Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: During police operations, items of value may be forfeited by individuals. There are expenses associated with the management of such property, including storage, returning items where appropriate, etc. NH law permits the auctioning of abandoned property, and the proceeds are put into a fund. This Article would allow the funds to be withdrawn to cover the costs of department needs, as approved via the RSAs.

Those in favor say: No one spoke in favor of this Article at Deliberative Session.

Those against say: Those opposed take issue with the taking of property, or have issues with how funds are spent. Both of these issues are defined at the state level and are not affected by the voters’ decision.

Fiscal impact: There would be no new tax impact, since this money has already been collected. The intent of the Article is to allow the withdrawal of the funds for various Police Department needs.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: The current compactor was originally put in service in 2009. It is used 7 days per week. The previous repairs have included repairs made to the pistons, hoses, valves, and pumps. It now needs body work. This Article proposed replacing the compactor, and covering the cost with the Unassigned Fund Balance.

Those in favor say: No one spoke in favor of this Article at the Deliberative Session.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session other than to question why it was not part of the DPW budget.

Fiscal Impact: There would be no new tax impact.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: This Article proposes using the Unassigned Fund Balance to add a 1-ton Dump Truck to the Town’s fleet for cemetery maintenance.

 Those in favor say: No one spoke in favor of this Article at Deliberative Session

 Those against say: It was questioned why these funds are not being withdrawn from the Cemetery Trust Fund. The reply was that those funds were being reserved for general maintenance. Also, according to Town Manager, the Dump Truck would also be used for other Town purposes (not just the cemeteries).

 Fiscal impact: The $65,000 cost is being proposed to be withdrawn from the Unassigned Fund Balance and thus there would be no new tax cost for property owners.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: A fund has been established that will allow the Department of Public Works and the Board of Selectmen to address issues as they arise related to pedestrian and traffic safety. The fund needs to be replenished as set-aside dollars are used.

Those in favor say: Pedestrian and traffic safety are highly demanded throughout the town. This fund will allow traffic calming devices, pedestrian safety measures and sidewalk safety to be put in place as needed.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the DeliberativeSession.

Fiscal impact: The $50,000 cost is being proposed to be withdrawn from the Unassigned Fund Balance. If approved, the money would be withdrawn from these excess funds, and there would be no new tax cost for property owners.

 

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: The Conservation Fund, created via RSA-36-A:5, is used by the Conservation Commission to protect open spaces via acquisition or conservation easements, on behalf of the town. The fund was depleted in 2022 when it was used to help pay for the purchase of the 22+ acre Barkley property on North Shore Road. This Warrant Article will help to build up the Fund again so that it can be used to pay for future conservation opportunities as they are identified.

Those in favor say: The Commission tries to build up this Fund gradually to help reduce, if not eliminate the need to ask the voters for additional dollars when conservation opportunities arises. The Commission always uses this fund first before going to the townspeople for additional financial support for these opportunities.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article.

Fiscal impact: Cost per thousand dollars of valuation is $0.008. A household valued at $400,000 will see a tax cost of $3.20 in 2023.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: In 2019, voters approved $200,000 for a new Capital Reserve Fund for the replacement of Firefighter’s Protective Gear. As of the end of 2022, the fund stood at about $144,000. This fund needs to be added to regularly, so that as gear is replaced using money withdrawn from the fund, additional funds will be available for future needs. This Article would transfer the funds from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Turnout Gear Reserve Fund.

Those in favor say: This is an annual procedure to keep our Firefighters safe. The protective gear worn by a firefighter is exposed to potential carcinogens while fighting a blaze. A second set of firefighting protective equipment is needed in order to allow contaminated gear to be properly contained and cleaned, while another set remains ready for use. This equipment is customized for each firefighter to assure an effective fit. There are strict standards with regard to the amount of service before the gear must be replaced. To pay for this expense, a reserve fund was established and needs to be regularly replenished. This Article allows funds to be taken from the Unassigned Fund Balance for this purpose.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at theDeliberativeSession.

Fiscal impact: There is no new tax impact. This Article is allowing the transfer of funds from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the previously-established Firefighter Turnout GearReserve Fund.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: Hampton currently allows a tax credit of $750 for Veterans who meet certain criteria. (The state gives the option of setting the rate between $50 and $750). A recent amendment to NH law expands the definition of a veteran to “anyone who has served in the armed forces and continues to serve” and includes state active duty as a qualifying service towards the 90-day requirement under the all-veteran tax credit. Municipalities are required to use the new definition in the legislative language.

For optional and/or all veterans tax credits, the provisions of the expanded law do not apply unless a municipality readopts the local option by a vote of the legislative body. Statute amended: RSA 72:28, IV; 72:28-b, IV. E.D. July 26, 2022. 

Articles 31 and 32 are both required and refer to different mentions of the type of tax credit within the New Hampshire legislation.  Whether you decide to vote for or against Article 32, it would make sense to vote that same way for Article 31.

No one spoke for or against this Article at the Deliberative Session.

Fiscal impact: No direct tax impact.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: Hampton currently allows a tax credit of $750 for Veterans who meet certain criteria. (The state gives the option of setting the rate between $50 and $750). A recent amendment to NH law expands the definition of a veteran to “anyone who has served in the armed forces and continues to serve” and includes state active duty as a qualifying service towards the 90-day requirement under the all-veteran tax credit. Municipalities are required to use the new definition in the legislative language.

For optional and/or all veterans tax credits, the provisions of the expanded law do not apply unless a municipality readopts the local option by a vote of the legislative body. Statute amended: RSA 72:28, IV; 72:28-b, IV. E.D. July 26, 2022. 

Articles 31 and 32 are both required and refer to different mentions of the type of tax credit within the New Hampshire legislation.  Whether you decide to vote for or against Article 31, it would make sense to vote that same way for Article 32.

No one spoke for or against this Article at the Deliberative Session.

Fiscal impact: No direct tax impact.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: An electric aggregation program works by having a large group of customers come together to buy their electricity from the producer instead of having the utility purchase it. Currently, Hampton’s primary utility provider (Unitil) purchases electric power for most Hampton residences and businesses. If approved, the Board of Selectmen will be authorized to investigate and develop an aggregation program which would allow the Town to use the collective bargaining power of its residents to negotiate for lower power prices from alternative energy suppliers. Participation in the program is completely voluntary. Unitil would continue to deliver the electricity, maintain the equipment and lines and handle billing.

Those in favor say: Hampton is in a unique position where summer usage is higher than other times of the year which is opposite of most towns. This would benefit Hampton to be able to negotiate a lower rate. This would provide local control and customer choice. Residents would not see any change in billing as the electricity would be billed by Unitil, as it is currently.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at Deliberative Session.  However, it was questioned what additional options were investigated. The answer was given that this came to Hampton’s attention fairly close to the Warrants being prepared, and it was determined that it would be better to get something forward that could be evaluated by the voters.  Changes could always be made in the future.

Fiscal impact: There is no fiscal impact.

Click here to see the wording of this Article as it appears on your ballot.

What it means: Article 34 would change the town’s Entertainment Activities Ordinance with the objective of removing the subjectivity that has made it difficult for police to enforce, and to give the owners of entertainment venues a clear picture of what is and isn’t permitted.  If this Article is approved, it will restrict the playing of music or other sound-related activity to specific days and hours.

Those in favor say: This proposed Article is the culmination of the work of a committee, comprised of Hampton Law Enforcement, residents who are local to the beach area, and business owners who provide entertainment.  As a group, they tried to improve the existing ordinance to make it acceptable to the locals while not restricting the entertainment value that the beach businesses provide.  It is also more straight-forward for the Police Department.

Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at Deliberative Session.

Fiscal impact: There is no direct tax impact for this Article.