Restore fairness in property assessments
New Hampshire has always defended the privacy of the home. Part I, Article 19 of our Constitution makes clear that government intrusion must be strictly limited. Yet a 2007 New Hampshire Supreme Court decision, In re Walsh, still undermines that protection today.
The Court held that a homeowner’s “unresponsiveness” to a request for an interior inspection could be treated as a refusal — even though, in that case, “the taxpayers never explicitly denied entry and even though inspections ultimately occurred.” Although the penalty statute used in Walsh has since been repealed, the decision remains in force, allowing municipalities to treat delay, scheduling difficulty or simple miscommunication as a constructive refusal.
That interpretation flips the burden of proof and punishes citizens for exercising their constitutional right to control access to their homes. It also ignores the many non‑intrusive tools assessors already use: exterior inspections, building permits, sales data, photographs, depreciation schedules and contractor documentation. As the briefing states, “government should not be permitted to convert a homeowner’s assertion of privacy — or even mere delay — into a forfeiture of appeal rights.”
In a state that proudly declares “Live Free or Die,” the home must remain a castle. It’s time to correct Walsh and protect the rights our Constitution promises.