Standards, at last, for Claremont City Council

Unlike many others, I wasn’t displeased to read that the Claremont City Council voted to remove Jim Contois on Feb. 8.

The removal has no merit. It’s an exercise in sheer gall, almost certainly illegal.

However, for five years I’ve tried to encourage the Claremont council to uphold any standard of behavior amongst councilors. The council wouldn’t issue so much as a censure when Jon Stone and buddies “joked” online about hacking me and my wife with machetes. Nor would the council act when, amidst the worst pandemic in a century, Stone lied about public health policy on a quasi-official Facebook page.

In both cases, I listened to nauseating amounts of rhetoric about a councilor’s seemingly illimitable First Amendment rights. I witnessed infuriating episodes of hand-wringing about the ability of the council to enforce ethical standards amongst councilors. I endured idiotic arguments about the lasting damage censure might inflict upon the camaraderie amongst councilors.

Well, that was just censure — a slap on the wrist, kiddie stuff. In the case of Councilor Contois, we’ve skipped right over censure and jumped straight to removal. It’s refreshing now to see several of the very same councilors (Stone, O’Hearne, Matteau, Koloski) who argued against censure measures now endorse a full-throated policy of the Claremont Council enforcing a code of conduct amongst members.

So now, let’s have no more nonsense about inability of the council to hold members accountable. That, at least, is a step in the right direction. And I, for one, am grateful.

Sam Killay

Claremont

Fix New Hampshire property appraisals

The VTDigger article in the Feb. 4 Valley News (Facing a crisis, Vermont House panel considers transforming property value reappraisals”) raises interesting points about the current state of property value reappraisals in Vermont. The situation in New Hampshire is even more dire because of the state’s reliance on property taxes; mandated appraisals are not getting done, and there are too few professional assessors.

Appraised property values in New Hampshire are supposed to be equitable and proportional. By my and my friends’ calculations from data available through the town, the Lyme reappraisal in 2021 produced a big shift in the tax burden from high value properties to those at the lower end of the scale. Properties below $500,000 saw their taxes increase 8.9% on average, while those valued above $500,000 saw a 4.4% increase. Since that time, higher-end properties have been selling at an average of 40% above appraised value, while the lower-end sales average is 15% above. Individual property owners have no mechanism for challenging a town’s inequitable valuation.

On Jan. 26, Department of Revenue Administration leaders visited Lyme and presented to about 30 citizens. The message was that the statistics are bad for all of the state on how far from market valuation most properties are but Lyme is not bad (what a great motto, “Lyme, it’s not too bad!”) and that assessors have a hard time valuing high-end properties; (ironically, real estate agents and buyers are coming up with values.)

The department used to conduct all the revaluations statewide, but a state cost-cutting measure pushed that responsibility out to the towns. A statewide assessment process would be a step toward restoring the “equality and proportionality of taxation” that is in the New Hampshire constitution.

Hebe Quinton

Lyme

‘Voter-owned elections’ bill should pass

Many New Hampshire voters believe that our voices are being drowned out by excessive, secret and especially out-of-state election donations from multinational corporations and from a tiny percentage of excessively wealthy individuals.

The outrageous expense of running a campaign today causes many candidates with good ideas to be excluded from running for office. Many other candidates without financial resources are willing to accept exorbitant amounts of campaign donations without realizing that when elections are over and it comes time for laws to be passed, the wealthy and powerful will be expecting something in return for their donations, Those donations then quickly become “legalized bribes.”

The more financially dependent our public officials become on wealthy donors to sustain their next election, the higher the prices the rest of us are paying for the necessities of life: fuel, medical treatment, education, insurance, electricity etc.

What we really need in New Hampshire is a bill calling for an alternative election funding system which is constitutional and which does not rely exclusively on excessively large private donations coming from a very tiny, unrepresentative, and elite portion of our society.

We actually have such bill just waiting to be passed at the Statehouse on Tuesday, Feb. 14. If passed, HB 324 will make New Hampshire the fourth state to have passed a “voter-owned election funding” law. To learn more regarding HB 324 go to: https://tinyurl.com/nhvoea

Then contact your New Hampshire state representatives before Feb. 14. Thank you.

Corinne Dodge

Derry, N.H.

]]>