Tax coalition pushes for new cap law
Related News
- 01/20/10 — Legislator targets public employees for pay cuts in constitutional amendment
- 01/18/10 — Earnings tax in St. Louis, Kansas City could be challenged in statewide ballot initiative
- 12/07/09 — N.J. voters to decide ballot question restricting tax dollars
- 12/05/09 — Two measures for ballot
- 11/24/09 — Experts Debunk Claim That Tax Measures Would Cost Jobs
- More Fiscal/Budget Issues news
Concord Monitor: Consider it a new form of appeal. In March, a judge found that a proposed tax cap in Concord was against state law, so proponents of the tax cap are trying to change the law. The New Hampshire Advantage Coalition has worked with legislators on an amendment to a House bill that would specifically allow cities and towns to adopt a tax or spending cap. "This isn't so much about allowing a tax cap; this is a voting rights issue," said Matt Murphy, director of the New Hampshire Advantage Coalition. "Whether people in communities should be able to amend their charter through citizens' initiatives and be able to vote on those amendments." The House bill amendment was sponsored by state Rep. Ken Hawkins, a Bedford Republican, and added to a bill that Hawkins was already sponsoring. The original bill, which passed in the House and is now in a Senate committee, would repeal a law authorizing selectmen to remove certain town employees whom the selectmen judge to be insane or incapacitated.
Hawkins said he decided to attach the tax cap amendment in light of the judge's ruling in Concord.
"I think it's good for the taxpayers," he said. "If the voters decide they want to limit the rise in spending . . . they should have that ability." But some say using an amendment is an inappropriate way to handle what could be a controversial political issue. "I thought it was highly unusual that individuals felt it necessary to bring a nongermane amendment in on this bill," said state Sen. Betsi DeVries, a Manchester Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate's Public and Municipal Affairs Committee, which is considering the bill. "I think they were looking more for the political statement than they were to have something passed." DeVries said the coalition should have found other legislation that was more applicable to the topic or should have put in new legislation that would have had a fully noticed public hearing.
"I was very concerned there was no notice for this amendment," DeVries said. "Though I granted them the benefit of speaking to it, other individuals had no idea it was coming in and had no opportunity to come in and speak. That's not good government." ...
To read more, Click Here.
Comments
There are no comments for this entry.
