In response to Nancy Cowan’s Dec. 6 letter, we should use a typical home’s tax bill rather than the tax rate for honest comparisons. We pay tax bills, not tax rates. I recognize folks routinely compare rates as shorthand to compare the tax burden from town to town, but this method is misleading.
I encourage Deering residents to compare their tax bills to those for similar homes in nearby communities. You’ll likely find their tax burden is higher. In Deering’s case, the higher rate reflects our lower median home values compared to the rest of the state.
Cowan suggests altering the Land Use Change Tax allocation to reduce Deering’s tax burden. Reviewing past town reports reveals LUCT revenue is typically nothing, or very little. Diverting this would be essentially fruitless and run counter to Deering’s master plan.
The recently adopted, community-developed master plan is available on the town website and is a must read. There are dozens of supportive conservation references. Among them: “Over 80% rated that land held in conservation is important/very important to them and the rural character of Deering is a core value.”
I agree. Open space, without dense development or commercial districts, is why I live here.
Anyone serious about relieving New Hampshire’s property tax burden should elect state candidates who don’t take the “pledge.” This 1970s-era gimmick tricks residents with lower incomes into supporting sharply reduced tax burdens for high earners. Debating equitable taxation will bring meaningful change to Deering, not diverting the LUCT.
AARON GILL
Deering