Heather Raymond for State Representative

Memorial Day in Nashua begins with remembrance ceremonies and ends with a parade and luncheon.

Parents in NH already have the right to opt their own children out of anything they find objectionable - any lesson, any book, any video, anything. And state law already requires 2 weeks prior notice to parents before a teacher can introduce any materials that reference s*x or s*xuality, so there is ample time to request an opt out.

This new bill goes much further and expressly permits parents to opt other people’s children out too; even over the opposition of those other parents.

We all agree that parents should partner with teachers to ensure that their family values are respected. We all also agree that public schools should have oversight via elected school boards so parents and taxpayers have a say in curriculum and materials.

But this bill, and all the other culture wars bills this year, are trying to elevate the personal beliefs of the most prudish people in society and let those people dictate the books (and artwork and statues) that everyone else can see. I don’t believe that the statue of David is inappropriate for minors. Art historians agree. But this lets the one mom who thinks it is decide for the entire school district.
That’s wrong.

Community voices criticism of Facilities Master Plan » Nashua Ink Link The Nashua School District held a third community forum Wednesday night on the district’s Facilities Master Plan and the community did not hold back concerns, with a strong presence in particular from the New Searles Elementary community.

Brad Cook in today’s issue of the NH Business Review:

Rethinking NH’s Tax Policies:

Without enough revenue coming in, how will we fix roads and pay for schools?

State revenue and how it is raised has been in the news from Concord recently, in several respects. A reported $400 million deficit in funds available to repair and build roads as set forth in the state 10-year highway plan, a proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit passage of a state income tax, and measures to force votes on local school budgets and other property tax-related measures, all have called attention to how New Hampshire pays for things.

Government is a system for us all to decide what we want to do together, because we cannot do it alone. For example, we could not construct highways individually, but we can collectively. Yet, when it is clear road tolls and gasoline taxes do not produce enough money to maintain our road system, leaders oppose increasing the road toll, or propose raising it only for those who do not live here.

Tolls are a fee designed to have those using the roads pay for them, not a tax. Our roads are not just used by out-of-staters, but primarily by our residents. We should pay for them. And while they are at it, the legislators should figure out a way for owners of electric cars, heavier than gas models and harder on roads, to pay the equivalent of what they would pay in gas taxes, if their autos used gasoline.

Proposals to put a prohibition on passage of a state income tax in the New Hampshire Constitution are especially inappropriate. Somehow, we have developed a “religion” that says taxes paid by everyone, broadly based, are bad. Where the logic is in that has always escaped me.

Tying the hands of the Legislature, our means of taking action together, is a crude and inappropriate step. More importantly, refusing to distribute the tax burden broadly among those who either have more ability to pay due to higher income, or those who purchase more and would pay more tax on sales, is strange public policy, and policy which leaves us with few options for revenue raising, with the local and state property tax being the default choice.

Action by the Legislature in recent years to cut the rates of, or eliminate entirely, state taxes, such as the repeal of Interest and Dividends Tax, or cutting the rate of business taxes, deprives the state of needed revenue to fund the programs already passed or proposed, and has pushed much of the cost down onto cities and towns.

Consequently, the burden falls disproportionately on residents of different communities, depending on the value of property in them, whether they have lakes and rivers, or the amount of commercial property they can tax.

Not too long ago, a client in a small town in Merrimack County contacted me after a reassessment of the real estate in his town. His next property tax bill had increased 10% over the prior year’s bill, and he was sure he had been abused in the reassessment process.

That led to an analysis that started with the question of what the average increase in assessment for the town was. In this case, it was about 75%. Then, looking at the client’s increase, I discovered his increase was only 72%. His share of the total tax in town, then, had gone down.

If the total town, county and school spending had stayed the same, his tax bill would have gone down accordingly, but it went up 10%. Checking with the town administrator, I was shown the figures for the town, that its total budget supported by the property tax had increased over 10% in one year, largely due to the costs shifted down from the state onto the community.

I advised my client that it was not the reassessment that had increased his taxes, but the amount that had to be supported by the total property tax. He was amazed and somewhat incredulous.

State law requires reassessment of property if the average assessment gets to 80% of fair market value, and increasing sales prices of homes, especially in some towns with many waterfront properties, have made frequent reassessment more common. It has also resulted in huge ranges in the tax increases in different municipalities, often next door to each other.

It is common to hear of people paying many tens of thousands of dollars in property taxes, often to communities in which they have second homes, do not send their children to school, and do not use municipal services to any great degree.

The question needs to be examined whether a more intelligent system would be to have the taxes paid to the state, so that funds could be distributed equitably among all communities in the state, and whether the local property tax has outlived its usefulness.

Our anti-tax “religion” in New Hampshire keeps candidates for political office from discussing the subjects of this column calmly and thoughtfully, forcing them to repeat slogans.

Thoughtful citizens should not be bound by the same restraints. Think about it.

https://touch.npaper-wehaa.com/nh-business-review/read/

Earlier in April, Nashua Community Arts and Spectacle Live hosted the first graders from Nashua's twelve elementary schools at the Nashua Center for the Arts for a live performance of Click Clack Moo, made possible through donations to the Arts Ball Fund-a-Need. Thanks to the generosity of Balin Books, Bank of America, Casey Holt, Nashua PAL, and St. Mary’s Bank, books were given to each school library, the Nashua Public Library and every first-grade student in attendence!

Opportunities such as this support literacy and nurture creativity and an appreciation of the performing arts.

I wrote the minority report when this bill was first reviewed by committee back in February. States that value the rights of children to safety are rapidly moving to prohibit parental alienation claims in custody cases because a decade of research shows a significant correlation between those claims and credible allegations of s*xual abuse. Parents who feel they are loosing meaningful connection with their children should seek help through family or pastoral counseling to rebuild their relationship in a safe and healthy manner.

Here’s the report as published in the House Calendar:

Rep. Heather Raymond for the Minority of Children and Family Law. Parental alienation, originally coined by psychiatrist Richard Gardner in the 1990s, has been widely discredited by the American Psychological Association, the Leadership Council on the Abuse of Children, the National District Attorneys Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, and the American Bar Association after rigorous study spanning 30 years. In 2015, the American Bar Association reviewed over 7,000 cases where parental alienation was alleged and found it was most often brought by a parent who had been credibly accused of abuse, most frequently s*xual abuse. After the review, the Bar Association published an article concluding that Parental Alienation Syndrome is "without any specific merit" and should not be considered in high conflict cases. In the past three years, CA, NY, MD, IL, CO, and PA have all restricted the use of parental alienation as a justification for forcing children into contact with parents against the child's expressed will. NH's judicial system is under strain. The Children and Family Law Committee frequently hears testimony from parents who feel the judges are already not applying laws or rules of evidence fairly. It would not be in the best interest of children, nor parents, to add a controversial term, already rejected by legal experts, into custody cases. It is not practical, and likely violates the First Amendment for judges to determine what parents are allowed to say to their children. As written, this bill could be used to prevent parents from discussing demonstrable facts with children such as when the other parent has an addiction or has been arrested: even if the child initiates the conversation. Parents who feel that they are being unfairly deprived of a meaningful relationship with their children due to divorce can, and should, seek family counseling and alert the court and the Division for Children, Youth and Families if they believe their children are being psychologically abused or manipulated by the other parent. For this reason, the minority strongly opposes this and recommends it be found Inexpedient to Legislate.

A must-read from the New Hampshire Union Leader: Former NH family law attorney and Waypoint board member Marilyn T. Mahoney makes a compelling case against HB 1323, which would make NH the first state to codify 'parental alienation' into law. The data on how alienation claims affect survivors is deeply troubling. Trusted advocates, courts, and national experts agree this legislation would harm children. NH's children deserve better. Read Marilyn's op-ed here: https://ow.ly/6VZO50Z2nhK

His posts were not “critical” of colleagues. That’s a ridiculous minimization.

A Jewish colleague invited everyone to karaoke and he responded by calling for her to be put to death. When folks suggested that he surely must be joking, he clarified in writing, that he was not.

The House Legislative Administration Committee held a public hearing and dozens of people testified for hours about how he has displayed a pattern of deplorable conduct toward both colleagues and members of the public including using racial slurs, expressing white supremacist talking points, and making other calls for violence. The committee, which is majority Republican, voted overwhelmingly to recommend that the full House issue a censure.

He absolutely has a right to free speech. But the House also has a right to censure him when he violates The Behavioral Standards he agreed to follow when taking the oath of office that specifically prohibit using social media to target other lawmakers with hateful or discriminatory rhetoric. Both calling for the death of a colleague and calling for the deportation of another colleague based on their religion and race qualify as serious violations. These behaviors would’ve likely resulted in termination in any other employment.

Because this Representative declined to serve on any committees this session and there is only one day left in session this year, a formal vote of censure is the only consequence he will face. The voters in Weare will need to decide if he best represents their community’s values in November.

The Senate replaced the contents of the Charlie Kirk act HB 1792 with a revival of the Divisive Concepts Law that the State Supreme Court already ruled unconstitutional. The House rejected the changes, effectively killing the original bill and the amended bill.

Another controversial culture war bill this year, HB 1132 which would’ve banned all banners and flags, including sports team banners, from public schools was defeated by the Senate this month.