Gilford Dock Owners losing access to Glendale Launch Ramp

[Descant]

Originally Posted by The Real BigGuy

Sounds to me like the town is either inviting a lawsuit or tax abatement requests from those tax payers that are prohibited from using the services.

Many don't use town services, schools, etc., but there is no break in the taxes. Gilford (and other towns) has been reducing Glendale use a little bit at a time for many years. No docking between 2 and 4 am, I think was the first rule, then no swimming, then parking passes, then islanders docks, no commercial vessels, etc. etc. Still one of the best run municipal dock facilities around.

[Rich]

Thanks to everyone that called or emailed! We made a difference! I heard they voted to amend the rules to allow dock owners access last night!

[The Real BigGuy]

Originally Posted by Descant

Many don't use town services, schools, etc., but there is no break in the taxes. Gilford (and other towns) has been reducing Glendale use a little bit at a time for many years. No docking between 2 and 4 am, I think was the first rule, then no swimming, then parking passes, then islanders docks, no commercial vessels, etc. etc. Still one of the best run municipal dock facilities around.

The difference is that a taxpayer choosing not to use a service is far different then a taxpayer being prohibited from using a service.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by The Real BigGuy

The difference is that a taxpayer choosing not to use a service is far different then a taxpayer being prohibited from using a service.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Its my understanding that as an island resident of Gilford you cannot put children in the school system, even though you theoretically could live on island 8 months out of the year (year round if equipped with means to get across the ice safely). I have a friend that was denied for this. I'd call that being prohibited from using town services. Their island home was extremely nice and they were probably "contributing" $14-16k per year at least to the general fund.

[steve-on-mark]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Its my understanding that as an island resident of Gilford you cannot put children in the school system, even though you theoretically could live on island 8 months out of the year (year round if equipped with means to get across the ice safely). I have a friend that was denied for this. I'd call that being prohibited from using town services. Their island home was extremely nice and they were probably "contributing" $14-16k per year at least to the general fund.

We looked into that for Blake and were told the same thing.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[tis]

You know what, I never knew that and don't think it's right.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Its my understanding that as an island resident of Gilford you cannot put children in the school system, even though you theoretically could live on island 8 months out of the year (year round if equipped with means to get across the ice safely). I have a friend that was denied for this. I'd call that being prohibited from using town services. Their island home was extremely nice and they were probably "contributing" $14-16k per year at least to the general fund.

This is very interesting. Does your friend list the island house as his (and his kids') primary residence? I would guess that's the issue

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

This is very interesting. Does your friend list the island house as his (and his kids') primary residence? I would guess that's the issue

Could it be that an island property cannot be a primary residence due to permitting?

I know that many residents around here had to sign off on various town services to build on non-conforming lots were the ''road frontage'' could not be meet due to the access being below standards.

[Descant]

There have been people living on a Gilford island for 12 months a year, (boat snowmobile, Subaru and hovercraft to Lockes Is.) but I don't know of any that tried to enroll children in school.

[Riviera]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

This is very interesting. Does your friend list the island house as his (and his kids') primary residence? I would guess that's the issue

That’s the issue. The island home would need to be listed as your permanent address, as shown on your driver’s license, or government issued ID. If your island home were truly your permanent place of residence, there would be no issue having your child attend the Gilford school system.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Riviera

That’s the issue. The island home would need to be listed as your permanent address, as shown on your driver’s license, or government issued ID. If your island home were truly your permanent place of residence, there would be no issue having your child attend the Gilford school system.

Then that makes sense. And if they were living on an island for 12 month it would have to be their primary or permanent home.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

This is very interesting. Does your friend list the island house as his (and his kids') primary residence? I would guess that's the issue

They have since sold and moved on, but I believe at the time they were claiming the home as their primary residence.

[tis]

Originally Posted by codeman671

They have since sold and moved on, but I believe at the time they were claiming the home as their primary residence.

Really? And the kids still were not allowed to go to school? That's not right!!!

[John Mercier]

Do not know if this is up to date... https://www.gilfordnh.org/file/2016/..._Ordinance.pdf

But it stipulates that properties not connected to the mainland (IR zoned) cannot be used for permanent residence.

[tis]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Do not know if this is up to date... https://www.gilfordnh.org/file/2016/..._Ordinance.pdf

But it stipulates that properties not connected to the mainland (IR zoned) cannot be used for permanent residence.

If it is up to date I still don't see why it's fair. They pay property taxes. That obviously means they can't vote either?

[AC2717]

A lot of second home/seasonal properties/vacation home condo associations and homeowners associations have a provision in their bylaws that states that you cannot declare said property as a permenant/primary residence. This was often a requirement of the county, for example in our assocation Belknap County requied this be put in, in order for them to grant status of the assocation and file titles and deeds.
This was a measure used back in the 80s/90s to stop people from using their second homes to register their kids in the school system instead of where they were living and to have allegedy no further burden on town services. - some towns dont do trash pick up, possibly registering vehicles and the like.

Some of this has fallen off as you can register vehicles and toys because guess what the money is too good, and for example Laconia will still offer curb side trash pickup for associations. but forget anything else

Still a non resident when it comes to:
any type of License like fishing or hunting
voting/representation in the town as a property owner
not being able to speak in town meeting as a resident if there is one
town dump and other possible services
schools
food assistance/health assistance (except emergency of course)

but the tax rates do not reflect the lack of services you are eligible for vs those eligible for everything - "taxation withouth representation"

I have often wonderd why I am not able to vote in local elections only for the property I own in that town.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by AC2717

A lot of second home/seasonal properties/vacation home condo associations and homeowners associations have a provision in their bylaws that states that you cannot declare said property as a permenant/primary residence. This was often a requirement of the county, for example in our assocation Belknap County requied this be put in, in order for them to grant status of the assocation and file titles and deeds.
This was a measure used back in the 80s/90s to stop people from using their second homes to register their kids in the school system instead of where they were living and to have allegedy no further burden on town services. - some towns dont do trash pick up, possibly registering vehicles and the like.

Some of this has fallen off as you can register vehicles and toys because guess what the money is too good, and for example Laconia will still offer curb side trash pickup for associations. but forget anything else

Still a non resident when it comes to:
any type of License like fishing or hunting
voting/representation in the town as a property owner
not being able to speak in town meeting as a resident if there is one
town dump and other possible services
schools
food assistance/health assistance (except emergency of course)

but the tax rates do not reflect the lack of services you are eligible for vs those eligible for everything - "taxation withouth representation"

I have often wonderd why I am not able to vote in local elections only for the property I own in that town.

Because you knew when you purchased that you couldn't.
Taxation without representation is a historically incorrect statement. When I go to Mass or Florida, I pay their sales taxes... I didn't vote for those taxes or have anyone in their Legislature or Executive branch that I voted for.
In fact, in NH, prior to the 14th Amendment after the Civil War... and then some time due to social delay... only Protestants were allowed to vote. Jews and Catholics could buy property and pay taxes, but could not vote, hold elected/appointed office, or teach in a public school.

[Descant]

Seasonal homes are a business. You can't vote anymore than Walmart can vote. And, if you vote at your (primary) residence, then that's your vote-- you can't vote in two places.
On the other hand, it appears I could live on my boat as a tenant at a local marina and vote if I declared that as my primary residence. People live year round on boats elsewhere, most often on salt water where boats do not come out of the water seasonally. (There are local marinas where boats stay wet all year.)

[Woodsy]

Originally Posted by Descant

Seasonal homes are a business. You can't vote anymore than Walmart can vote. And, if you vote at your (primary) residence, then that's your vote-- you can't vote in two places.
On the other hand, it appears I could live on my boat as a tenant at a local marina and vote if I declared that as my primary residence. People live year round on boats elsewhere, most often on salt water where boats do not come out of the water seasonally. (There are local marinas where boats stay wet all year.)

I doubt the local marina's are zoned for year round permanent residency... most are no doubt zoned commercial/resort with restrictions. But it is an intriguing thought.

Bottom line in this whole mess is that NH's "no income tax" structure works for NH residents, not out of state property owners. So if you are an out of state property owner you have 3 choices.... become a NH resident and give up whatever tax advantage you may have in your home state, or sell your NH property, or perhaps just be happy that you have the means to have 2 homes.

Woodsy

[tis]

Originally Posted by Descant

Seasonal homes are a business. You can't vote anymore than Walmart can vote. And, if you vote at your (primary) residence, then that's your vote-- you can't vote in two places.
On the other hand, it appears I could live on my boat as a tenant at a local marina and vote if I declared that as my primary residence. People live year round on boats elsewhere, most often on salt water where boats do not come out of the water seasonally. (There are local marinas where boats stay wet all year.)

And people can live in an rv and declare their rv park as their residence.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by tis

If it is up to date I still don't see why it's fair. They pay property taxes. That obviously means they can't vote either?

I don't know the rationale for the rule. But if the rule was published before owners bought those properties, then they knew what they were buying, and therefore it is fair. Presumably this is one reason that island land values are lower than other waterfront, and this is reflected in tax assessments

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I don't know the rationale for the rule. But if the rule was published before owners bought those properties, then they knew what they were buying, and therefore it is fair. Presumably this is one reason that island land values are lower than other waterfront, and this is reflected in tax assessments

If permanent residence was acquired before the zoning change, and maintained to the current day, then it would be grandfathered.