Moultonborough Taxes
 

So today in the mail I got the Real estate bill for the second half of 2023.... putting both payments together my Tax has gone up about 1700$ over last year.... I am wondering if others are seeing such an increase

The tax rate is still low in fact I believe it to be slightly lower or the same as last year, so the increase is completely do to the new inflated Tax Valuation, that were processed this year.

With that said, has town spending really increased that much?
Or is this more about trying to force long time seasonal and full time residents out, to push more initiatives to modernize the area....

Don't get me wrong I am not grumpy, and will pay the additional amount.... but much like has happened before, are we seeing a sharp increase because people aren't getting the desired results for the initiative they want to push...

Taxes don't increase unless town meeting or state politicians vote to increase them. Valuations can result in small increases or decreases due to the reapportionment of burden that comes naturally with valuation changes. In other words, waterfront may appreciate quicker than mainland property resulting in a hike. But $1,700 sounds excessive for that. I'm not completely tuned into the politics of taxes here, hopefully someone more knowledgeable of where the increase came from will tell us.

So I did the math, the increase is completely from the hike in property value... Which town wide seem to go up this year in a exponential fashion...

If the town was hurting for money, I would and could understand this.... but Moultonborough is pretty well off as far as funding goes...

Do they have any future big projects in the pipeline? Maybe they are planning some major projects.

According to the newsletter that came with my M'boro tax bill, "The results of the 2023 revaluation indicate an approximate overall increase of 15.8% in the town-wide value." From the valuation numbers shown on my bills due July and December, my valuation went up 15.2%. This suggests that, without any change in budgeted town expenditures, my share of the total tax burden would change very little. However, when I look at the tax rate per $1000 numbers, the bill due in July is based on an annual tax rate of $4.78/1000, while the bill due next month is based on an annual tax rate of $5.70.

Here is the breakdown of the rates:
Rate/1000 July % of total December % of total
Municipal 0.63 26.36 1.86 32.63
Local School 0.88 36.82 1.77 31.05
State Edu. 0.48 20.08 1.19 20.88
County 0.40 16.74 0.88 15.44
Total 2.39 5.70


[someone please tell me how to get columns of such numbers to line up visually - I tried everything!]


So the distribution of the various parts of the total rates varied a bit, notably from school to municipal, but I don't know why, if the budgets weren't changed. But the annualized tax rate went from 4.78 (twice the 2.39) to 5.70, an increase of 19.2%, along with the valuation increase of over 15%. That seems like "double-dipping" to me. As a result, my annualized tax bill has gone up 37%, and I'd like to know why. Normally, without any increase in town budget, the seemingly high jump in valuation is simply offset by a lowered tax rate, so that the actual increase in annual tax reflects the change in total budget times the new individual share of the burden.

The alignment throws me off a bit, but it looks like the municipal rate jumped from .63 to 1.86

The school rate also went from .88 to 1.77

It is plausible that some other funding source - State or Federal declined so the budgets may have moved very little, but with the other source of revenue gone... the revenue requirements had to be made up by the property tax.

Those rates for the July bill are for half a year; double them to compare with the rates for the December bill. So that 0.63 becomes 1.26 to compare with 1.86 on the new bill. And as I noted, I tried everything I could, with fonts, etc, to get the columns of numbers to line up when posted. No matter how I juggled things, with strings of spaces, fonts, etc., when I hit "Submit" or "Preview Post,", the displayed form condenses out the spacing.

Outrageous
 

:fire:

Any rate the previous posters have suggested is outrageous! The waterfront properties have gone up in value but so has the other properties. I can’t access my tax bill online but if these rates are true, I think the town wants everyone to sell their homes to the super rich because they won’t care how much they pay in taxes.

Recreation Complex. With indoor and outdoor swimming pool. Indoor and outdoor tracks. All with a small room dedicated to the elderly - so it can be marketed as a senior center.

i had a big increase also. Usually for me the second half is much closer to first half this time the second half was 75% higher. So in May will the first half for next year be equal to the second have number if so yikes

omg the HUBBERs will be back

So for those of you who want to get into the real details, following are my calculations for what changed:

First, the tax rate for last year was $4.78. To understand the numbers, you first have to recalculate that number using the NEW assessed valuation. That said, had the assessed valuations been know, the rate for last year would have been $4.14. This is key to now understand what changed to get to $5.70. The increase of $1.56 is caused by the following:

1. Last year there was a very large amount of town unassigned cash thrown back to offset the tax rate. It was made up of two things...$700,000 from a year earlier that the Board of Selectmen held back from refunding the money to taxpayers in hopes that town meeting would stuff it away to help a community center. That motion failed at town meeting, so there was that extra $700K to give back to taxpayers. Secondly, the town had just shifted from an 18 month budget to a 12 month budget. During that process, the budget for the 18 month process was knowingly set high to be sure there was enough money to cover the 18 months. With sound management of the town coffers, the town under-ran the budget by $2 million dollars. So last year there was a total $2.7 million throwback to help the tax rate. Unfortunately, this was a one time occurrence and did not recur this year. So the tax rate actually went up by $.47 just for this item. Some could argue the town could have held back some of that refund and used it to offset expenses in the future. However, it is really excess tax money that should go back to the taxpayer and let future cost items stand on their own for justification in the tax rate. A very theoretical argument but I think it makes sense to return what was asked for if they asked for too much. Kind of pay as you go.
2. Town revenues from all sources (lower than last fiscal year) increased the rate by $.10
3. Budgeted expenditures increased overall across schools ($.25), town ($.21), county ($.19) and the state school rate ($.35) all increased by a total of $.99 (rounding). The state was higher because a favorable credit in last year did not repeat, the county was higher because they had the same issue as the town with no longer a large unassigned cash account to throw back to towns, and the schools were higher due to added costs and less one time grants.

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

Bottom line...make sure you go to town meeting and schools town meetings to. be sure you agree with all the cost being proposed, because it all ends up in your tax rate.

The prior analysis is from my records and may not be what town officials say.

Yes, the spring bill is always an estimate which is half of your December bill. The state doesn't set the tax rate until late fall so they don't know in the spring what your bill is going to be.

Just checked mine and I am up about 35 percent over last year. Not sure how they justify that.

it goes to show a million here a million there it adds up to real money.

When is enough, enough? Municipalities establish a percentage mil rate that they use to assess property. Depending on where property valuations are the town moves the mill rate up or down. Of course, they balance that against the recent sales values in our neighborhoods. That process seems reasonable however the majority of property owners just want to use their property. We generally don’t buy and sell every year.

The old way of collecting property taxes is outdated. There should be a rate that allows municipalities to collect a higher tax value on resale property. Properties that are dormant could occur smaller increases. It is always an interesting topic when people think your wealthy because your property appreciates. Yes, it does feel good however the majority of us are property poor. Maintenance and taxes continue to rise. We benefit on the sale.

Some states are taxing property when a sale exceeds a dollar value. They are using these funds to assist the homeless. Maybe that tax should just go back to the town.

Just my thoughts. I really don’t like any new taxes. I have always believed that municipalities are poorly managed.

No municipalities do not establish a percentage mil rate to assess properties.
No the town does not move the rate up or down.

Management of the municipalities - i.e. budgets - are a function of the residents. For towns, this is a direct vote on the budgets. For cities, it is a representative format whereas the residents can change direction very quickly if they choose to.

We residents set the budgets directly/indirectly. The assessors set the value of each property. There are checks and balances for both. And the State sets the mil rate.

Some States have used a ''homestead'' exemption; but those would just shift taxes from resident-owned primary properties onto others.

And the State of NH has a Real Estate Transfer Tax that covers ever dollar... not just the sale of high end property.

Thanks for the notes, at the end of the day we are looking at a 38% increase in tax revenue..... if I take out the $0.47 unassigned adder we still see a 26% increase.......

Some how the NH way just isn't working if there needs to be a year to year increase of this much...... I have lived many places and only once before have I seen a property taxes increase year over year like this.... And oh wait a minute the previous experience was also in NH......

I have always wondered if the towns keep on spending if there will become a point where people will sell believing that for the few months they use their lake home they just don't want to pay those kind of taxes-whether they can well afford to pay or not. It just might not make sense to a lot of people at some point.

Response to TIS
 

Tis, thank you, your suggestion certainly creates significant thought.

I believe most residents (seasonal/permanent) were caught off-guard by the astronomical % tax increase; our taxes went up 46%. With inflation forcing costs up on everything, geo-political issues, a government in disarray, a wide open board, fentanyl epidemic, and wages not keeping up with previous stated inflation, there can be no doubt this ridiculous tax bill will force many to reconsider the risk/reward of ownership.

Unfortunately, the previous tax bill created a sense the euphoria would continue...."Surprise, Surprise, Surprise" Gomer Pyle USMC.

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.

Though my tax bill is very small compared to most here, I was also surprised at its increase.

That being said, costs have gone up on everything the last couple years, so it makes sense that spending and taxes would as well.

I guess I'm mostly weirded out by how it happened—with a really low rate for two bills and not much communication about whether that was real or not.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Don't be weirded out by it, it is the New Hampshire way. When the state runs out of funding they know where they can get more money and they always do. The way the state funds education is at the top of the list for Horrible ideas. While great in theory to take from wealthier communities and give to poorer ones, the issue is that the monies aren't tied to education...

I am also concerned at all the work being done on the highways in NH, and the fact that the state hasn't come around to the convention of exit numbers being associated with mile marker numbers, as all other states of done.. This was a mandate and likely means money to keep up the interstate system in NH from the federal government is not happening.

At the end of the day, I was not surprised to see an increase.... I knew last year was to good to be true. It is the amount of increase that I am seeing that is alarming. I have seen this before, and for similar reasons the state got themselves into a funding pickle, and hiked everyones property tax to get through it. Then slowly the tax bills decreased to get people over it. We will likely see the same thing here again.

NH's tax scheme continues to run amuck....

Saw last nights Moultonborough School Board meeting where they are advocating for some $23 MILLION of capital improvements to both school buildings that was just recently disclosed a few weeks ago. SURPRISE!!!! This is 44% more cost than what was proposed for the Community Center last year. They want to put it on the warrant for the upcoming School Meeting in March. For those who are concerned with property taxes, you need to pay attention to what is going on, as this may well hit tax bills over the next 20 years.

and the number of students keeps dropping. maybe time to merger with interlakes for high school

The federal budget can not be cut... so that would mean higher taxes.
The loss of the one time grants is most likely the end of a federal spending program... other cuts would impact the State budget directly, and result in the transfer of higher costs locally.

The labor issue was forecast for us by Ronald Reagan. The fact that people either didn't pay attention in school, or thought that day would never come, well, we are here.

NH made it worse by promoting the aging of the State.

The fix is an influx of younger workers... something that we don't have the option on.

So something that causes seniors to give up their homes, is the market solution. It isn't soft and friendly, but the markets never are.

The State doesn't take from wealthier communities and give it to the poorer ones. No shifting of the State Education Tax has occurred since 2011.

Also, the State didn't hike your property tax.

real reason for huge increase vs last year was the use of two large one-time credits last year . compared to 2022 my increased taxes were about 20% so large but being on the water my assessments went up big time

To look past the credits that caused last years rates to be below normal, maybe a look back.

But I don't think there is any escaping the the Lakes Region is a high demand area for many retirees to at least own a summer home in.

5.50 is the second lowest tax rate in 35 years, last year's 4.78 the lowest, with probably the highest assessments ever. A million$ + was returned to the taxpayers lowering that rate last year.

Year total Muni. County State Ed. Local ed.
2023 $5.70 $1.86 $0.88 $1.19 $1.77
2022 $4.78 $1.25 $0.80 $0.97 $1.76
2021 $6.98 $2.33 $1.01 $1.67 $1.97
2020 $7.13 $2.11 $1.15 $1.78 $2.09
2019 $7.15 $2.18 $1.10 $1.96 $1.91
2018 $7.72 $2.44 $1.23 $2.10 $1.95
2017 $8.22 $2.46 $1.35 $2.29 $2.12
2016 $8.74 $2.77 $1.43 $2.28 $2.26
2015 $9.01 $2.85 $1.42 $2.54 $2.20
2014 $8.86 $2.85 $1.22 $2.53 $2.26
2013 $8.69 $2.77 $1.13 $2.66 $2.13
2012 $8.56 $2.73 $1.11 $2.52 $2.20
2011 $8.33 $2.77 $1.06 $1.97 $2.53
2010 $8.12 $2.63 $1.05 $2.32 $2.12
2009 $7.70 $2.22 $1.03 $2.31 $2.14
2008 $7.66 $2.32 $0.97 $2.21 $2.16
2007 $6.99 $2.07 $0.79 $2.01 $2.12
2006 $6.71 $1.89 $0.75 $2.34 $1.73
2005 $6.79 $2.05 $0.77 $2.58 $1.39
2004 $7.99 $1.66 $0.78 $2.87 $2.68
2003 $12.18 $2.35 $1.14 $5.15 $3.54
2002 $12.11 $2.33 $0.89 $5.55 $3.34
2001 $10.06 $1.99 $0.74 $4.63 $2.70
2000 $9.55 $1.89 $0.61 $4.69 $2.36
1999 $14.58 $2.72 $0.92 $3.80 $7.14
1998 $10.24 $2.92 $0.94 $6.38
1997 $9.69 $2.66 $0.94 $6.09
1996 $9.24 $2.57 $0.90 $5.77
1995 $10.80 $3.20 $0.98 $6.62
1994 $10.56 $3.14 $0.99 $6.43
1993 $10.24 $3.14 $0.98 $6.12
1992 $9.70 $2.64 $1.06 $6.00
1991 $9.37 $2.75 $0.91 $5.71
1990 $9.67 $2.91 $0.91 $5.85
1989 $8.61 $2.56 $0.87 $5.18


https://www.moultonboroughnh.gov/Doc...x-Rate-History

That's pretty much meaningless. A better list would be the total amount collected for each of those categories for each of those years.

I think it clearly shows what tummyman pointed out.
Last year was an unusual year with offsets that created a false low in the tax rate.

The amount raised for each category would also be wonky due to the offsets being present over time.

Each time the State or federal government supplied funds to a specific category, the amount need to be raised in property taxes in that category would be lower.

The specific budgets would be more accurate... but since those would be a decision of the residents of the town, no real blame outside of their choices could be inferred.

Now that is meaningless ... and that's being kind!

Taxes aren't paid by each category. Do you make four payments for one tax bill?

Those numbers were used at the recent selectboard meeting where the 5.70 tax rate was approved. The unassigned balance was being discussed. The town administrator showed 13.1% and we debated with two selectboard members that it was a good decision to give back $million+ to the taxpayers, last year. The same two selectboard members had wanted to save it for "The Hub".


https://www.moultonboroughnh.gov/Doc...nce-PDF?bidId=

Now, I'm surprised nobody picked the typo of 5.50 instead of 5.70
With all the whining about how the tax rate is too high. The taxes rates are not too high ... look at your assessments. The taxes are higher, but not due mainly to the tax rate.


Town meetings don't vote on taxes. They vote on expenditures. The tax rate is set by the NH DRA in the Fall.

https://support.axiomnh.com/support/...tting-process-

What am I missing? The Gilford tax rate in 2022 was $12.25; haven't seen the 2023 bill yet, but waterfront values must be similar to Moultonborough. In many other towns the rate is any where from $14 to $22. A few years ago, a realtor pointed out to me that we had only 1 $1MM dollar home in town. The town next to us had 51 and Moultonborough had 286. There's a lot more that goes into the tax base/total assessed valuation, but it doesn't appear to me that Moultonborough taxpayers have much to complain about. A $1MM house in Gilford pays more than twice what a Moultonborough homeowner pays, but they're not complaining because they believe they're getting value for their dollar, I think. If you're not getting value for your dollar, go to Budget meetings, start a FB group, go to the deliberative session, run for office, etc. etc. Stop whining and crying.

Look at different town rates here:

https://www.revenue.nh.gov/mun-prop/...-tax-rates.htm

It's meaningless. What counts is the amount of money voted at town meeting, yes, expenditures, that are funded by tax dollars. Then you have the state expenditures, also voted on by reps and senators, added to the bill, all paid for by taxes plus some fees. Those appropriations, or voted expenditures, are used to set the tax rate. The tax rate is just a number, calculated to raise the money that is to be spent that year.

The information needed to figure out what caused this is available, you just need to look for it, it would be nice if the town and state put it in an easily digestible format..... but that would kill the incorrect assumption that property tax increases are caused by rising property values, the assumption that politicians, at least the ones who understand it, love, because it lets them off the hook.

Were that assumption (taxes rise because of valuation increases) true, in down years, when valuations slacken, taxes would decrease. That doesn't happen. Instead the tax rate would be increased to cover what was appropriated and eventually spent. If the appropriation were increased by the respective votes, taxes would still increase in a year, or period valuations decreased.

The answer is in the spending, not the tax rate. It's pretty simple, but many people are fooled.

I think you mean the county. The county would be representatives in that county.

The State education portion of the bill is not collected and redistributed... it just offsets what your school tax would actually be.

The State, or even the federal government, may choose not to make a discretionary grant to the town. But that effect can actually be measured.

That would be State senators, the Governor, Congress or the President stopping the flow of those revenues.

The town receives - and this is not an inclusive list - a portion of State gas taxes, Meals & Rentals, and BPT/BET (should they get educational grants or have individual students using EFA or charter schools).

Other than the push/pull of having a high year then offset of a low year that created a false marker... I think as tummyman pointed out, it really is more of the movement of value toward the water.
Every property may be going up in value, but those are going up faster.

I have a lot of job sites that I am supplying some very high end materials to, and they are all near the water.

Valuation
 

John is right. My condo may not be on the lake but I have deeded right to lake access. Tax valuation is based on nearby property sold. I bought my property in 2007 for 98K. My goal is to retire here. Now tax evaluation is $400K! My taxes did not increase fourfold but it more than doubled.

A friend of mine lives near town. In 2009 he paid 85K for his home. He does not have access to the lake but uses the town beach. His valuation today is only 149K. He sees his tax decrease. He's in a better position to retire!

There must be a better way to tax assessment. Perhaps square footage and acreage???

as a builder in this area you dont need to use fancy words or numbers. the population has exploded and all the poison is moving into this area and has been for several years. the municipalities will need to be be increased to support fire, first responders etc. this is reality folks Moultonboro has turned into a small Boston Suburb. enjoy.

Assessment's are based on market values, no matter whom your town utilizes or contracts to determine those values.

Assessments x tax rate = Tax

Should be easy to understand.

Tax rates do go up and down. Take another look at the 35 year MoBo history. Facts, not opinion.

NH DRA sets the tax rate. The town voters set the appropriations.

The MoBo history included, has the 35 year relevant history for all 4 elements of the tax rate:

Municipal + County + State Ed. + Local Ed. = total tax rate


Shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend.