Mar

26

Adequacy and the Future of Education [HB 927]

Filed Under School Info | Comments Off

According to CBN News, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has just ranked New Hampshire among the top ten states for education quality. Education in New Hampshire is still a local function, driven by parent input and administered through local school boards. The cost is still paid for through local property taxes.

In its 1993 Claremont I decision, the N.H. Supreme court decided to change N.H.’s historic education formula when it ruled, “ … that encouragement of literature clause of State Constitution imposes duty on state to provide constitutionally adequate education to every educable child in public schools in state and to guarantee adequate funding.” (Emphasis mine).

The Court’s word “provide,” means the state must assume responsibility for all of the elements of education now accomplished by local school districts including the hiring of teachers, providing and maintaining school buildings, bussing, etc. The implications of state takeover have been studiously avoided by governors and legislatures since the Court’s 1993 ruling.

In December of 1997, the Court further determined that local property taxes can’t be used to pay for what the Court described as the state’s “guaranteed funding,” obligation.

Those happy to dispense with local control and especially with local school property taxes might want to think again. The centralized education model which the Court prescribed for New Hampshire is similar to systems employed by California and Hawaii. California and Hawaii scored dead last in U.S. Chamber education rankings.

Democrats in the N.H. House and Senate have embraced the Court’s education concept. Governor Lynch has embraced the N.H. Department of Education model for education “adequacy.” Lynch’s “adequacy,” preference will cost about $9,000 per child and will require 1.2 Billion Dollars in new state spending. Lynch’s new, guaranteed-to-fail, state-run education system will require the imposition of state sales and income taxes because proposed revenue from other sources, including gambling, won’t produce enough money to fund all this. And, all this, is what Governor Lynch and his legislative leaders are working enthusiastically to achieve.

If you care about quality education for New Hampshire’s kids you should be fighting state takeover tooth and nail.

Sincerely,

Honorable Paul Mirski
PO Box 190
Enfield Center, N.H.

Mar

21

CNHT eBlast 03/21/2007

Filed Under CNHT eBlasts | Comments Off

Just got a call about the reversal of the conviction of James Tobin in the 2002 phone jamming case.
If Chuck McGee had the dough he would not have a record either.

Now how do the liberal Democrats hide the Buckley case and live off the phone jamming bonanza they ran an entire campaign on?

I have read the federal statutes about this case and you have to prove intent.

For the conviction of Chuck McGee to stand when he was on the phone early in the morning calling the company making the calls to stop them when he found it was illegal is a tough call.

Check the phone records. Chuck was franticly calling every couple minutes, but the firm started making calls 90 minutes before he got through and stopped it.

Under NH law he could have hired a local firm and called himself and not committed a crime. It was using an out of state firm that triggered the federal statute.

In the world of hard ball politics all kinds of things happen.

Conservatives have suffered mail tampering. I have had my mail tampered with. Right to Life had the Governor’s office diverting calls to their answering machine just last month. Non-residents and illegal aliens vote in NH and a 17 year old Republican in Londonderry gets convicted. The Democrat Party Chair has a sign stealing and non-resident vote scam run out of her house. Someone tried to burn down the Republican party HQ in Concord.

Its always best to run a clean and legal campaign but when prosecution is reserved for one side only and the other uses it for political gain it sure is sweet when it blows up in their face like today.

I wonder what Ray Buckley the next Democrat Party chair has to say.

Just my opinion.

Ed Naile, CNHT

Mar

19

NJ Court Upholds Second Amendment

Filed Under Other News | Comments Off

Court holds that it trumps gun forfeiture law.

In a landmark written opinion filed February 27, a New Jersey Superior Court recognized the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and held that a citizen’s Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms cannot be involuntarily waived under a New Jersey firearms forfeiture law. “The recognition of Second Amendment rights in New Jersey is long overdue,” said attorney Evan F. Nappen, whose law firm (including Richard V. Gilbert, Esq. and Louis P. Nappen, Esq.) represented appellant Dennis W. Peterson in the Warren County case. “In this appeal, the Second Amendment was applied to New Jersey via the Constitutional doctrine of fundamental fairness, overcoming a significant legal hurdle needed for the Federal Bill of Rights to apply to the State.”

This decision coincides with the recent Parker v. District of Columbia case, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down a decades-old handgun ban in Washington, D.C. on the ground that it violates the Second Amendment.

“The legal significance of the Second Amendment is finally being recognized by American courts,” Nappen continued, “and this New Jersey case is part of a growing trend in American jurisprudence.”

For more information see: Evan Nappen

Mar

11

CNHT eBlast 03/11/2007

Filed Under CNHT eBlasts | Comments Off

Here is the bill [HB 804] to get rid of the “view assessments” Avitar has created and abused.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Appraisal Of Taxable Property; Full and True Value; View Excluded. Amend RSA 75:1 to read as follows:

75:1 How Appraised. The selectmen shall appraise open space land pursuant to RSA 79-A:5, open space land with conservation restrictions pursuant to RSA 79-B:3, land with discretionary easements pursuant to RSA 79-C:7, residences on commercial or industrial zoned land pursuant to RSA 75:11, earth and excavations pursuant to RSA 72-B, and all other taxable property at its market value. Market value means the property’s full and true value as the same would be appraised in payment of a just debt due from a solvent debtor, provided, however that full and true value shall not consider any value of a scenic view or other view external to a property. The selectmen shall receive and consider all evidence that may be submitted to them relative to the value of property, the value of which cannot be determined by personal examination.

2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect April 1, 2007.

Ed Naile, CNHT