to its office that the center intermingled health insurance premium money with its other operations.

Subpoenaed documents include all financial records and a list of all employees and their duties with each center sub-agency.

A change in state law took effect in July that gave the Secretary of State’s Office, which oversees the bureau, regulatory power over the agency. Prior to that, no state department had any oversight of risk pool management agencies like the center.

When You Pay Your School Property Taxes......

When you pay your school property taxes does all that money go to the schools? HECK NO!

That money also goes to union dues. What do the unions do with that money? The Education Intelligence Agency recently documented where 30.5 million dollars of people's property taxes went. Here is a sampling......

Democracia USA - $150,000

Democratic GAIN - $10,000

Democratic Leadership Council - $25,000

Working America - $200,000

World Outgames - $5,062

Yes on 1A and 1B - $3 million

Zimbabwe Teachers Association - $10,000

MediaMatters - $100,000


Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - $30,000

NAACP - $55,000

NAACP National Voter Fund - $200,000

National Action Network - $10,000

How do you like 100,000 dollars that should be going to schools going to Media Matters? Your property tax dollars working against you.

For more information as to where the 30.5 million dollars that should be going to your local public schools went, visit the Education Intelligence Agency's website.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Quote of the Day - "When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children." - Albert Shanker, Former President of the American Federation of Teachers

Yes Taxes Are Immoral

The following piece appears on Townhall.com. I totally agree that taxes are immoral, I have found that most people who support taxes either live off them via wages or welfare.

Quote of the Day - “There is no such thing as a good tax.” - Winston Churchill

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

The Left Is Right -- Taxes Are a Moral Issue
by Dennis Prager

One principle that all those on the left hold is that taxes constitute more than an economic issue; they are, first and foremost, a moral one. Economists on the left may argue for higher taxes on economic grounds but they and we know that at bottom, higher taxes, especially "taxing the rich," is what they believe morality demands.

For example, there are obviously only two possible ways to reduce government deficits: reduce spending or increase taxes (or some combination of both). The left advocates the later; the right advocates the former. Left-wing spokesmen, such as New York Times economics columnist and Princeton University professor of economics Paul Krugman, may offer economic arguments for raising taxes in order to lower government deficits, but their real motivations are moral: reducing economic inequality (by redistributing income) and expanding government (because government is the most effective way to help all citizens).

Now, as it happens, not only is there is nothing wrong with being animated by moral concerns -- we should all be. The problem with the left's advocacy of higher taxes is not that it is rooted in moral concerns. The problem -- actually the two problems -- are these:

First, higher taxes are rarely morally defensible. In fact, on purely moral grounds -- in other words, even if they did effectively reduce the deficit without paying an economic price for doing so -- they are usually not moral. More on this below.



Second, higher taxes are usually economically counterproductive. This does not matter to the left, however, because economic growth is not what most interests the left. Since Karl Marx, the left has always been far more interested in economic equality than in economic growth. It is true that liberals such as John F. Kennedy were more concerned with economic growth than with economic equality -- which is why he advocated lowering taxes -- but for much of the last century, unlike today, there was a major difference between liberal and left.

Now to return to the moral arguments, my difference with the left is not that I oppose morality dictating economic policy. I believe, in fact, that virtually all social policies should be rooted in moral concerns. My difference with the left is that I am convinced that moral considerations dictate lower, not higher, taxes.

It is too bad that libertarians and conservatives rarely take on the left on moral grounds because the left's moral foundations are as weak as their economic foundations.

The very notion of an income tax is morally debatable. On what moral grounds can the state force a citizen essentially at gunpoint to give away his legally and morally earned money? Why isn't taxation a form of legalized stealing? The obvious answer is that common sense dictates that citizens have the moral right, even the moral obligation, to vote to give money to, at the very least, enable a government to fund a police force, sustain a national defense, and help those incapable of helping themselves or of being helped by others.

But at some point beyond that, taxation becomes nothing more than legalized stealing. Obviously, people will differ over where exactly that point is, but no rational person disputes that such a point exists. No one could argue that a 100 percent tax -- even if it paid for every need every member of the society had -- was moral and not simply a form of theft.

So moral problem No.1 with taxation is the morality of forcing other people -- under threat of violence -- to give their money away.

A second moral problem is having some people give at a greater percentage rate than others. The biblical notion of tithing, for example, is entirely universal -- everyone gave a tenth what he had. No one was forced to give half while others gave a tenth.

A third moral problem is allowing those who pay no tax (such as the federal income tax) to vote on how much others will be forced to pay. It is quite difficult to morally defend the fact that about half of Americans pay no federal income tax, yet they determine how much the other half will be forced to pay.

A fourth moral problem is that the higher the taxes, the more decent people become cheaters. One of the leading religious ethicists of our time, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, author of two volumes of Jewish ethical law, told me years ago when he lived in Israel during the height of its socialism with its correspondingly high taxes that he witnessed the finest citizens, religious and secular alike, having to cheat on taxes or be rendered impoverished. I have never forgotten that.

I know no one in America today -- and I know extraordinarily honest and generous people, liberal and conservative -- who does not in some way "cheat" on taxes -- as, for example, reporting expenses as business expenses that are not really so. I place the word cheat within quotation marks because not all cheating is illegal. Some people figure out how to avoid paying what the law demands through completely legal, but ethically questionable, means.

At a certain level of taxation, virtually every honest person is reduced to cheating either legally or illegally.

A fifth moral problem is that the higher the tax rate, the lower the charity rate. This is universally true. The more people give to the state, the less they give to their neighbor -- and even to members of their family -- in need.

And sixth and only finally because of the limitations in size of a single column, the higher the taxes, the less people are inclined to work hard. Why should they? At a given point, people just conclude that work is for suckers.

And I haven't even begun to discuss the economic failings of higher taxes.

So, next time someone on the left advocates higher taxes, remember two things: He or she is coming from a moral, not an economic, position. And the moral case against higher taxes is far more powerful than the moral case for them.

Sullivan County Board Meeting - Budget

Jim attended the Sullivan County Board meeting Thursday night. Comments he said not in the article below were against the creation of new programs and services as well as outrageous pay increases during the current economic crisis.

The excuse for a 15% pay increase was that our County was raising an employees salary to be on par with employees in other counties. This is a pile of well bull, a 15% increase in these difficult times when private employees are taking decreases in their salaries is not only ballsy but irresponsible. No increase should have been given and if the employee did not like it he could have quit his job. If other counties were acting in a fiscally responsible manner they could have asked their employees to reduce their salaries to be on par with employees in Sullivan County. But that won't happen government employees and teachers' unions play the ratchet the salary game taxpayers and taxpayer dollars.

Quote of the Day - A bureaucrat is the most despicable of men, though he is needed as vultures are needed, but one hardly admires vultures whom bureaucrats so strangely resemble. I have yet to meet a bureaucrat who was not petty, dull, almost witless, crafty or stupid, an oppressor or a thief, a holder of little authority in which he delights, as a boy delights in possessing a vicious dog. Who can trust such creatures? - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Update 5/31/09 There is another article about the meeting in the Eagle Times.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

The following article appeared in the Union Leader.

Click on image to enlarge.

1 Million People Attend Tea Parties

Why I attended the Tea Party and observations of the Tea Parties friends and I attended.



The Tea Party for many others and myself was about more than just taxes. I oppose progressive taxes. I attended because I oppose excessive government spending, I believe that the government should not carry debt or deficit spend. I believe in personal responsibility. I oppose fascism the merger of government and corporate powers, which began under the Bush Administration. I oppose universal healthcare. I believe in States rights. I attended because I believe we are losing our right to free speech and our right to criticize our government especially if you oppose the current administration. I believe we are on the verge of tyranny.

Democrats and people making under 250,000 dollars were present in large numbers. Atheists and Agnostics also attended the tea parties. The Tea Parties were attended by people of all races.

If you looked at the signs of people attending you would see that they carried many messages. This was individuals expressing their thoughts on the current administration this was not a one message protest. To state that as so, is just ignorance on the part of those who opposed the Tea Parties.

The following piece appears at World Net Daily.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.


A REVOLUTIONARY IDEA
1 million attend tea parties in 50 states
'Obama has awakened a sleeping giant'
Posted: April 17, 2009
12:00 am Eastern

By Jerome Corsi and Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


An estimated 1 million Americans participated in at least 1,000 tea parties, according to reports by organizers tabulating the nationwide numbers, with documented protests held in 50 states.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform told WND, "The Obama administration has awakened a sleeping giant."

Tax Day Tea Party national event coordinator Amy Kremer told WND she has confirmed that more than 850 parties took place. She has at least 100 more reports in her e-mail inbox that have not been posted.



Sign a petition calling on Congress and the president to halt out-of-control spending

Asked how many people attended the events, she responded, "I would estimate it at over 1 million. I'm waiting on more numbers to come in from organizers right now. I can tell you it is absolutely over 750,000 right now."

The largest protests occurred in Atlanta, Ga., with 15,000 participants. As many as 10,000 protesters participating in Sacramento, Calif., and Overland Park, Kan., according to data compiled by Americans for Tax Reform on more than 207 tea parties.

Americans for Tax Reform has established an Internet page on the group's website where organizers of tea parties can submit attendance estimates to be included in the running tally.

Michael DePrimo, special counsel to American Family Association President Tim Wildmon, told WND that AFA's tea party website, Tea Party Day, had 2,031 confirmations that tea parties were to be held in as many cities.

"Since yesterday, we have had 394 cities give us reports, many with photographs, about the tea parties that were held," he said. "We have not been able to get all the information up. We expect more to come in as the days go by."

Glenn Beck reported yesterday on his Fox News program that official estimates of the participation in the Tea Party held in San Antonio, Texas, reached as many as 20,000 people.

The Glenn Beck show broadcast on Fox News live on April 15, from the Tea Party held at the Alamo in San Antonio.

"The establishment in Washington, D.C., is terrified," Norquist said. "There were no such demonstrations four months into the administrations of Democratic presidents Carter or Clinton."

Norquist told WND that the Obama administration was taken by surprise by the nationwide protests because the administration had calculated increased government spending was supposed to be the popular part of President Obama's economic stimulus plan.

Instead, Norquist said, the tea parties held in every state on Wednesday proved Americans nationwide are demonstrating in anger and disappointment against Obama administration plans for massive deficit spending.


Tax Day protester in Kansas City, Mo., holds sign (photo: Posted to Tea Party Day)

"Imagine what happens when President Obama, House Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid begin to pay for their 'spend-fest' with higher taxes and inflation," Norquist said.

Kremer said the mainstream media have completely neglected their duty to accurately report on this nationwide movement.

"It's amazing that the mainstream media is reporting it the way that they are," she said. "It's just crazy. It's basically just going to come down to us. We're now reporting it ourselves because they are not reporting it accurately."

Many say the mainstream media attempted either to ignore the protests altogether or characterized tea partiers as disgruntled Republicans unable to accept that "they lost" the 2008 presidential campaign or as "rich taxpayers" unwilling to pay their fair burden of taxes.

However, Kremer said she is constantly receiving reports from organizers about the movement's resounding success.

"I think it was an absolute success," she said. "We want to send a message to them: We hired them; we can fire them. They work for us. They seem to have forgotten that."

She continued, "If it means we have to go after every incumbent in office from now until 2012, we will do that. But the American people are tired of sitting by, and they are starting to step forward and take notice."

Please visit the World Net Daily site to view the pictures.

Change I Feared

Here a tax, there a tax, everywhere a tax, tax.

No wonder there are so many tea parties coming up on the 15th.

I found the picture at Granite Grok.com.


Cathy

The Economy Is Going to Get Bad - No duh

At last years town hall meeting I too had painted a grim picture yet all school warrants passed. Maybe Croydon residents did not believe we were going to have four dollar gasoline last summer. Will the educrats fill town hall again and pass tax warrant increases this year? I am sure a certain someone will be by the phone to call people in if a warrant has any chance of failing.

Okay if housing prices went down why did our assessment go up? In reality our assessment should not have gone up as no home has sold in our development since we purchased our property in November of 2006.

Boy do I sound a little cranky today?

The following AP piece appeared on MSNBC.


Cathy


Economists paint grim picture for NH, region

By NORMA LOVE
updated 5:55 p.m. ET, Wed., Jan. 21, 2009

CONCORD, N.H. - One by one a parade of economists — apologetic for bearing bad tidings — painted a grim picture for New Hampshire and the region lasting into next year.

"I've got binoculars on trying to see the light at the end of this housing market tunnel," Russ Thibeault, president of Applied Economic Research in Laconia, told lawmakers Wednesday.

As he left, Thibeault summed up for the others: "Good luck. It's going to be a tough couple of years."



The House budget and tax writing committees had asked the economists to offer their outlooks and any solutions to the state's budget crisis. Dennis Delay of the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies suggested the revenue shortfall — if nothing changes — could be $500 million over the life of the budget for the two years beginning July 1.

"I don't really know where revenues are going to be in 2010 and 2011," he began before offering his qualified assessment.

Ross Gittell, a professor at the University of New Hampshire and forecast manager for New England Economic Partnership, offered a bit of cheer. New Hampshire's jobless rate is expected to remain below the national rate even if the state rate hits 7.4 percent as projected.

"We're going to come out of this relatively strong," he said.

But Gittell and the others also cautioned that the recovery will be very slow.

Gittell estimated New Hampshire will lose 16,000 jobs due to the recession and though hiring will win out over layoffs by the end of next year, the state won't recover all the jobs it loses until 2012.

Gittell said the forecast is for New Hampshire's housing prices to drop 23 percent before a slow recovery.

Economists say the current recession is similar to one New Hampshire experienced in 1990. Thibeault said it took nine years for home prices to reach the prices they were in 1989 after they dropped in the 1990 recession and a similar, slow recovery is likely with this recession.

"It's a steep drop and it's going to be a gradual recovery," he said. "Hopefully we will bottom out in 2009."

Buyers aren't getting into the market despite low interest rates because they're afraid they'll be laid off, Thibeault said.

"It really is confidence in jobs, confidence in the economy that are the missing ingredients," he said.

He said he's hopeful federal incentives will help stabilize the market by the end of this year.

Shawn Warren of auditing firm KPMG said other states are doing everything from not paying bills to tapping rainy day savings accounts to deal with budget shortfalls from declining revenues.

Warren said short-term fixes may take care of immediate budget problems without resolving the underlying problems. For example, across-the-board cuts may appear attractive, but would exempt fixed spending that can't be cut — such as debt payments — and lead to deeper cuts in other areas of government without examining whether the right cuts were made.

Warren said the same applies to layoffs since government needs the right people in place to be effective.

"It is not a sustainable way to balance a budget in the long-run," he said.

He also cautioned against selling state assets to plug ongoing spending holes. Once the cash is gone, the state no longer has the asset and still has the spending problem, he said.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Thought of the Day - I am not really a fashion maven I am all for comfort and I have not been a fan of Bush as of late, but you have to give him credit for respecting the office. A major Bush rule gets scrapped by Obama.

Rep. Roger Wells: State has little choice but to find new revenue - We Say B.S.

The following tasty morsel appeared in the Union Leader.

As always be sure to read the comments you can always spot the tax eaters. Only a whacked out educrat could coin the phrase Slots for Tots.

Anyone looking for pawn shops, prostitutes, payday businesses and increased crime will have no problem finding them near any new casino.

Mr. Wells do us all a favor don't pretend to be a Republican switch to the Democratic party.

Cathy

Want to know where to cut spending? How about all of this "Educational Adequacy" nonsense whose spending spree is only just beginning?

The NH Constitution does not authorize the state to spend one dime on education. Nor does it permit the Supreme Court to order the Legislature to spend money or pass laws.

Leave education to the towns as has been working so well for decades. Sure, a complete elimination of state education spending might raise property taxes, but it would lower state taxes even more.

Besides wasting our money, what does government do well? Not much. Why squander limited resources on inefficient state programs?
- Jim Peschke

Rep. Roger Wells: State has little choice but to find new revenue

Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2009

Now that we are starting the new year and a new legislative session, it is time to make some choices as to where our state is heading financially. While we are looking at as much as a $500 million deficit, are we willing to see our property taxes skyrocket further? Are we willing to finally accept an income or sales tax? Are we willing to look at expanded gambling as a solution?


After a 16-month study by a subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee, the full committee voted to recommend the introduction of future legislation for the use of video lottery terminals. Though the 9-8 vote was close, had all members been present the outcome would have been three votes more for the majority opinion. In other words, after hearing the information presented, the vote would have been 12-8 for opening a serious debate on whether gambling should be considered as a revenue source for our state.

While gambling is an easy target for some well-intentioned people, the facts do not support the perceived evils. The bill that was studied would have provided $5 million for treatment programs for addictive behavior, including treatment not only for gambling problems but also for drug, tobacco and alcohol addiction. The committee learned that many of these problems are co-occurring; that is, those who are likely to have a problem with one type of abuse are also vulnerable to gambling.

While it is obvious that many New Hampshire citizens already struggle with addiction problems, the services needed to treat such problems are woefully underfunded. Unfortunately, these people, many of whom already have gambling problems, will continue to be underserved until the state finds the revenue sources to fill this gap. The current budget crisis only deepens the hole.

The committee found that the incidence of pathological gambling problems ranged between 1 to 2 percent, far lower than addiction rates for alcohol and tobacco. Information provided by Dr. Clyde Barrow from the Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts showed that most people who gamble at casinos or racinos do so responsibly as a form of entertainment. By contrast, those who play the lottery or buy scratch tickets forego the entertainment component (how long does it take to scratch a ticket?) and make their purchase solely with the unlikely chance of coming out of the gas station or variety store with more money than they had when they went in.

The many polls taken in New Hampshire consistently show that the public favors this as a revenue source by numbers between 70 to 80 percent.

The data also showed that "social costs" of casino gambling were much lower than perceived by opponents. Our state is experiencing significant "social costs" right now as property tax increases squeeze a growing number of people out of their homes.

Based on data from states with similar programs, the revenue New Hampshire would realize was estimated at $250 million to $319 million per year. If most of that state revenue were directed to education funding, local property taxes in most towns could be reduced significantly, by about one third.

The report also showed that if the casinos were located at the racetracks in Salem, Hampton, Loudon and Hinsdale, approximately 80 percent of the revenue produced would come from out-of-state residents within a 100-mile radius.

The outspoken opponents of gambling often talk of corruption that may be associated with gambling. Most often the corruption is the vast amount of money sent by gambling interests from surrounding states to politicians in the states considering gambling. The speaker of the house in Massachusetts is a prime example. He has received money from gambling interests and has single-handedly blocked legislation from going to the floor.

Soon the Legislature and the citizens will be faced with a choice: Cut many of our existing services or look for new revenue. The only choices are to increase property taxes, institute an income tax or sales tax, or introduce expanded legal gambling at those facilities where gambling already exists and maybe consider other possible locations.

My property tax this year will represent approximately 30 percent of my total income. I cannot afford to continue to live in the state without relief. I am not alone in this situation.

The choices are increasing the property tax or instituting an income tax, a sales tax or gambling. "None of the above" is not one of the choices.

Rep. Roger G. Wells, R-H

What a Great Idea

We stopped having the Eagle Times delivered right about the time of the first snowfall. We live on a pretty steep hill and our driveway can also be pretty slippery in the winter. I have fallen a number of times getting the mail. In fact the mailbox was difficult even for the mailman to get to so the mailman requested our mailbox be moved into our driveway because the road we live on is steep and the edge of the road changes so dramatically with the weather. But I digress, because it was difficult to get to the newspaper delivery box, I cancelled the Eagle Times for the winter. Initially we received the Argus Champion but sadly that ceased publication. Again I digress.

So for the first time in a long time this morning I went to the Eagle Times and saw the following article. What joy a delicious cup of coffee and officials actually using their brains. Our Founding Fathers would be happy to see this turn of events. I have to admit it was a shocker especially since it came from Claremont home of those dreadful people who sued over an "adequate education." Anyone with a lick of sense knows it was about getting more money for the tax-eaters who refuse to be accountable for actually educating our children.

Cathy


Volunteer tax credit proposed


Would reduce property taxes for some

By BEN BULKELEY, Staff Writer
Monday, January 05, 2009 7:59 PM

CLAREMONT -- Mirroring what some towns in Massachusetts have done to get more volunteers in city departments, State representative John Cloutier, D-Claremont, wants to propose legislation that would allow senior citizens to get a credit for their property tax bills if they volunteer their time in the city.

The bill is currently a Legislative Service Request (LSR), which is a request to draft a bill.

"I submitted this proposed legislation after doing some research on the idea, which was first proposed to me by Mayor Deborah Cutts a year ago," said Cloutier. "Mayor Cutts said she heard of a program in Mass. that gave senior citizens some property tax relief in exchange for community service."

If it becomes law, it would allow seniors over the age of 60 to receive a credit up to $750 if they volunteered for one of the city departments.

"I requested that the legislature's research division check out the program, and they confirmed that there was such a program in Mass.," said Cloutier. "Over the past year I became more interested in this program, and believed it was worth serious consideration in New Hampshire."

Mayor Cutts said that by using the tax credit in exchange for volunteers, Claremont would ultimately benefit.

"This is a win-win opportunity. I believe we have a segment of our population that frequently volunteers-- typically parents or folks very dedicated to culture or arts," said Cutts. "Volunteering for these groups comes easy-- it's part of our daily life and culture and it satisfies some of our needs."

Cloutier said that the towns that wished to participate in the program would be able to decide how it would be implemented.

"If the program were to become law it would be up to local communities to decide whether to participate," Cloutier said. "The city council would have to vote to participate in the case of Claremont, and town meetings would vote on whether communities like Unity and Lempster would participate, in my district's case."

Cutts said that the program could target members of the community who wouldn't normally volunteer.

"I also believe we have a segment of our population that isn't as involved in community activities as they could be," said Cutts, referring to senior citizens. "Reasons include lack of transportation, limited belief that they could really make a difference, belief they are of the old school and that nobody really wants them, fear, lack of incentive.

"I hear this when I visit and talk with folks around town and I hear it when I talk with younger folks about their parents, aunts and uncles," said Cutts. "The biggest sore point in Claremont is property taxes-- if we can offer an opportunity to reduce your taxes and help share your value in your community-- what a great mix."

Cloutier said that the program could be used in a different number of ways.

"Ideally I envision the local communities having broad leeway within certain established limits (such as the legislation's proposed maximum amount of tax relief of $750 for citizens over age 60) on which municipal departments would use volunteers, for which jobs, and for what amount of time," said Cloutier.

"As a Claremont citizen I think we might be able to use volunteers in such areas as transfer station and recycling center, Fiske Library, Goodwin Community Center, and the Visitors Center, among other examples," he said.

The visitor center was one of the locations Cutts described as having a need for volunteers.

"I'm not positive at this point but one opportunity that came to mind was our visitor center," said Cutts. "We would love to staff the visitor center but staffing won't allow that right now. I think there are Claremont senior citizens that would love an opportunity to volunteer staffing our visitor center simply because it would be fun. If they could get a tax break, even better."

No time or date has been scheduled for the LSR, Cloutier said.

Cutts added that the program could have other benefits.

"I do believe that many of our senior citizens would become more involved and share their help and expertise because that is one of the ways we teach them to stay healthy," said Cutts, adding that the incentive of a tax credit would entice more people to participate.

"We are really trying to get enabling legislation versus implementing this right away in Claremont," said Cutts. "We are trying to make the opportunity available. As I always say... build it and they will come."

Ben Bulkeley can be reached at (603) 543-3100 ext. 105, or by e-mail at bbulkeley@eagletimes.com

Thought of the day - Liberal Fascism at its best. NBC cuts Coulter; Keeps Perez. Gee I thought this was America.

I know it was too good to be true.

I should have known it was too good to be true. We received our property tax bill and our taxes went up 500 dollars. We figured with the cut in the education tax rate we would be paying less taxes. But no.... our assessment went up 160%. Absolutely amazing! The explanation we received is as follows.

"Their explanation to us was that they have changed the building lot valuation from $55,000 to $110,000. per lot, for the area that includes Winter, Pinnacle, Glidden, Barton, Croydon TP from Winter to the 4 Corners and Lovering Hill Roads. Also they have raised the land valuations on Old Springfield Rd.. I'm told that the land/building lot valuations in those areas were $55,000 for first acre and $2,000 for each additional acre in the building lots. Large tracts are handled a bit differently.

So apparently the new formula is now $110,000 up from $55,000. Their explanation to us was that this change occurred due to several recent high priced land sales that have occurred in the area described above. Some of these were land exchanges involved in settling the Ruger Estate, sold by the Ruger Company and land sold by the Ruger et al to abutters."


So look out Croydon. They were told to expect appeals....you would think that appeals would not be expected if something fishy were not going on. Also those assessed first get to pay two years higher taxes before everyone else. It is amazing that the assessors and the various governments in their infinite wisdom thought raising taxes in the current state of the economy was a good idea. What a bunch of greedy socialist schmucks.

To fight your assessment

Go on line to the State of NH Board of Tax and Land Appeals

www.state.nh.us/btla

Once on the site click Forms then click " Abatement Application to Municipality" and follow the instructions.

After the review by the Board of Selectmen and their decision, if you are still dissatisfied with the decision you can down load the form " Appeal Form to BTLA"

Cathy

SWEET SILVER LININGS TO OUR BALLOT INITIATIVE

The following email was sent to me by Small Government News. When reading the story below keep in mind that the 7,258,816 million dollars is tax money from homeowners that was sent to schools used to educate our children. But instead it ends up in union hands to be used against the taxpayer.

Cathy


Small Government News*
Thursday, November 13, 2008

Publisher: Carla Howell
Editor: Michael Cloud

===========================================================
SWEET SILVER LININGS TO OUR BALLOT INITIATIVE
TO END THE MASSACHUSETTS INCOME TAX
By Michael Cloud
===========================================================

Teachers Unions and their allies spent $7,268,816* to defeat our Ballot Question 1 to END the state income tax.

They won the vote.

That’s supposed to be the end of the story.

But it’s not. The Teachers Unions and their tax-profiteering allies have already gotten more than they bargained for.

Teachers Unions and their allies have incurred huge costs – immediate and long-term - from their campaign against ENDing the state income tax.

Taxpayers have lost nothing and gained much from the Teachers Unions’ NO on 1 campaign.

Massachusetts state income taxes are the same today as they were the day before the vote. Taxpayers didn’t lose a dime. Government didn’t gain a dime.

Taxpayers are no worse off than before the vote. Teachers Unions and their tax-benefiting allies are no better off.

The $7,268,816 we forced the Teachers Unions to spend to keep the state income tax is $7,268,816 they could NOT spend elsewhere to raise property taxes and other taxes.**

This year, the Massachusetts state legislature and Governor postponed government spending increases, announced spending cuts – and did NOT increase taxes. Our Ballot Initiative and our campaign for it are a key reason why.

The Teachers Unions regularly and repeatedly campaigned against ENDing the income tax on the grounds that it would raise property taxes. So did their allies. So did newspaper articles and editorials.

Hundreds and hundreds of advertisements by the Teachers Unions claimed:“YES on Question 1 = Raising Property Taxes.”

These ads aroused and reinforced opposition to raising property taxes.

The Teachers Unions campaign against our tax cut just might stop their 2009 campaigns for property tax increases.

Unintended consequences. Sweet silver linings.

***

* As of 11-1-08 Campaign Report.

** See Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt or “What is Seen and What is Not Seen (The Broken Window Fallacy)” by Frederic Bastiat.