About time!

[deleted]

[deleted]

I'm from a donor town and I support the tax. But I hold education of a society in high regard.

I believe I live in a recipient town, quick Google shows our students get about 75% more in state aid per pupil than the NH average. Of my tax rate, 22 bucks is to local ed, and 2 bucks is to state. Just because we're getting your money doesn't mean they aren't taking a shit ton of ours too. The whole state needs a massive overhaul of our educational funding system.

Being in the Hampton Falls school district, we are ok with our property taxes. We have friends in the Bedford and Bow school district as well.

What is a donor town?

I agree but it should be voluntary. Parents of enrolled children + supportive community members will continue to fund the program that they care about.

Well yes-We would. People move to certain towns FOR the schools.

They declared it in 2001.

The idea of a donor town is that it's a town that pays more in taxes than it received in statewide education funding. IMO this is a pretty terrible way to rate anything, since it's a statewide funding scheme whose entire point is to move resources from affluent areas to less-affluent ones. But it's something folks in those affluent areas have taken up as a term to convince themselves/others that they're the victims here.

I believe it is, or was towns wealthier in property taxes taken in paying that money to the state who then redistributes the money. So a "donor" town feels they should keep their taxes and spend it on their own children rather than help "poorer" towns with lower tax revenue. I think.

That's not how public services work or survive. What you're speaking to is libertarian naivete at best and selfishness at worst. Everyone benefits from a well educated society.

Everyone benefits from many things, that doesn't have any bearing on whether what he's saying will work or not.

The New Hampshire Way is broken. It doesn't work. It's horribly inequitable.

The state has lost twice in court already. I grew up in Claremont where they were the first to sue the state over educational funding and it was found back then the way educational funding is done in the state is unconstitutional. I’m no lawyer or constitutional expert but I don’t understand how the state has lost multiple times now and has pending lawsuits going on again and yet they’re not forced to make changes.

I'm saying his idea won't work well. If anything we need more funding for education not relegating it down to volunteer based. And to your point if we have something that clearly benefits everyone we would be stupid to not fund it publicly.

Would love a tldr, if anyone feels like helping a sister out

If it benefits everyone we don't need to fund it publicly... because everyone stands to benefit from it existing.

You know, like UL.

Thats some upside down thinking like trickle down economics

It's rather difficult for one branch of the state government to hold the other two in contempt; it's not like the Supreme Court can lock the General Court and governor in their respective spaces until everyone agrees on something which won't cause *someone* to head right back to a lawyer's office.

Also, with the Claremont decision the state is required to fund an adequate education but "adequate" was left undefined, leading to years of squabbles around how much this nebulous concept of adequacy costs and what adequacy is in the first place. Remember, the Supremes only declared the old funding method unusable, they didn't (and couldn't) dictate the whats and hows of any new method.

You don't even know what those words mean

You are OK with your property taxes? Must be nice

I do actually. I can try and help you understand them as well, if you'd like.

Hopefully this starts a nationwide trend. I didn’t move to a nice town to fund other schools. Get a job like the rest of us, pay taxes like the rest of us, have descent schools like the rest of us. This robbing Peter and paying Paul bs on a national level has gone to far.

Well yes. We are in an amazing school district and our taxes help support that.

Some people who live in these affluent areas live there for a reason I’m assuming. That they want the best education, the best resources for their children. And now they’re expected to have to share that? How is that fair ? I know this will be an unpopular opinion….

We live in a nice town, and have really good schools and don’t think that we should be punished for that. We are perfectly OK with paying taxes. We saved up. We worked hard we moved to a nice town with great schools and a lot of resources for the kids. And a lot of really nice people in town.

because the whole point of a public education system is to provide education of equal value to the whole of the public

💯

send your kid to private school then you peasant

damn sounds like you’re too poor to afford private school should have saved up more

Found the libertarian

And the people who can't afford to live there just... get worse lives for their kids? The people who live in worse-off areas live there for a reason, too, but I doubt many of them are saying "yeah, I COULD do better by my kids, but y'know, I'm sure our shitty schools are good enough."

Hopefully the school can teach your kids how to spell “decent” correctly.

I want all kids in New Hampshire to get a properly funded education. Child education in the US is consistently outperformed by most developed countries. No American should want to continue that downward trend.

If a person can't afford to move to a good school district, do their children deserve fewer resources and worse schools?

Will you be my financial advisor?

Do you really not grasp how your kids 'descent schools' at the expense of the majority of the state having 'not descent' schools is going to eventually negatively affect you and your kids if you plan on staying in NH? Large pockets of this small state offering a second class education to kids who will become adults with poor educations translates into the state becoming an increasingly low economic area as a whole. That means less new business locating here to create enough 'descent' jobs, drops in property valuations, more crime, more untreated mental health and substance use issues, more money needed for social services, more homelessness, poor quality elderly and medical care, etc. If you're able to see beyond your immediate present, it directly benefits you and your kids to make sure other kids who will soon be adults running the economy and wiping your ass in the nursing home have a 'descent' education.

Ahh yes cause funding education for anyone regardless of class is communism.

I can’t believe that in 2022 there are people who don’t understand that you need to educate everyone, not just the well off.

We live in a society and we have to look past just our own selfish needs/wants to the future.

Even if you don’t have kids that doesn’t mean you don’t have to help provide for a better future.

How exactly are you being punished for living in a nice town?

> have descent schools like the rest of us.

The fucking irony! 🤣

In turn I should be able to opt out of funding public education if that’s the attitude right?

Sorry I went to an underfunded school, if they were all privatized I would be on your level of grammatical corrections.

MA is calling your name. Seems you invite higher taxes and socialism. Let the strong survive.

TLDR:

In New Hampshire, the state does not have a statewide education property tax. Instead, the funding for public education is provided through a combination of local property taxes and state funding.

Local property taxes are collected by individual towns and cities and are used to fund the operation of the local public school district. The amount of property tax that a homeowner pays is determined by the value of their property and the tax rate set by the local municipality.

In addition to local property taxes, the state of New Hampshire also provides funding for public education through the state's Education Trust Fund. This fund is supported by a variety of sources, including state taxes and federal grants. The state uses this funding to supplement the funding provided by local property taxes and to help ensure that all public school districts in the state have the resources they need to provide a high-quality education to their students.

You went to an underfunded school and now you want to perpetuate that by reducing funding to poor schools? Really?

yeah dude absolutely! however, since our public education system is fully integrated into the social services package that YOU receive as a resident of your town, state, and country, in order to not be a hypocrite you would also need to do some little things like stop using public roads, sidewalks and spaces, stop using emergency response services such as 911, as well as refusing delivery of any and all utilities, including cable and electricity.

if this is too burdensome for you i guess you could also establish your own sovereign state where public education isn’t offered.

also, asking out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on “right to work” laws?

[deleted]

Only real estate holders pay the tax.

We can argue that those renting pay the tax also through the landlord. But money doesn’t have names attached.

Just because I say -about time- doesn’t mean I am not willing to pay. I am answering the topic. It doesn’t say defund schools…. It doesn’t say no one should pay for school… it says real estate tax dollars should not be the source of educational funding.

Not communism- simply tired of paying 8k in school taxes where my neighbor who rents and has 6 kids pays zero. And I have zero kids in school..

Now, I am going to super popular!! If there was only another revenue source in New Hampshire ….. hmmmmm….

I am from a western state where SOME property tax is used and income tax does the rest. ( wait.. wait… hold that down vote!!). I am not suggesting that.. but there must be a way that everyone participates- not just those who hold real estate.

Okay. Go ahead. Continue to down vote.

Damn that’s a good idea! I’ll start in Keene and work my way out.

sounds good governor brownback 🫡

I’m .02% African according to 23 and me. I take offense to this.

2% actually, even more offended now! Didn’t government indoctrination teach you to not be such a racist bully?!

wow, you are quite literally too stupid to make fun of. Governor Sam Brownback is an actual person, a former governor of Kansas whose libertarian policies were so incredibly unpopular and destructive (they literally couldn’t even keep street lights on or cops on the payroll the state was so broke) that they were repealed less than 4 years after their introduction, and the state of kansas is still deeply in debt due to his policies.

[deleted]

This is to easy.

Just remember, by owning property and paying taxes on it, you get to deduct them from your federal tax every year, your neighbor doesn't. You move and sell your house, you get to keep all that beautiful equity, your neighbor doesn't. You always come out ahead by owning property

A lot of shitty schools out there. It’s also about parent involvement.

Do we deserve to have our resources taken away??? No.

Probably. Sounds like you have more than enough.

Don’t take funding from our children.

Nice assumption. Sounds like you live in a terrible district.

Jesus. 6 kids?? Damn. We have one and that is plenty. We live in an affluent area, pay over 10k in taxes and our child goes to private school. Our public school system is 10/10. We still pay it because we know it goes towards the kids in our city.

Hahaha jokes on you. My child goes to private school and our school is a 10/10. Sorry if you live in Manchester.

Living in a nice town and wanting nice things for your kids and not having to share it is normal. If you want it, come live in these towns.

For what it is worth, I happen to agree with you on this particular topic. But rather than going with a state tax, I would rather go with a sales tax. But that would spark a whole different outcry lol

It’s an offset against salary- if you have enough deductions. And since the new tax laws in 2016, it’s not the way it once was

Sell pot and put the money towards education and roads it’s not hard.

Finally, a way to completely dismantle the public education system. A certain money cult must be thrilled.

No need to make self-annihilating statements online, it’s ‘indescent’

Great thoughtful thread of people who will want help if they need it but refuse to put in to help others.

See this is the problem with the conservative mindset, only understanding the value of things that DIRECTLY benefit you without understanding how much value you get from indirect benefits. The fact is, the schools in affluent areas will still be the best ones, even under a more equitable model. The kids of affluent parents will always have more opportunities, more life experiences, less college debt, more opportunities to be a home owner etc, but God forbid someone undeserving benefits somehow. You benefit from the education and expertise of others every single day that you didn't pay for, and a better educated population helps you even if it's in those towns, like Claremont, and Franklin, so gross. Lower crime rates, highly skilled workforce, more livable communities, better public health, these are all benefits that make our state and community a safer, nicer, healthier place to live even when funding other local communities, which makes all of our lives better

The state has a statewide education property tax called SWEPT. The plaintiffs want it ruled unconstitutional. They wanted the judge to grant a preliminary injunction in December but the Judge said no. The tax is levied by municipalities and given to the school districts without passing through the state coffers.

The 3 questions asked by the case are

1- is $3,706 enough per student

2- if it's not enough, are the varying property taxes required to fund the shortfall

3- Is it paid out correctly per the constitution?

Since 2011 towns that paid more in SWEPT taxes than what the state deemed an adequate education cost of got the excess returned to them. Taxpayers in municipalities that didn't meet the cost had higher property taxes.

NH Supreme Court: “to the extent the State relies upon property taxes to fund a constitutionally adequate public education, the tax must be administered in a manner that is equal in valuation and uniform in rate throughout the State” in conformity with the Constitution, which requires taxes be “proportional and reasonable.”

Even though the NHSC said that, the state keeps trying to make it so wealthier towns pay less in taxes, even though they keep losing.

[deleted]

No one is doing that.

I’ve never even been to Claremont Or Franklin. But from what I hear they are very unsafe places to be.

You explained it in an excellent way that actually has made me completely see how the way I was thinking was narrow minded. People literally move (buy houses) we don’t have apartments complex’s into this area when their kids hit school age and will move when they graduate.

Why do you have such a problem with affluent people and towns?

There's a reason why Windham schools are so well funded and have the "best" education while Manchester is laughed upon and struggles to make do. New Hampshire be better.

So you're saying that your vision only works if it involves theft. All I'm asking is to make in consensual. Opt-in.

Lol

It's greedy & selfish.

>Not having to share is normal

self·ish /ˈselfiSH/ Learn to pronounce adjective (of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.

Also this person is single & has no children.

One of the reasons kids drop out of school is so they can work to help support their families....

[deleted]

MA residents just got paid by the state because of a surplus...

Not when you worked hard and earned all of so your kids can have a great life. Who is it greedy for? People who can’t afford to live in these towns? Why is it greedy? There will always be different classes of people all over the world. I should never be made to feel bad about where I stand in society especially since I brought myself up. No one did it for me.

[deleted]

How is more people being educated a punishment for you?

Do you ever consider what's given instead? Or is it all about you?

That's what you'd be doing if you don't pay taxes that fund public schools.

It's because of how you're deciding to represent them.

Edit: not to mention you're saying all this reprehensible shit on an alt.

[deleted]

If it was federally legal they probably would.