We the undersigned registered voters of Hampton, NH, do hereby request the Select Board of Hampton, NH, to insert into the 2022 Warrant for the Town Meeting the following article: To see if the Town of Hampton, NH, will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $1,000 for the recruitment and retention of CASA volunteer advocates. CASA of NH is a nonprofit that provides a voice for abused and neglected children and youth by empowering a statewide network of trained volunteers to advocate on their behalf so they can thrive in a safe, permanent home.

What it means: This is a new request for a donation to help fund services to abused or neglected children.

What they say: No one spoke for or against this Article at Deliberative Session.

Fiscal impact: A household valued at $400,000 would see a tax increase of $.12 in 2022 if this Article is approved.  Cost per thousand dollars of valuation is three one-hundreths of one cent.

On petition of Paul Nicholson and at least 25 registered voters, shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the amount of $3,000 for the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, to be added to the Charitable Donation list, for expenses incurred for the use of the Community Kitchen. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul of Hampton is a local (501c3) non-profit organization dedicated to families and individuals in need as well as providing others with the opportunity to serve. The Society has been assisting local families since 1984. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul offers tangible assistance to those in need on a person-to person basis. It is this personalized involvement that makes the work of the Society unique.

What it means: This is a new request for a donation to help fund community kitchen services.  This Article specifies that if the voters approve, St. Vincent De Paul Community Kitchen will be added to the annual donation list in future years.

Those in favor say:  This is a group that is part of the community and steps up whenever they can help.

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

Fiscal impact: A household valued at $400,000 would see a tax increase of $.40 in 2022 if this Article is approved.  Cost per thousand dollars of valuation is one-tenth of one cent.

To see if the town will adopt a mosquito control ordinance such that owners or persons in control of any piece of property shall, at all times, maintain the outside premises free of any standing water in any barrel, tire, tub, swimming pool cover, ornamental pool, or any other artificial water receptacle, or shall treat and maintain such receptacle in a manner as to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes, or act on anything relative thereto. (As Petitioned)

What it means: A petitioned Warrant Article is requesting that the Town institute an Ordinance that requires homeowners to keep properties free of standing water, as a way of preventing mosquitoes from breeding.

Those in favor say: Keeping properties as dry as possible is the best and least expensive way of preventing issues with mosquitoes, and avoids the use of mosquito sprays that are costly and potentially harmful to the health of children.

Those against say: This would be difficult to enforce.  Homeowners deserve privacy – who would be put in charge of determining if homeowners were complying? Neighbors would be tattling on neighbors. There was a concern about how the Ordinance if approved would affect the use of rain barrels.

Fiscal impact: There is no taxpayer cost associated with this Article.

To see if the town will modernize its approach to mosquito management by adopting a science-based approach of integrated pest management (IPM) that prioritizes the least intrusive and most appropriate prevention measures to protect public health, or act on anything relative thereto. These methods are to utilize proactive planning and action to reduce the risk of human disease from arboviruses rather than respond to nuisance control. The approach is to be a phased response plan tied to disease threshold indicators for Jamestown Canyon Virus (JCV), West Nile Virus (WNV), and Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) using the State of New Hampshire Arboviral Illness, Surveillance, Prevention and Response Plan from the Department of Health & Human Services Division of Public Health Services as a model. 

The prevention measures are to include a mosquito control ordinance, public education on elimination of breeding sites, public education on personal protective actions, the provision of child safe mosquito spray in town offices, larval and adult mosquito catchment testing, surveillance and monitoring of mosquito population and habitat conditions, consideration of local ecological systems, habitat manipulation methods, licensed use of Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) biological larvicides to control breeding interest sites, full disclosure of larvicide use, advance notice of larvicide use, the provision of an opt out opportunity that eliminates larvicide contact with opposed party’s land and if the town elects to include adulticide control it is to be utilized only with strict red level disease threshold criteria with opt out opportunities in place that eliminate adulticide contact with opposed party’s land. 

Therefore, the purpose of this IPM mosquito management program is to implement planning and practices which minimize the use of synthetic pesticides and prioritize the use of least toxic options.

What it means: A petitioned Warrant Article is requesting that the Town minimize the use of synthetic pesticides, and adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which seeks to reduce the toxicity of mosquito control measures, while still preventing mosquito-borne diseases.

Those in favor say:  There are measures that could better protect the health of our children, reduce toxins for lobsters and natural predators to mosquitoes (such as dragon flies and bats) and still provide adequate control of mosquito-borne diseases. Changing our way of controlling mosquitoes would also result in a lower cost for taxpayers.

Those against say: Much of what is being suggested is already incorporated into our existing mosquito-control program.  Although there may be beneficial changes that could be made, those changes could be considered by the Mosquito Control Commission, our mosquito control vendor and the Board of Selectmen.  As a Town, we need more time to carefully consider the proposal that has been made, rather than having it determined by a petitioned Warrant Article.

Fiscal impact: There is no taxpayer cost associated with this Article.

Note:  Articles 39 and 40 are essentially identical, and will be discussed as one.  For comparison, Article 40 is also provided below, but not expanded upon.

To the Town/City of Hampton- We, the undersigned duly registered voters in the Town/City of Hampton, New Hampshire herby petition and apply for the insertion of the following petitioned warrant article:

“Shall the following provisions pertaining to elections be adopted? All voting shall be by paper ballot and all ballots shall be hand counted only, rather than use by optical scanning or any other types of programmable electronic counting devices.”

This shall also constitute an application for RSA 656:40 stating ballot counting machines were adopted on a trial basis, so we wish to return to manual hand counting by citizens.

What it means: The current system of voting in Hampton is done by paper ballots which are counted by optical scanners.  This Article, if passed, would revert to the manual counting of votes by citizens.

Those in favor say:   

• Current method of scanning votes was adopted on a trial basis.
• ⅓ of New Hampshire towns still count by hand.
• A complete audit of the machine count has never been done to prove accuracy.
• Current machines are old and repaired using non original manufacturer parts since they are no longer manufactured.
• Current software used has not been updated in a decade and is unsupported.
• We rely on a third party entity to program the machines with no government oversight.
• Manual counting can be done by concerned volunteer citizens who have an interest in the integrity of the vote.

Those against say: 

• No proof that hand counting would be more accurate.
• More chance of human error and uncertainty in elections.
• Voting location would need to be changed as ballot counting would need to be completed before ballots are moved.  Process could take several days. The current location for voting must be turned back to school purposes and could not be dedicated to counting for days.
• Number of volunteers needed could exceed 100 year after year.
• Current scanners are tested for accuracy prior to each election.
• Partial audits have been completed in the past for close elections, and never has the manual count changed an outcome.
• Current scanners are not connected to the internet or bluetooth enabled.

Fiscal impact: There is no taxpayer cost associated with this Article.

ARTICLE 40 IS A DUPLICATE OF ARTICLE 39.  WHATEVER YOU DECIDE TO VOTE FOR ARTICLE 39, DO THE SAME FOR ARTICLE 40.

Article 40 – Voting by Paper Ballot and All Ballots to be Hand-Counted

To the Town/City of HAMPTON- We, the undersigned duly registered voters in the Town/City of HAMPTON, New Hampshire, herby petition and apply for the insertion of the following petitioned warrant article:

“Shall the following provisions pertaining to elections be adopted? All voting shall be by paper ballot; and all ballots shall be hand counted only, rather than use by optical scanning or any other types of programmable electronic counting devices.”

 

 

NEW HAMPSHIRE RESOLUTION TO STOP THE PUPPY MILL PIPELINE

By petition of 25 or more eligible voters of the town of Hampton, to see if the town will go on record opposing the retail sales of dogs and cats in pet stores in the town. This resolution is necessary because the majority of dogs and cats sold in pet stores are sourced from large-scale, inhumane commercial breeding facilities commonly called “puppy mills”. The record of vote shall be transmitted by written notice from the selectmen to the town’s state legislators and to the Governor of New Hampshire.

What it means: This Article is requesting the Town of Hampton to go on record with the State of NH opposing the retail sales of dogs and cats.  Hampton does not currently host any stores that sell live animals (only pet supplies).  This action would augment a state-wide effort against such retail outlets for the reasons stated.

Those in favor say: Puppy mills are large-scale breeding operations. With irresponsible and often unregulated breeding practices, they produce traumatized dogs and cats who are vulnerable to infectious and genetic diseases. Puppy Mills exist to sell to pet stores. Nationally, there is a move to stop the inhumane treatment by preventing pet stores from operating.  Families wanting such pets can acquire them from shelters or from responsible breeders. Other NH towns are also considering such legislation, and neighboring states have already enacted restrictive regulations. Approval of this Article would help to send a message to other locales that inhumane treatment of animals should not be allowed to persist.  A comment was made that this does not affect retail stores that sell supplies for pets, nor does it affect retail stores that showcase shelter animals (but do not sell their own).

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

Fiscal impact: There is no taxpayer cost associated with this Article.

THIS IS THE LAST ARTICLE ON THE TOWN BALLOT FOR 2022.