In The Know Hampton

Your Source For Unbiased Town Information

Article 41 – Close Voting Polls at 7 PM Rather than Current 8 PM

To the Town/City of HAMPTON, New Hampshire. We, the undersigned duly registered voters in the Town/City of HAMPTON, New Hampshire, hereby petition and apply for the insertion of the follow warrant article: “Shall the following provision pertaining to elections be adopted?: This petition article seeks to change the closing times of the Hampton, NH polls to 7PM on election day to match the vast majority of polling places in NH including surrounding towns North Hampton, Rye, Portsmouth, Greenland, Newmarket, Durham and Newington.

What it means: A petitioned Warrant Article is requesting that the Town close voting polls an hour earlier than has been the procedure in Hampton.  While polls currently close at 8 PM, if this article is approved, they would close at 7 PM for all future elections.  If you want the polls to close at 7 PM, vote “yes”.  If you want the poll to stay open as they currently do until 8 PM, vote “no”.

Those in favor say: Concerns were expressed about potential voter fraud from out-of-staters using same-day voter registration to vote in Hampton after polls close in neighboring towns.  No evidence of this was presented.

Those against say: Keeping polls open until 8:00 PM allows more time to vote, especially for families where one member works and the other is dedicated to the care of children, and for those who work a distance from home and need the time to get to the Hampton polls.  The current timing helps to encourage more democratic participation.

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

Article 42 – Restriction on Sale of Dogs and Cats in Pet Stores 

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.

Article 12: Collective Bargaining Agreement with Police Sergeants – $45,196 in 2022

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to approve the cost items included in the collective bargaining agreement reached between the Hampton Board of Selectmen and the Hampton Police Association Sergeants, which calls for the following increases in salaries and benefits at current staffing levels, over the amount paid in the prior fiscal year:

Estimated Increase (over previous year level)

2022 (39 weeks) $45,196

2023 (52 weeks) $30,028

2024 (52 weeks) $28,323

2025 (13 weeks) $7,400

And to further raise and appropriate $45,196 for the current fiscal year, such sum representing the additional costs attributable to the increase in salaries and benefits required by the new agreement over those that would be paid at current staffing levels? (Majority vote required)

What it Means:  Article 12 would increase Police Sergeant’s pay by 2-3% versus the current schedule. Below is a schedule of hourly wages that would be in effect if this Article passes. For comparison, the consumer price index, upon which social security increases are based, is 5.9%.

More details can be found on the town’s website: 

https://hamptonnh.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4989/HamptonPoliceAssociationTentativeAgreement—Patrolman

 

Those in favor say: Every shift and every division is supervised by a sergeant. The leadership skills of our Sergeants have allowed dangerous situations to be resolved favorably.  As part of the salary review in anticipation of these negotiations, the Town became aware that there are Patrolmen in nearby towns making more money than Hampton Sergeants. We need to get competitive or we stand the chance of losing these experienced employees who make a difference in very tense situations.  During negotiations, both the Town and the Police Sergeant’s Association conceded some items, for a “meet in the middle” kind of agreement. 

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

Fiscal impact: This is a four year agreement, with 39 weeks falling into 2022. In this fiscal year, a property valued at $400,000 would see a tax increase of $4.80 if this Article passes.  Using 2022 valuations for the tax base, the subsequent years would see additional increases of $3.19 in 2023, $3.01 in 2024 and $.79 in 2025 (for 13 weeks only). To calculate the effect on your own property, use .012 times your valuation divided by 1,000 in 2022.

Article 13: Collective Bargaining Agreement with Police Patrolmen – $303,037 in 2022

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to approve the cost items included in the collective bargaining agreement reached between the Hampton Board of Selectmen and the Hampton Police Association Patrolman, which calls for the following increases in salaries and benefits at current staffing levels, over the amount paid in the prior fiscal year:

Estimated Increase (over previous year level)

2022 (39 weeks) $303,037

2023 (52 weeks) $187,071

2024 (52 weeks) $140,000

2025 (13 weeks) $33,864

And to further raise and appropriate $303,037 for the current fiscal year, such sum representing the additional costs attributable to the increase in salaries and benefits required by the new agreement over those that would be paid at current staffing levels? (Majority vote required)

What it means: Article 13 would increase the Patrolmen’s pay by 2-3% versus the current schedule.  Below is a schedule of hourly wages that would be in effect for service anniversaries up to 4 years, if this Article passes.  

More details can be found on the town’s website: 

https://hamptonnh.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4989/HamptonPoliceAssociationTentativeAgreement—Patrolman

Those in favor say: Hampton needs to pay competitive wages in order to recruit and retain people willing to serve. Nearby towns (Seabrook and Manchester were mentioned) have more attractive salaries than Hampton has been providing. It is inevitable that we will lose both incoming candidates, and Patrolmen that Hampton has already invested in. We have lost one-third of our Patrolmen since the last contract. Some of them left law enforcement entirely but many left for higher pay elsewhere. The requested increase is entirely reasonable and very necessary – especially with regard to current and anticipated inflation – to maintain the necessary force, and thus the safety of our residents and the tourists who come seasonally.

A representative of the business community spoke at the Deliberative Session in favor of remaining competitive so that the town does not find itself short-staffed when the need is greatest. Throughout the country, businesses are having to increase hourly wages to attract and maintain employees.  It is no different in a municipal environment.  We need to remain competitive or we will not be able to properly staff for the needs of the community.

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

Fiscal impact: This is a four-year agreement, with 39 weeks falling into 2022.  In this fiscal year, a property valued at $400,000 would see a tax increase of $31.60 if this Article passes.  Using 2022 valuations for the tax base, the subsequent years would see additional increases of $19.51 in 2023, $14.60 in 2024 and $3.53 in 2025 (for 13 weeks only).  To calculate the effect on your own property, use .079 times your valuation divided by 1,000 in 2022.

Article 28 – Update Security for the Police Department – $150,000 (No 2022 Tax Impact)

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $150,000 for the purpose of upgrading the Hampton Police Station security and access security control systems. Said sum of $150,000 to come from the Unassigned Fund Balance. This shall be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and shall not lapse until the upgrades are completed or by March 31, 2027, whichever occurs sooner? (Majority vote required)

What it means: $150,000 would be taken from the Unassigned Fund Balance to upgrade security systems at Police Department buildings.

Those in favor say: The current systems are approximately 17 years old, and are becoming unserviceable due to outdated hardware and software. The systems in question provide access to the building and provide camera coverage throughout the building, including booking rooms and interview rooms. The needed upgrades will maintain security for everyone’s safety.

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

Fiscal impact:  There would be no new tax impact, because the funds would be taken from the Unassigned Fund Balance.

Article 29 – Police Forfeiture Fund – $90,000 (No 2022 Tax Impact)

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $90,000 to carry out all lawful functions allowed under federal, state, and local criminal justice forfeiture programs and to authorize the withdrawal of said sum of $90,000 from the Police Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund established for that purpose under Article 55 of the 2003 Town Meeting?   (Majority vote required)

What it means: During normal police operations, items of value may be forfeited by individuals. There are expenses associated with the management of such property, including storage, auctioning, returning items where appropriate, etc.  NH law permits the auctioning of abandoned property where appropriate, and the monies so received are put into a fund.  This Article seeks approval to use the funds to cover the cost of managing the forfeiture process and other activities approved via the RSA’s.

Those in favor say: This is a standard, annual procedure to allow money to be withdrawn from the fund.

 Those against say: Those opposed take issue with taking the property of others in the first place (as opposed to the withdrawing of money from the fund); or have issues with how the funds are spent.  Both of these issues are defined at the state level and are not affected by the voters’ approval of this Article.

 Fiscal impact: There is no tax impact because the money will be taken from a separate fund.  This Article is allowing the withdrawal of the money from the fund.

Article 30 – Cemetery Maintenance from Established Fund – $50,000 (No 2022 Tax Impact)

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $50,000 for the purpose of maintenance of the Cemeteries in order to protect grave sites, gravestones, and roadways, and to authorize funding said appropriation through the withdrawal of $50,000 from the principal in the Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund, established for that purpose under Article 26 of the 1986 Town Meeting. This shall be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and shall not lapse until the maintenance is completed or by March 31, 2027, whichever occurs sooner? (Majority vote required)

What it means: There is a fund that was set up in 1986 for the purpose of maintaining the cemeteries.  Voter approval to use this money is required.  The outlined work would be performed using $50,00 from this fund, which had a value of $661,000 at the end of 2021.

Those in favor say: The cemeteries need regular work in order to maintain safety.  There are overgrown roots that are pulling up the walkway and causing a trip hazard.  Some of the stones have been broken due to trees coming down, and many need to be cleaned due to moss and lichen overtaking them.  The requested funds would allow the Cemetery Maintenance crew to do the necessary work to clean up the cemeteries.

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

Fiscal impact:  There would be no new tax impact, because the funds would be taken from the Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fund.

Article 31 – Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Capital Reserve Fund – $40,000 (No 2022 Tax Impact)

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to establish a Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Capital Reserve Fund under the provisions of RSA 35:1 for pedestrian and traffic safety purposes and to raise and appropriate the sum of $40,000 to be placed in this fund, with said sum of $40,000 to come from the Unassigned Fund Balance. Further, to name the Board of Selectmen as Agents to expend from said fund? (Majority vote required)

What it means:  A fund will be 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 money will come from previously collected taxes, so there will be no new tax impact. Theoretically, it will need to be replenished as the funds are depleted, so it may appear on future ballots for that purpose.

Those in favor say:  This is a good use of excess funds.  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 Deliberative Session.Fiscal impact:  There would be no new tax impact, because the funds would be taken from the Unassigned Fund Balance.

Article 32: Turn Out Gear/PPE Capital Reserve Fund – $27,500 (No New Tax Impact)

Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $27,500 to be added to the Firefighters Turn Out Gear/Personal Protective Equipment Capital Reserve Fund established for that purpose under Article 17 of the 2019 Annual Town Meeting. Said sum of $27,500 to come from the Unassigned Fund Balance? (Majority vote required)

What it means: In 2019, voters approved a $200,000 funding of a new Capital Reserve Fund for the replacement of Firefighter’s Protective Gear.  This fund needs to be added to each year so that as gear expires and funds are depleted, additional funds will be available for future needs. It is a way to prevent taxpayers from being presented with a large bill all in one year. This Article would transfer the funds from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Capital 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. There are strict standards with regard to the amount of service the gear can see before it must be replaced.  To pay for this expense, a reserve fund was established and must be 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 the Deliberative Session.

Fiscal impact: There is no new tax impact because the money was appropriated in prior tax years.  This Article is allowing the withdrawal of the money from the Unassigned Fund Balance to be transferred to the previously-established Firefighters Protective Equipment Reserve Fund.

Article 6: Food Trucks

Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 5 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?  Amend Article III – Use Regulations. Add New Section 3.49 to establish regulations for mobile food service vendors on private property. The use would be expressly limited to special events that have received approval for a specified date(s) from the Board of Selectmen. The use would also be limited to licensed vehicles and trailers with mobile kitchens and to portable carts. The use would be permitted in the RAA, RA, RB, B, I, and G zoning districts.  Amend Article II – Districts. Section 2.7 (Professional Office / Residential District), and Sections 2.8 C & 2.8 F (Town Center District – Historic, North, and South) to permit mobile food service vendors on private property in accordance with Section 3.49. Also, Amend Article XI – Construction Provisions, Section 11.5 to provide an exception to the requirement of a permanent foundation if the provisions of Section 3.49 are met. 

What it means: Currently, food trucks are not permitted in Town.  This new ordinance would allow them, in certain Zones (Districts) only. The use is for special events only, meaning on specific dates not for regular operation, and would require approval by the Board of Selectmen.

Those in favor say: By virtue of the fact that Food Trucks are not specifically allowed in Hampton, they are prohibited.  This Ordinance would allow for Food Trucks under certain conditions. The Zones that were excluded (Seasonal Districts) were deemed to be less safe due to smaller lot sizes, and the density of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic in those areas.  

Those opposed say: Excluding certain Districts seems discriminatory, especially since (according to statements made at Deliberative Session) the Town will allow Food Trucks in those same areas during events that it sponsors. Disallowing Food Trucks on private property, even when all insurance and licensing requirements are in place, seems unfair and unreasonable. According to those who do not want this to pass, the ordinance as written does not treat all taxpayers equally.  (Those in favor of the Ordinance retort that many of our ordinances distinguish based on District – otherwise, there would be no need for a Zoning Map – all sections of Town would be treated the same.)