Moultonborough Taxes

[John Mercier]

There have not been donor towns since 2011.
I already told you that.

On November 20th, Judge David W. Ruoff in Steven Rand et al vs State of NH ruled the system that allowed State Ed taxes to be kept by the town.
It will now go to the NHSC and if upheld, donor towns will return to the mix.
The excess money collected will be sent to the State for redistribution.

He also has a ruling that the current State Ed Adequacy Grant is only about half of what it should be.
Because we are working to lower business taxes in the State to stay competitive with New York (Northeast Quad), and are dissolving the D&I, the most likely out come of the new funding requirement, should it hold up in the NHSC, is a instead of raising half of the money from SWEPT is to raise three quarters or more from SWEPT... thus increasing the State Ed rate by about three or four times.

I have been pointing this out for months.

NH is generally a conservative State - Yankee Frugal - it taxes consumption/recreation, but not production/savings.

[tis]

I know you told us that. But when the state takes taxes from the town and funnels (LI's word) it back to other towns that didn't raise enough, I'm not sure there is a lot of difference, just in the name.

[jeffk]

The money marked as the "state education" component of the property tax (SWEPT - StateWide Educational Property Tax), since 2011, stays with the town it is collected in. It is labeled "state" because the state REQUIRES that the town collects it. The state requires this because the state constitution requires that the state must provide for an adequate education (a continually debated amount). SWEPT discharges the state's responsibility.

When SWEPT was created, it was determined that $363 million annually would be needed to FUND "adequate" education. The state property tax assessed rate is set, based on total current state property values, to raise that $363 million, however, the money is NOT sent to the state. It remains in the town that collects it as the state's "contribution" to the town's needs for an adequate education.

Since 2011, IF the local SWEPT amount received exceeds the local school budget for the town (voted locally), the excess is KEPT by the town and can be used to defray other tax liabilities thereby lowering the other tax rate components.

To emphasize, NO money from SWEPT goes to the state. Since 2011, there are no longer any "donor" towns. Any addition aid assistance (food programs, etc.) is provided by the state from non property tax revenues (see below).

The Local Education Tax simply pays for any excess beyond the money provided by SWEPT as passed by the individual town in their school budget.

Beyond SWEPT and an adequate education, the schools also report additional AID required on a per student basis, such as supplemental meal assistance. The state assists (at a small proportional amount) with such costs by using money from other state sources of revenue, such as the Business Enterprise Tax. The remaining AID funding is provided through local school property taxes.

The demand for more money for education is unending, even in other states with income and sales taxes. It is hard to determine what benefit these states get for all their additional revenue dedicated to education as compared to New Hampshire. The forces for education spending are continually launching legal assaults on New Hampshire's limited funding methods to pry additional funds and additional revenue methods (income tax, sales tax) from NH citizens.

The dependance on property taxes creates stress on some property tax owners but the reality is that most owners of expensive, highly taxed properties can afford the tax. "Solutions" like income or sales taxes come with a plethora of ills, especially a revenue source that can be tweaked by the state to provide more money any time they want to spend on some idiotic venture to "buy" campaign funding from grateful businesses. Check Vermont, who went full boat into taxation to "relieve" property owners. They are much worse off for it, especially their citizens.

There is no utopian solution to paying taxes. All approaches have their down sides. As tough as property taxes can be for some, they are the best solution for local control and controlling spending.

[BroadHopper]

JeffK is right about the education portion. The town collects the money.

The state should fund at least $7,356 per pupil – not the current $4,100 – the judge holds.

You will see this amount will almost double when the state implements the court ruling. I'm trying to find the article that states the amount per pupil average is around $13,000 statewide if you include administrative, property, and special education expenses.

And this debate will go on and on and on...................

[longislander]

NH Dept. of Education
Posted: January 06, 2023


https://www.education.nh.gov/news/ne...continues-rise

https://www.education.nh.gov/sites/g...-2000-2022.pdf


Add more controversy

https://nhcharterschools.org/faq/

[tummyman]

So we know M'boro spends way more per pupil than the state or the judge considers for adequate. M'boro is in the $40,000 + range per student. And last year the SWEPT was $1.22 per thousand from the state. The question is.....what will the tax rate impact be if M'boro has to return money to the state? Is it just that taxes would go up be $1.22 or is there some sort of fancy calculation that I cannot seem to find. HELP !!

[BroadHopper]

the average per pupil expenditure of $19,399 across the state as per court.

https://www.nhbr.com/judge-nh-school...onstitutional/

[jeffk]

Originally Posted by tummyman

So we know M'boro spends way more per pupil than the state or the judge considers for adequate. M'boro is in the $40,000 + range per student. And last year the SWEPT was $1.22 per thousand from the state. The question is.....what will the tax rate impact be if M'boro has to return money to the state? Is it just that taxes would go up be $1.22 or is there some sort of fancy calculation that I cannot seem to find. HELP !!

First, with rough numbers, a recent report of student numbers is 501 and the school budget for 2022/23 was $15,541,613. This yields $31,021 per student, not $40,000+. Plus, I suspect this budget includes aid programs like free school lunches which is technically outside education funding.

"If M'boro needs to return money to the state"? This would only happen if the court cases were successful and, frankly, the contortions needed to address any new legal requirements are unknown and unknowable. It's legislative sausage making and who knows what will come out of the grinder. Also, it's a ways out in the future. The court cases will not be easily resolved and any resolution will be challenged to the State Supreme Court. Then, there will be some grace period to accomplish a change through the legislature. No matter what some judge would like, trying to immediately ram through any funding changes NOW would be a fiscal nightmare. The state Supreme Count would not let it happen so abruptly.

There is no "calculation" to find because, CURRENTLY, there is no mechanism for return of ANY SWEPT funds to the state. ALL SWEPT funds are retained by the town. Period.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by jeffk

First, with rough numbers, a recent report of student numbers is 501 and the school budget for 2022/23 was $15,541,613. This yields $31,021 per student, not $40,000+. Plus, I suspect this budget includes aid programs like free school lunches which is technically outside education funding.

Regardless of $31K or $40K per student funding calculation.... If the courts dictate that the State Governing body kick more into the towns, it would like be a give and take type issue.... While that State Fund line item would go up, the local portion could come down. I also wonder if that straight calculation isn't flawed when it comes to per student educational funding... As I agree that the school budget might be hard to interpret, because of funding for things like school lunches etc. and other "non" educational line items, some of which also get federal funding... I read the other day, that School Nurses don't fall under the envelope of being required for proper education...

Now with all that said.... we continue to go around and around on the education issue.... And the laws may not have donor towns any more, and I thank Jeff K. for his information on the subject... But if the State is not funding schools at an acceptable level, causing hard ships on the towns, that is just as bad.... and negatively effect our property Taxes.... Which leads me to the same ultimately conclusion, that financially the State of NH has funding problems that they are willing to pass the buck on. Towns like Moultonborough or any of the towns on the lake form what I have seen get a break, because of the seasonal home ownership that can help offset the expenditures, and don't drive additional costs....

If the State would start to better understand its strength and weakness in terms of revenue generation, the system could likely be made a whole lot better....

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by tummyman

So we know M'boro spends way more per pupil than the state or the judge considers for adequate. M'boro is in the $40,000 + range per student. And last year the SWEPT was $1.22 per thousand from the state. The question is.....what will the tax rate impact be if M'boro has to return money to the state? Is it just that taxes would go up be $1.22 or is there some sort of fancy calculation that I cannot seem to find. HELP !!

If SWEPT returns to the constitutional condition, with no increase in per pupil expenditure... a rough calculation could be determined by multiplying the number of students in Moultonborough times the per pupil grant. Multiplying the State Ed rate times the total property valuation. And subtracting the first number from the second.

(State ED Rate x Total Property Valuation)-(State ED Adequacy Grant X # of pupils) = Excess Funds Sent to State

At this time, it is impossible to tell if changes to the State ED Rate or the State Ed Adequacy Grant will change.

If history holds true... if will go from the Superior Court judge to the NHSC. The NHSC will find the current status quo unconstitutional. The Legislature will balk and try to change the court - or bring public opinion against it. The majority of the Legislature will shift from one party to the other. They will uphold the court finding and try to fix the system to fall within the State Constitution - as they have all sworn to do, but hate to. And my guess, is the State ED Adequacy Grant will be nearly doubled, with the new money being found by changing the State Ed Rate. A compromise will be made to do it over time as to not shock the system...

History could be different this time...

[upthesaukee]

Moultonborough is not alone. I got my tax bill yesterday and I went from $854 6 months ago to $1,246 due on 12/27. Merry Christmas to me and my family.

Last year, the Town of Alton approved EVERY Warrant Article on the ballot except for spending $20,000 for a sign saying "Welcome to Alton".

Time to sharpen the pencil.

Back to Moultonborough and their frustrations.

Dave

[tis]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

Moultonborough is not alone. I got my tax bill yesterday and I went from $854 6 months ago to $1,246 due on 12/27. Merry Christmas to me and my family.

Last year, the Town of Alton approved EVERY Warrant Article on the ballot except for spending $20,000 for a sign saying "Welcome to Alton".

Time to sharpen the pencil.

Back to Moultonborough and their frustrations.

Dave

You forgot though, you can't compare Dec to Jun. The spring bill is always half of the full bill for the previous year. The Dec bill reflects the full amount for the current year less the June amount you already paid.

[upthesaukee]

Originally Posted by tis

You forgot though, you can't compare Dec to Jun. The spring bill is always half of the full bill for the previous year. The Dec bill reflects the full amount for the current year less the June amount you already paid.

tis, I do realize that. My tax bill for this year (6 month) is $1,246. Last June, it was $854. Our Town Facebook page lit up yesterday with the receipt of the tax bill yesterday.

When I write the check on December 27th, the bill is and will be the $1246. In late May, I will get installment two for the same $1246 (roughly). Everything has gone up in Alton, the town amount, the school amount, the state amount, and the county amount.

Dave