[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6612624,"mediaKeyId","2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d","parentId",2890632,"title","Bill would require towns to post 10 years of tax rates and estimated tax impacts of proposed projects","audioSeconds",2300,"startMs",1059000,"endMs",3359000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d&start=1059&end=3359","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d/thumbnail_1059000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6612624/New-Hampshire/Bill-would-require-towns-to-post-10-years-of-tax-rates-and-estimated-tax-impacts-of-proposed-projects","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612624-d8128458241647d06b032c96828e5a28/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578764&Signature=m44EiilNUCK0~2Z833F1wct5D929FpR3WCpx0gJLl1abRANSp80WCqoL8I1SVboiYJFhMhcJ4~bVZBkmiOynaBmNMHujQUl60NktIl23oO3ADLl1ZryMj7NQ4gL9wYqbp~UxHa8Uti8e5gSRmqH8YgQ5b2xsLuMmeHBRDXzb4UXMGf1zeqnxo8eyqqI6WbBK73CjkcoqIbJHpLUVXUiK5UbZE9DW07b5xY5xUsTHZjUdEq9t74T9WhuDxtwDj7Eg5myOdg2Gwr4cwyblo570MRWDnx9C6UH8RNXZmf~eNRYSWNbikU~hBbRKrr76SBgrnteHvMl-6uz7hexYB6hIcQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-04-07T15:27:10.683Z","article","CONCORD, N.H. — The House Municipal and County Government Committee heard testimony April 7 on Senate Bill 217, which would require every New Hampshire town to post the prior 10 years of tax rates and estimated tax impacts of proposed taxpayer‑funded building projects on the front page of the town’s official website and on any social media pages the municipality uses.

Declan Donahue, legislative aide for Sen. Victoria Sullivan (the bill’s prime sponsor), told the committee that the proposal would require postings of county, local and state education, town/municipal and precinct taxes and that historical tax data “are available to municipalities on the Department of Treasury website.” Senator Sullivan said the requirement is intended as a low‑burden transparency step so taxpayers can better understand how property taxes are broken down. “People didn’t understand the structure of their property taxes,” Sullivan said. “Having this in one place where our citizens … can look at it and have an understanding of where their money is going.”

Multiple representatives asked practical questions about placement, timing, accuracy and potential unintended consequences. Representative Fracht and others said mandating placement on a homepage risks “cluttering” pages and suggested a prominent link could satisfy the intent; Sullivan said she wanted the information to be immediately visible and believed links and buried pages reduced accessibility. Representative Davis raised concerns about whether publishing estimated tax impacts constituted impermissible electioneering; Sullivan responded that providing taxpayers with estimates “is important information” and not electioneering because it informs voters.

Testimony from Eric Power (Brookline) supported the bill but urged posting a tax‑effort metric (taxes raised per dollar of valuation) or appropriations trend in addition to or instead of tax rates, arguing tax effort is a more stable measure than rates that fluctuate with revaluations. Power also recommended timing rules for posting project impacts and coordination with school districts on school projects.

Committee member Representative Gilman reported the remote sign‑in results: nine in support, 41 opposed, two neutral; written blue sheets showed one opposed and two in support. The chair closed public testimony on SB 217; the committee did not take a vote at the hearing.

The bill leaves several implementation details unspecified in testimony: timing for posting estimated project impacts, how municipalities should display reappraisal events or bond/lease financing assumptions, and which social media uses would trigger posting obligations. Proponents said the underlying data are public on the Department of the Treasury website; opponents warned the 10‑year historical window could be misleading without contextual notes about revaluations and temporary federal funding.

— End —","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Municipal and County Government (04/07/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The committee heard Senate Bill 217 on April 7, a proposal by Sen. Victoria Sullivan that would require towns to post the previous 10 years of tax rates and estimated taxpayer impacts of proposed building projects on their official website homepages and any social media pages they use.","taxTitle","Public Works and Highways, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17759,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6612629,"Committee hears bill to require death affidavits for transfer‑on‑death deeds",466,295000,761000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d&start=295&end=761","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d/thumbnail_295000.jpg","/articles/6612629/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-bill-to-require-death-affidavits-for-transferondeath-deeds","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612629-04f5a030d62014aa7a991d1d440ac369/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578764&Signature=PZ-MhyRosvvK-Pkquq948rU2Pjn8LT4oAqJi64UfBDfzWM1anzUAEHKV1dTQf2Z~eWj~DxiNeLXpGYsveka6GuWC8PSN8bnClkf-3P6HCZowqUMK~HVH2Abca6nyB10YA-FeoHb8cJo5dV2RCX0OuN7sXDJ7nUZgYnwJWbtoS6v3PyGvcAx828IfRoeQppbQrtjYGVlvFG9e1ZsD2y~7slTlpLFLZ3HxoqAzrlF~sLFcoLpC~slF~S0Asho1jVTP839rEmJj~BEft6299~e-0VDJGVj63SWpVt3djadsAgJOjku0nL-gXB1~s1RpxrOFi1j9Kvq9eDrFLMJFluSuXQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD, N.H. — The House Municipal and County Government Committee on April 7 took testimony on Senate Bill 42, a bill from Sen. James Gray that would add a requirement for an affidavit of death when a transfer‑on‑death deed is used so registers of deeds and town tax assessors are notified of the death and the current owner.

Senator James Gray, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the committee the change was requested by municipal officials and is “a very minor technical change” intended to make it easier for registers and towns to identify the current owner and direct tax bills correctly. “When a person passes away … the heir that they have chosen would have to do a lot of different things,” Gray said, and the affidavit would give registers criteria “to make sure that that transfer on death deed is the deed that is current.”

The bill refers to existing transfer‑on‑death deed provisions currently cited in the transcript as “RSA 5 63 d.” Representative questions focused on how the new affidavit would interact with existing revocation rules for transfer‑on‑death deeds and who would be responsible for filing or notifying registers and assessors.

Kate Horgan, speaking for the New Hampshire Association of Counties and pinching for a county register, said the change is limited to notification: the register of deeds would notify the tax assessor when a transfer‑on‑death deed is filed and “it does not change anything else around that deed. That process is purely notification.” Horgan said county registers and assessors had worked on the bill over the summer.

Representative Gilman reported the public sign‑in counts: remote sign‑in showed three in support, one opposed and one neutral; two in‑person sign‑ins indicated support. The committee closed the public hearing on SB 42 with no committee action recorded during the session.

The bill drew only technical questions during the hearing; members asked for clarifications about revocability and the statute cited. No committee vote was taken at the hearing.

If advanced, the bill would direct registers and assessors to rely on the filed affidavit to help route tax bills and reduce the need for probate steps to establish ownership, according to testimony.

— End —","The House Municipal and County Government Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 42, which would add an affidavit-of-death notification to existing transfer‑on‑death deed procedures so registers of deeds and tax assessors are notified when property ownership changes by death.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6612614,"Bill would enable towns to adopt budget caps tied to per‑resident spending and inflation",0,4388000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d&start=4388&end=4388","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d/thumbnail_4388000.jpg","/articles/6612614/New-Hampshire/Bill-would-enable-towns-to-adopt-budget-caps-tied-to-perresident-spending-and-inflation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612614-17aaf667a2c629145e3b28363af2fd7d/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578764&Signature=kNlfzfOULz3B0vwZ2sVXaprc9lbSP5KCi1PU2rXHgimDlIkYBvHJN6ARVsAIkmLvXV5qofANSmknaMfKn1hJKMdekLvd~CQR8HIVjV4rrwzQ3ctcTQL37tiAAzqaEyf3MX8Gngy8m2zVYtQZ350BfhBcOde~bkLRu6lBTjHNbHkKQ7eGpTnM1tkZyX-afvDGcPOnenowgrIRpldjfelS9-e-zpzlsOKqSJRKnEf2GFTYHzL3GvQv9gBVHR0lWZpSxemkIkvGCyCl3aBGWgMy~~atM9iGsM7~0pV-~YLRfhDXHcXHqq6OG0RUf~~IANu8dgX9qvwW49kVOMWGLtrhZQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD, N.H. — The House Municipal and County Government Committee received testimony April 7 on Senate Bill 105, which would give New Hampshire towns the option to adopt a budget cap calculated as a per‑resident expenditure that adjusts annually for population and inflation and that can only be exceeded by a three‑fifths vote.

Senator Keith Murphy, who introduced the bill, said it extends to towns a budgeting tool cities already have and that the measure accounts for population growth and inflation while allowing a rescission process if towns later choose to remove the cap. “People who live in towns and cities deserve the same rights and powers,” Murphy said.

Eric Power (Brookline) testified in support and explained the difference between a tax‑effort cap (an existing option for some localities) and a budget cap: the budget cap limits total appropriations on the warrant, including special articles, and in this bill adjusts by a per‑resident expenditure that is multiplied by 1 plus an inflation factor each year. Power said cities already use similar caps and that the bill would provide towns a voluntary tool; he recommended choosing an inflation index and suggested examples and thresholds for bond or lease reporting.

Representative questions probed technical mechanics: Representative Colby cited existing RSA chapters for local tax caps and asked how the bill would interact; Senator Murphy said towns lack the exact budget‑cap authority this bill would enable and acknowledged drafting could be clarified. Representatives also asked whether population figures come from the Department of Business and Economic Affairs (Murphy said they should use the state’s most recent population estimates) and whether the cap would apply to special warrant articles, bonds and vehicle purchases (testifiers said the cap covers total appropriations unless overridden).

Remote sign‑in totals reported to the committee were 10 in support and 75 opposed; no committee vote was taken at the hearing. Supporters described the proposal as a voluntary municipal tool to slow rapid spending growth and force supermajority approval for expenditures above the cap; opponents in the remote sign‑in were numerous and the committee recorded broad opposition in the sign‑in report.

— End —","Senate Bill 105 would allow New Hampshire towns to adopt a budget‑cap mechanism like the one already available to cities and some school districts — setting a per‑resident expenditure that adjusts for population and inflation and that can be overridden by a three‑fifths legislative vote.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6612619,"Bill would set 30‑day appeal window for zoning board decisions; supporters say predictability, opponents cite fairness risks",647,3261000,3908000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d&start=3261&end=3908","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2890632-ce414d8ba164d85dfdc43365e788d82d/thumbnail_3261000.jpg","/articles/6612619/New-Hampshire/Bill-would-set-30day-appeal-window-for-zoning-board-decisions-supporters-say-predictability-opponents-cite-fairness-risks","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6612619-46148667b8352dff2613fd312ef13943/orig.mp4?Expires=1773578764&Signature=izkgisqcBiFc51rCQIkOCeXlhuzujTq23lUAFP38tO6QIQLCME8AOignRtvmZ~k67rak7DpSwAYu2j3Omtz0tpVrATmcPVVUUWR9f1l2QZ4fi3tSbdhTvz-WkMSVCekYTPjSKoZQA~S004xA8YFUjR2nY9jH8eV0Ja7D6RQvAosu-uqT71K-b5NvQU7VQ0G6vBk68zlOEDEqxura~Qd3NH91IzUxA7KFQz8ATE4xXu-5oa9IFTlSQkGKi7Vqnv4ETLcQDim7sYIU8NFDyHPtUdMw-hMC-ldemKJRqHth~Uvu4aK0Qt0f2MSPc2wgRyQ-ZwTmzJgDKRpr-9qZccNqpg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD, N.H. — The House Municipal and County Government Committee on April 7 heard Senate Bill 78, which would set a 30‑day deadline to appeal decisions of local zoning boards of adjustment. Sponsors said the standard would provide predictability for applicants and developers; some local board members and residents warned the fixed window can deny relief in situations where neighbors and town staff are actively working to resolve violations or correct permits.

Senator Keith Murphy, the bill’s prime sponsor, described the measure as codifying “what is already standard practice in most of the state” and said the current statute’s “reasonable time” wording creates uncertainty that can scare away proposals. He told the committee a defined 30‑day window would provide “a reasonable degree of predictability for developers” and could help with housing production.

Opponents included Jim Geiser, a 20‑year member of his town’s Board of Adjustment, who said his board moved away from a fixed 30‑day rule because it produced unfair results. Geiser described cases where construction proceeded following a permit and neighbors later discovered what they believed were violations; under a strict 30‑day limit, he said, impacted neighbors had no remedy when the issue only became apparent after work started. “If this proposed law was in effect, that neighbor has nothing they can do,” Geiser said.

Supporters including the New Hampshire Association of Realtors (testifying through Sarah Holland) and some municipal planning members argued a 30‑day rule is common across the state and reduces long delays and legal uncertainty. Eric Power, a Brookline planning board member and testifier, said his town already uses 30 days and that the standard helps projects move forward without prolonged appeals.

Committee members asked whether the bill should include exceptions for towns with quorum or staffing problems or wording to permit extensions when parties are working in good faith to find solutions; Senator Murphy indicated he would consider amendment language but emphasized the bill’s goal of statewide predictability. Public sign‑in totals were mixed: remote sign‑in showed eight in support, seven opposed and one neutral; two written blue sheets opposed; the chair closed the public hearing with no vote taken.

— End —","Senate Bill 78 would standardize a 30‑day period to appeal zoning board of adjustment decisions. Supporters said the window provides certainty to applicants and developers; opponents, including experienced local board members, said a fixed 30‑day limit can unfairly bar appeals in complex, unfolding situations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would require towns to post 10 years of tax rates and estimated tax impacts of proposed projects

Committee hears bill to require death affidavits for transfer‑on‑death deeds

Bill would enable towns to adopt budget caps tied to per‑resident spending and inflation

Bill would set 30‑day appeal window for zoning board decisions; supporters say predictability, opponents cite fairness risks