Should Non Resident Tax Payers vote?

[LHemy]

I get annoyed when the town of New Hampton votes for expensive things. They reassessed and tax the heck out of waterfront properties like my own and yet I have not right to vote for the people who are spending my money.
There seems to be a double standard. Lakefront properties are getting taxed at higher rates and we seem to be the ones who have no say. They have lower rates and they get us to pay for all the stuff they want.
I get very very angry about it.
I have no problem paying for fire, police and schools to some degree. But, I use nothing from this town. Our private road gets no snow removal, we get no trash collection, we get virtually nothing and pay through the nose for it.
They are thieves in my opinion. Give me the right to vote in this town, give the rest of us who own places this right. I'm not asking to double my vote for things like President, but I should be able to say how my money is spent.

[no-engine]

OK, so the reverse should be applied: If I live & own my residence primarily in New Hampton and vote there, THEN when I own a residential property in Boston, a "second" home because I work there and sleep there. I claim just less then 50%. Should I be voting in Boston? NO, as it's not my "residence", which can be in only one municipality, by definition.
The laws and way for ages and ages.

It is troubling, for the reasons stated by many.

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by LHemy

I get annoyed when the town of New Hampton votes for expensive things. They reassessed and tax the heck out of waterfront properties like my own and yet I have not right to vote for the people who are spending my money.
There seems to be a double standard. Lakefront properties are getting taxed at higher rates and we seem to be the ones who have no say. They have lower rates and they get us to pay for all the stuff they want.
I get very very angry about it.
I have no problem paying for fire, police and schools to some degree. But, I use nothing from this town. Our private road gets no snow removal, we get no trash collection, we get virtually nothing and pay through the nose for it.
They are thieves in my opinion. Give me the right to vote in this town, give the rest of us who own places this right. I'm not asking to double my vote for things like President, but I should be able to say how my money is spent.

You as a lakefront owner are not being taxed at a higher rate (tax rate). You are being taxed at the same rate as the guy with a 2-bedroom ranch on the other side of town. You have a higher value applied to your rate due to the land value (being waterfront) and possibly a bigger building.

Question. Were you made aware of the tax rate and property value when you purchased your property? or did you not read that portion of the property disclosure?

Anybody wondering why most locals do not want non-residents to vote, your answer is above. Ill informed tax payers that could care less about what the town needs and are only looking out to save themselves a few bucks on a property that all the information was presented to them ahead of time as expensive.

And just to clear things up, "private" road means that the town does not maintain it.

[Charlie T]

And just to clear things up, "private" road means that the town does not maintain it.

So are you of the opinion that my house on a "private road" should be valued and taxed the same as the same property built on a town owned, built and maintained road? It seems like I get even less for my tax dollar with no recourse in valuation because my "non voting taxpayer" opinion doesn't matter to the town.

[Slickcraft]

Originally Posted by Charlie T

So are you of the opinion that my house on a "private road" should be valued and taxed the same as the same property built on a town owned, built and maintained road? It seems like I get even less for my tax dollar with no recourse in valuation because my "non voting taxpayer" opinion doesn't matter to the town.

Your house is assessed based on the market value of the property, not services received. That is the way it is throughout the state and in most other states. If you believe that the assessed value of your house is well above market value then you should talk to the assessor in your town.

There are a lot of high value properties on private roads, the market value determined by what people are willing to pay for property in that location.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by Slickcraft

Your house is assessed based on the market value of the property, not services received. That is the way it is throughout the state and in most other states. If you believe that the assessed value of your house is well above market value then you should talk to the assessor in your town.

There are a lot of high value properties on private roads, the market value determined by what people are willing to pay for property in that location.

I believe the point was that the non-residents pay for services they never use. The vast majority of lakeside houses are seasonal. The people who use them don't send their kids to the schools they are paying for. They use the roads but a fraction of the time the residents use. The list goes on.

People could complain that NRs don't have the best, long term interests of the town always in their minds and there's some truth to that. On the other hand the residents can spend with near impunity at rates that otherwise wouldn't be allowed for because it's OPM and beyond the NR's ability to control.

What's needed is some balance.

[Charlie T]

Originally Posted by Slickcraft

Your house is assessed based on the market value of the property, not services received. That is the way it is throughout the state and in most other states. If you believe that the assessed value of your house is well above market value then you should talk to the assessor in your town.

There are a lot of high value properties on private roads, the market value determined by what people are willing to pay for property in that location.

The problem is the assessor's don't believe and won't accept the argument that being on a private road diminishes the value of a home. They don't even want to hear about the expense of upkeep, plowing etc. Their response is "simiilar homes have similar value and the road makes no difference to us"
Kindly explain how that is justified!
I'm surprised they didn't propose that they should add the value of the paving that I paid to my assessment.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Originally Posted by jmen24

You as a lakefront owner are not being taxed at a higher rate (tax rate). You are being taxed at the same rate as the guy with a 2-bedroom ranch on the other side of town. You have a higher value applied to your rate due to the land value (being waterfront) and possibly a bigger building.

Question. Were you made aware of the tax rate and property value when you purchased your property? or did you not read that portion of the property disclosure?

Anybody wondering why most locals do not want non-residents to vote, your answer is above. Ill informed tax payers that could care less about what the town needs and are only looking out to save themselves a few bucks on a property that all the information was presented to them ahead of time as expensive.

And just to clear things up, "private" road means that the town does not maintain it.

How do you feel about full time residents without children being allowed to vote? Obviously "they could care less about what the town needs and are only looking out to save themselves a few bucks on property that all the information was presented to them ahead of time as expensive."

How about voting children of taxpayers who don't actually pay any taxes themselves? I have two of my own. It is ironic that they can vote at the town meeting where we live but I can't vote in the town meeting where I pay taxes.

This issue is not fully obvious to all of us.

BTW I voted No in the poll.

[jmen24]

Charlie T first. Before we get to deep in this conversation we need to look at what causes a road to be private vs. public.

A private road is typically created for one of two reasons.

It is a right of way that services one or multiple properties (private cul de sac or association). Typically these properties pay an association fee for upkeep or services, so you are basically paying a higher fee for privacy.

The second is that someone wanted to build down a class six road even though the town was not interested in taking it on for whatever reason, so someone fit the entire bill to bring that road up to spec with the knowledge that they were going to have to maintain it. These situations can typically be brought into full town maintenance if enough houses are built per mile to off-set the cost of maintenance (then they raise the town tax rate to pay for it) and enough people on the road want it to happen. Usually though if it is not at current spec, which typically requires two points of entry, the town will not play.

You are in a tough spot, but living on a private road has benifits over us public road folks.

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy

How do you feel about full time residents without children being allowed to vote? Obviously "they could care less about what the town needs and are only looking out to save themselves a few bucks on property that all the information was presented to them ahead of time as expensive."

How about voting children of taxpayers who don't actually pay any taxes themselves? I have two of my own. It is ironic that they can vote at the town meeting where we live but I can't vote in the town meeting where I pay taxes.

This issue is not fully obvious to all of us.

BTW I voted No in the poll.

I can understand your feeling on this as my folks entered this arena about 11 years ago. This is their take on that; they do not have a choice in the matter but if by paying into the burden of the school budget means that someone elses children get the same opportunity or better than their kids got, then they are OK with it.

On your second point. I would have no problem with this situation, but I can only hope that this situation is handled properly. By that I mean, having parents that will take the time to discuss the issues with these children and clearly explain why they (the parents) are choosing to hold a particular platform on town spending (why is spending OK in one arena and not in another). That way, they understand why it is important to you and what you used to base your opinion on and so that they understand that you are not simply voting solely based on emotion; an all to common trait in voters it seems.

Anyway, my opinion on these types of issues is not a secret and I do not hold my nose to a non-resident in my town, thinking that I am better than they are, the same cannot always be said when the shoe is on the other foot. This coming from the resident of a town that shares police, ambulance, road maintenance and a school with the town next door, but we pay $2.00 more/K of value. We have a fire station and so do they and the town offices are on our side as are the school and police station, with seperate post offices. Try to figure out that arrangement as I have never been able to get a straight anwser from anyone, other than their side (no geographic town boundary either) has Highland Lake, so maybe those folks are getting a break to off-set the higher valuation, who knows.

And I also voted "no" in this poll. Suprise, suprise.

[Mashugana]

When it comes to local laws governing the land, if you own land and pay property taxes you should have a vote and the right to local representation.

No taxation without representation PERIOD.

[joey2665]

Does this mean that every state I own property in I should be able to vote. I dont think so you should only be able to vote in the state of your primary residence. What about people that own property here or for that matter anywhere in the US and they are not US citizens do they now have the right to vote? When you own property outside of your state of residence resolve your self to the fact that you can not vote.

Remeber though if you have property issues this does not mean you do not have the right to legal remedies allowed under local law when you disagree with local building codes and laws regarding your property.

[Lakegeezer]

Be glad that the lake region towns don't do what Park City Utah does. They give residents a 45% discount on their property taxes and still don't give the non-residents a vote. It would be nice to have a system that let non-resident taxpayers have a vote on some issues, but in Moultonborough, they can at least speak at town meetings with permission from the moderator. Why couldn't a town implement a non-binding online voting process to at least get the pulse of non-voting taxpayers?

[laketrout]

What is the defination of timeframe someone has to spend for this discussion of a "non- resident taxpayer"?

Is it someone who owns a home/condo- whatever a dock? and spends a day here or weekend or weekends or months here. Is this like State of Florida in order to be qualified to be a resident I have to spend 6 months of my time there, and most snow birds come back and forth- very difficult to enforce. This is to much of gray area.
If I am shelling out thousands I would like to have a say. Currently I do not have the free time to vote up here but If I have the time maybe I will if I am informed about topics that are important to me.

Do most town issues at the lake pertain to me? Yes and No.
Library trustee, or similiar do not impact me but maybe a huge bond issue does. How do you draw a line on how to vote for what and when? So what is next, Big brother telling me to vote or not to vote or else. Again who would enforce this? A "honor system" or a voter enforcement board and at what cost in tough economic times. Most of the lake towns would not exist if it were not for Summer residents and the tax dollars they bring only to mention a few "trickle down theory at work". Next winter just take a drive around, the summer resident to winter residnet ratio is probally cut by 50% or greater. Would the new high schools and public safety buildings "sans" federal funds exist up this way without tax revenue-No.

Like most town elections only a small percentage vote. In my southern NH hometown only 10% voted in the last town election.
This thread should be about "apathy" which is more of an issue.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Be glad that the lake region towns don't do what Park City Utah does. They give residents a 45% discount on their property taxes and still don't give the non-residents a vote. It would be nice to have a system that let non-resident taxpayers have a vote on some issues, but in Moultonborough, they can at least speak at town meetings with permission from the moderator. Why couldn't a town implement a non-binding online voting process to at least get the pulse of non-voting taxpayers?

Moultonborough's annual Summer Informational Town Meeting will be held this Thursday the 22nd at Town Hall at 4:00 PM. Good opportunity for you to voice your opinions.

[no-engine]

Like we all have said, one must decide where they want to reside!
Regardless to owning property on Lake, across town from Lake, in Boston, or in Naples FL. Where is the majority of time spent? Answer that and vote there.

All info of meetings are usually in news media. In today's life, town happenings and issues at meetings seem to be posted on town websites.
It's time to get a life, as it's easy to be informed of issues before voters.

Per Roberts Rules, a non voter can be recognized and speak about an issue!

[Yankee]

NH law requires that a person be a citizen before being allowed to vote. Been that way for 200+ years, and it's not going to change anytime soon.

I find the elitist arrogance of out of staters absolutely astounding. They knew before they bought property that they would be subject to NH law. Now they not only want to vote in their own state but here as well. Tall about having your cake and eating it too! To think that they believe that they have the right to vote(yes, voting is a right!) in a town and state that they don't live in is astounding indeed. Their indifference for our state's constitution is remarkable and unjustifiable.

Using their logic, if I worked in Mass. and lived in NH, should I have the right to vote in Mass? I would say yes, absolutely.

Simply ludicrous.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Yankee

NH law requires that a person be a citizen before being allowed to vote. Been that way for 200+ years, and it's not going to change anytime soon.

I find the elitist arrogance of out of staters absolutely astounding. They knew before they bought property that they would be subject to NH law. Now they not only want to vote in their own state but here as well. Tall about having your cake and eating it too! To think that they believe that they have the right to vote(yes, voting is a right!) in a town and state that they don't live in is astounding indeed. Their indifference for our state's constitution is remarkable and unjustifiable.

Using their logic, if I worked in Mass. and lived in NH, should I have the right to vote in Mass? I would say yes, absolutely.

Simply ludicrous.

I'm sorry but New Hampshire law only requires that you not be registered to vote somewhere else in order to vote here. If you are in New Hampshire on election day and you are not registered somewhere else then you have a right to vote in NH.

I double checked this with the Secretary of States office a couple of years ago.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I'm sorry but New Hampshire law only requires that you not be registered to vote somewhere else in order to vote here. If you are in New Hampshire on election day and you are not registered somewhere else then you have a right to vote in NH.

I double checked this with the Secretary of States office a couple of years ago.

As much as I hate to banter with you and your misguided view of just about everything:

To be accurate, the person must be a resident. Which is defined as:

A person coming into a place with intention to establish his domicil or permanent residence, and who in consequence actually remains there.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Yankee

NH law requires that a person be a citizen before being allowed to vote. Been that way for 200+ years, and it's not going to change anytime soon.

I find the elitist arrogance of out of staters absolutely astounding. They knew before they bought property that they would be subject to NH law. Now they not only want to vote in their own state but here as well. Tall about having your cake and eating it too! To think that they believe that they have the right to vote(yes, voting is a right!) in a town and state that they don't live in is astounding indeed. Their indifference for our state's constitution is remarkable and unjustifiable.


Using their logic, if I worked in Mass. and lived in NH, should I have the right to vote in Mass? I would say yes, absolutely.

Simply ludicrous.

So, just how do you define the word "Live" ? This is how the Merrium Webster dictionary defines it.


Main Entry: 1live
Pronunciation: \ˈliv\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lived; liv·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English libban; akin to Old High German lebēn to live
Date: before 12th century
intransitive verb
1 : to be alive : have the life of an animal or plant
2 : to continue alive
3 : to maintain oneself : subsist
4 a : to occupy a home : dwell b : to be located or stored
5 : to attain eternal life
6 : to conduct or pass one's life
7 : to remain in human memory or record
8 : to have a life rich in experience
9 : cohabit
transitive verb
1 : to pass through or spend the duration of
2 : act out, practice —often used with out
3 : to exhibit vigor, gusto, or enthusiasm in
4 a : to experience firsthand b : to be thoroughly absorbed by or involved with

— live it up : to live with gusto and usually fast and loose

— live up to : to act or be in accordance with

— live with : to put up with : accept, tolerate


They may not spend 365 days a year here but it sure sounds to me like these people "Live" here, and if anything is ludicrous, it's your comparison.
These "out of staters" aren't living in CT. PA. NY. FL etc. and working in New Hampshire. They Own property here !
If you "Owned" property in MA, then Yes, you should have the right, to have a say in how your tax dollars are spent there.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

So, just how do you define the word "Live" ? This is how the Merrium Webster dictionary defines it.


Main Entry: 1live
Pronunciation: \ˈliv\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lived; liv·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English libban; akin to Old High German lebēn to live
Date: before 12th century
intransitive verb
1 : to be alive : have the life of an animal or plant
2 : to continue alive
3 : to maintain oneself : subsist
4 a : to occupy a home : dwell b : to be located or stored
5 : to attain eternal life
6 : to conduct or pass one's life
7 : to remain in human memory or record
8 : to have a life rich in experience
9 : cohabit
transitive verb
1 : to pass through or spend the duration of
2 : act out, practice —often used with out
3 : to exhibit vigor, gusto, or enthusiasm in
4 a : to experience firsthand b : to be thoroughly absorbed by or involved with

— live it up : to live with gusto and usually fast and loose

— live up to : to act or be in accordance with

— live with : to put up with : accept, tolerate


They may not spend 365 days a year here but it sure sounds to me like these people "Live" here, and if anything is ludicrous, it's your comparison.
These "out of staters" aren't living in CT. PA. NY. FL etc. and working in New Hampshire. They Own property here !
If you "Owned" property in MA, then Yes, you should have the right, to have a say in how your tax dollars are spent there.

What you suggest would not be legal. Property ownership does not grant voting priviledges. If I owned 10, no let's say 1000 pieces of property between MA, CT, and NH. Would that mean that I get to vote 1000 times? Nope. I could only claim one of them as a residence--And I would have to live there more than 50% of the year.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Yankee

What you suggest would not be legal. Property ownership does not grant voting priviledges. If I owned 10, no let's say 1000 pieces of property between MA, CT, and NH. Would that mean that I get to vote 1000 times? Nope. I could only claim one of them as a residence--And I would have to live there more than 50% of the year.

I don't know how you come up with these comparison of yours but I do believe that whatever your smoking has to be illegal.

I give up on this thread. I believe Everybody that pays property taxes should have the Right to say who gets to spend those dollars and how. I don't give a rats a$$ what anybody else believes.

[Skip]

Early on in this thread you are the one that ties the right to vote with paying property taxes:

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

I give up on this thread. I believe Everybody that pays property taxes should have the Right to say who gets to spend those dollars and how. I don't give a rats a$$ what anybody else believes.

And then you make this statement:

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

This thread is about whether or not Non Resident tax payers should have the right to vote. I don't believe it makes any referance to people, resident or not, being bothered with having to pay property taxes !
Your post is coming in from somewhere way out in left field.

Explanation?

[Pineedles]

Thank you BI, Skip, and AW. I kinda knew it would be illegal to vote in NH, but you all have confirmed it. You guys and girl are the best. As for other posters who criticize folks that are upset that we non-resident taxpayers would like to have a voice in how our tax dollars are spent..... Our home was built over 100 years ago and we have inherited the home. We have gone through expensive legal expenses to set up a trust to make sure that that cottage will never fall into dissrepair or be SOLD. So despite the notion that you think we will profit from its sale some day,,,, check back when the court system of the United States is no longer in effect...Hopefully that will be a day I never see..

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Skip

Early on in this thread you are the one that ties the right to vote with paying property taxes:



And then you make this statement:



Explanation?

Yes I did ! I do firmly believe that paying property taxes should give a "taxpayer" the right to have a say in Who spends those tax dollars and How !! After all, it Is There money. Isn't it ?
Where in any of my posts on this thread do I make referance to being bothered by "having to pay property taxes" ??
One thing doesn't even come close to meaning the other. I am at a loss to even understand how any person can make a correlation between the two.
Are you and Yankee smoking the same illegal substance ?

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

Yes I did ! I do firmly believe that paying property taxes should give a "taxpayer" the right to have a say in Who spends those tax dollars and How !! After all, it Is There money. Isn't it ?
Where in any of my posts on this thread do I make referance to being bothered by "having to pay property taxes" ??
One thing doesn't even come close to meaning the other. I am at a loss to even understand how any person can make a correlation between the two.
Are you and Yankee smoking the same illegal substance ?

Great idea! Own property in fifty states, pay property taxes on them, and vote 50 times in 50 different places!!!

Could you tell us what you are smoking?

[jmen24]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

Yes I did ! I do firmly believe that paying property taxes should give a "taxpayer" the right to have a say in Who spends those tax dollars and How !! After all, it Is There money. Isn't it ?
Where in any of my posts on this thread do I make referance to being bothered by "having to pay property taxes" ??
One thing doesn't even come close to meaning the other. I am at a loss to even understand how any person can make a correlation between the two.
Are you and Yankee smoking the same illegal substance ?

Buy property in any other state in this country and go complain that they won't let you vote either. This system has been in place for quite some time. You were aware before you bought and are aware now, also the next buyer will be aware as well, unless they decide to live here fulltime. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am fairly certain you are not alone, in not being able to vote as a non-resident property owner anywhere in this country.

IMO, there is another reason why this bothers you so much now. If it bothered you this much when you purchased the property I would think you would have passed, given your attitude on the situation. I have a thought, but am not going to make any assumptions on your situation.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Yankee

...And I would have to live there more than 50% of the year...

There is no "term of residency" in the State of New Hampshire, and the belief that you would have to live here "more the 50% of the year is incorrect.

Bear Islander continues to be correct in his comments about this subject.

In New Hampshire I can vote simply if I claim I am a resident the day of the election, provide or sign an affidavit stating/verifying my current NH address and do not vote in any other election.

And in actuality I do not even have to have a valid physical address. The Courts have ruled that a homeless person with no address still has a right to vote in at least one locality.

And this has been further addressed for those folks that live completely mobile either by motorhome or trailer. They can claim NH as home, even if it is a PO Box, as long as they do not claim any other locale as home.

I say this as a long time elected moderator for my hometown and as an attendee (mandatory) of several election forums hosted by members of the NH Attorney General's Office. This subject invariably comes up at each session and is clearly explained by AG Staff.

The concept is simple. Everyone has a right to vote in one location. The Government is extremely limited in its ability to attempt to restrict that right by employing numerous qualifications on residency. That is why in every major election cycle in New Hampshire (and a great many other States) there is always a number of political advocasy groups challenging voters based on perceived residency issues (it was a big issue in NH after the last Presidential election) and after investigating hundreds of complaints no criminal intent is discovered or prosecuted.

[Pineedles]

Skip,

The part where you say "as long as they do not claim any other locale as home." prompts a question. If I go to my CT town clerk's office and un-register to vote, if I can even do this I'm not sure but if I were able, I could truthfully answer the registered to vote question. However, since there are such things such as my driver's license, CCW license, all tied to CT, I guess I couldn't truthfully answer the question about where my home is, even for one day. Am I correct?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

Skip,

The part where you say "as long as they do not claim any other locale as home." prompts a question. If I go to my CT town clerk's office and un-register to vote, if I can even do this I'm not sure but if I were able, I could truthfully answer the registered to vote question. However, since there are such things such as my driver's license, CCW license, all tied to CT, I guess I couldn't truthfully answer the question about where my home is, even for one day. Am I correct?

You are correct.

For purposes of residency (unless you are a college student or active duty military) you still have to prove or sign an affadavit that NH is your home.

Here's an example. You have a home, driver's license and cars registered in CT. You have a camp on the Lake up here. The day of the election you decide that you won't vote in CT so you go down and sign the residency affadavit and vote in NH. You make sure you don't vote in CT. But you never make an attempt to change your license or registrations and claim you moved back to CT the day after the election.

In this case, if discovered, you will be prosecuted by the AG for voter fraud as an argument will be made you really never changed residency.

Let's look at it another way.

Just before or during the election cycle you also move your license and vehicle registrations to NH. Even if its on the day of the election. Here you have clearly established your intent and it is OK to vote, because there is no length of residency requirement in NH.

Be forewarned though. Your home State may have entirely different laws and regulations on residency. I am only commenting on what the election laws are in reference to NH.

In reality its a commmon sense call for the moderator on the day of the election. I had to deal with hundreds of UNH students bussed every election cycle, and sort it out each time. What I found in Dover is that while there was plenty of confusion on election day by many voters, I never once had an honest case of intentional voter fraud.

[Argie's Wife]

NH RSA 669:4 Qualifications of Voters. Any person having his domicile within the town and qualified to vote under RSA 654:1 - 654:2 and 654:4 - 654:6 and who is on the town checklist shall be qualified to vote in town elections.

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

NH RSA 654:1 Voter; Office Holder.

I. Every inhabitant of the state, having a single domicile for voting purposes, being a citizen of the United States, of the age provided for in Article 11 of Part First of the Constitution of New Hampshire, shall have a right at any meeting or election, to vote in the town, ward, or unincorporated place in which he or she is domiciled. An inhabitant's domicile for voting purposes is that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence and manifests an intent to maintain a single continuous presence for domestic, social, and civil purposes relevant to participating in democratic self-government. A person has the right to change domicile at any time, however a mere intention to change domicile in the future does not, of itself, terminate an established domicile before the person actually moves. A person's claim of domicile for voting purposes shall not be conclusive of the person's residence for any other legal purpose.
[The rest of this RSA can be read here: http://www.sos.nh.gov/rsa654.htm]

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

NH Constitution - Article 11
[Art.] 11. [Elections and Elective Franchises.] All elections are to be free, and every inhabitant of the state of 18 years of age and upwards shall have an equal right to vote in any election. Every person shall be considered an inhabitant for the purposes of voting in the town, ward, or unincorporated place where he has his domicile. No person shall have the right to vote under the constitution of this state who has been convicted of treason, bribery or any willful violation of the election laws of this state or of the United States; but the supreme court may, on notice to the attorney general, restore the privilege to vote to any person who may have forfeited it by conviction of such offenses. The general court shall provide by law for voting by qualified voters who at the time of the biennial or state elections, or of the primary elections therefor, or of city elections, or of town elections by official ballot, are absent from the city or town of which they are inhabitants, or who by reason of physical disability are unable to vote in person, in the choice of any officer or officers to be elected or upon any question submitted at such election. Voting registration and polling places shall be easily accessible to all persons including disabled and elderly persons who are otherwise qualified to vote in the choice of any officer or officers to be elected or upon any question submitted at such election. The right to vote shall not be denied to any person because of the non-payment of any tax. Every inhabitant of the state, having the proper qualifications, has equal right to be elected into office.

June 2, 1784
Amended 1903 to provide that in order to vote or be eligible for office a person must be able to read the English language and to write.
Amended 19l2 to prohibit those convicted of treason, bribery or willfull violation of the election laws from voting or holding elective office.
Amended 1942 to provide for absentee voting in general elections.
Amended 1956 to provide for absentee voting in primary elections.
Amended 1968 to provide right to vote not denied because of nonpayment of taxes. Also amended in 1968 to delete an obsolete phrase.
Amended 1976 to reduce voting age to 18.
Amended 1984 to provide accessibility to all registration and polling places.

[Bear Islander]

As Skip mentioned there are RVers roving the country that do not have permanent residences. An estimated 100,000 citizens, mostly retired, consider their motor home or trailer to be their domicile. They consider themselves to have "mobile domiciles".

Therefore when they get a hook up at a RV park or park in a friend or relatives driveway they consider themselves instant residence of that community, and entitled to vote immediately.

[Irrigation Guy]

Originally Posted by jmen24

Ill informed tax payers that could care less about what the town needs and are only looking out to save themselves a few bucks on a property that all the information was presented to them ahead of time as expensive.

This is why most of Florida has lousy public schools. The retired folks that live and claim residency there do not vote favorable when it comes to school budgets and this makes for a lousy school system.

I'm sure at home where some lakefront owners raised thier kids they voted plenty of money for schools to make sure their kids got a good education(unless they sent them private$$$). The school system in a town is also a primary reason some people move to a particular town vs another. This is likely true whether they have kids or not due to the fact that schools indirectly factor into property values.

[trfour]

Originally Posted by LocalRealtor

This is why most of Florida has lousy public schools. The retired folks that live and claim residency there do not vote favorable when it comes to school budgets and this makes for a lousy school system.

I'm sure at home where some lakefront owners raised thier kids they voted plenty of money for schools to make sure their kids got a good education(unless they sent them private$$$). The school system in a town is also a primary reason some people move to a particular town vs another. This is likely true whether they have kids or not due to the fact that schools indirectly factor into property values.

And, They often do voluntary, [ NO Charge ] work in 'their' communities to enhance education of the young!

I would ask YOU, where are you getting you're numbers from????

Now in most cases, and most younger folks get free education from the elderly, NO?...

Some need to take a better look at where they are getting their Nummer's from!...


Terry
__________________________________________________ _______

[Seaplane Pilot]

Ever hear of this? Funny thing is, the Tea Party movement is once again in the news. Better go back to the history books.