Quote:
Originally Posted by tummyman
So for those of you who want to get into the real details, ...
So the math is a start rate of $4.14 plus $.47 for the unassigned fund balance decrease, $.10 for less revenue, and $.99 for more expenses you get the $5.70 rate ...
|
This is a great explanation of the budget side of things.
But much of this increase is not due to local issues and not subject to local control. People are upset that expenses are not being controlled locally but out of control Federal spending has driven equally out of control inflation over the last couple years. That has driven labor costs and material costs up. It takes time for these costs to ripple through the system and HERE THEY NOW ARE.
Sure you could go to a meeting and vote down the school increases but that simply places the town in an uncompetitive position compared to other districts who recognize the realities of the economy and raise salaries. It would also force delays in needed physical plant repairs and maintenance and THAT always is bad.
Further, while the town recognizes a increase in property valuation, it is not distributed equally. Lake property values have exploded and off lake property not nearly as much. This shifts more of the tax burden to lake property owners. You can complain about it but the origin of the current system is the thought that someone who owns an expensive house can better afford to pay more taxes than someone who has a cheaper house, which is USUALLY TRUE. Suggestions that people that HOLD property should be shielded from tax increases and the burden shifted to people who BUY expensive properties has been tried in California. It was a disaster. Since the people that HOLD property (the majority of people) are protected they felt free to vote costly increases in. The cost of property AND the taxes on the new owners soared and made it impossible to find reasonably priced housing.
There is also talk about sales taxes and income taxes to "balance" things out. However, that just explodes spending as the state finds itself with a money spigot that they can hand out. Overall, the total NH tax burden is VERY low AND the spending, as much as it can be, is controlled locally, where voters have the most voice and influence.
If you really want to have a long term impact on costs, vote people into the federal government who don't think it is OK to spend more than the government takes in in taxes. THAT is the cause of inflation AND is a significant contributor to the increase in local budgets.