Webmaster, Please consider this as an article submission
Subject: Your Atkinson Property Taxes
Good Afternoon All Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations Committee Mailing List People
It's that time of year again. Your property tax bills must be paid by December 8th and most likely you were over assessed by a minimum of twelve percent in assessed value. If the average value is $358,801.93, that would mean one would be over assessed by $43,056.23 and over paying by $639.82 . Tax Rate this year is: $14.86
Please remember that each dollar you over pay, someone else is not paying his fair share. In other words, you are subsidizing them. In this poor economy, can we really afford to do this?
Have you inspected you property tax card this year for errors? (You should do this every year regardless if you filed an abatement last year.)
If not, we would like to suggest:
1. Go to the Selectmen's office at Town Hall and make copies of everything that is in your property tax folder. (Copy everything front and back) You will be charged fifty cents a sheet by the selectmen. They will also try to convince you that everything is fine and you are wasting your time. (Last year we got back over $130,000.00 for taxpayers and the figure is growing.)
2. Print out your latest Property Tax Card from the CAMA System and compare it to prior years.
3. Check all information on your card for accuracy. (Most cards we have checked have many errors that cost you money.)
4. Keep these copies in a safe place in your home. (Things get lost at Town Hall)
5. If you find errors, you must file an abatement between January 1st but no later than March 1, 2009 to get your money back and lower your assessment.
You can download and printout the abatement form at: http://www.atkinsontaxpayers.org/pdf/AbatementForm.pdf
6. If you need help understanding the codes or filing an effective abatement, please contact
us. We have experience and you do not have to do this alone. We are even willing to visit your home to look for factors/conditions that the assessor did not give you credit for. Conditions that will lower your assessment.
7. If you need help, you can contact us through lartus@aol.com.
Please note that your committee helped two plaintiffs in two BTLA hearing cases against the Town of Atkinson this year. These filings will be on our web site shortly and we will notify you of the court decisions when they are available.
Please do not allow Atkinson's Assessors to assess you for property you do not own.
Sincere regards,
Atkinson Taxpayer for Fair Evaluations Committee
Atkinson Town Hall
The Norman Rockwellian picture of Atkinson
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
Thank you so much for the "wake up" call. I see what to do now. I will be at town hall when it opens to get my files and start with that. Can I bring my own scanner and laptop and not pay the 50 cents a page? Do I have to pay the selectmen for the electricity my scanner uses or have I already paid for that electricity by my taxes to Atkinson for the last 30 years?
Nice follow-up to your own post Leon.
To Webmaster: Please consider this as an article submission at
http://atkinsonreporter2.blogspot.com/
To Anonymous said...
Nice follow-up to your own post Leon.
Dec. 3, 2008 9:13 AM
under
Property tax time, but are you overpaying?
Sorry, but I can not take credit for the follow up of the committee's posting. I can answer that person's questions.
Under the Right To Know Law, a person has every right to scan public documents without charge. (Please let me know if your rights are violated.)
I should know because I have spent days at town hall scanning documents used in court cases against the town. (The town administrator tried to stop me, and I filed a complaint against him with selectmen that went nowhere. I can produce the letter if you wish)
That Town Administrator is no longer with us, but some of the Selectmen still are. (No thanks to our assessors)
It's a shame that our assessors:
1. Make taxpayers work so hard, to get fair and proportional Property Tax Assessments that meet the law.
2. Allow taxpayers to be over assessed and extract tax monies they do not deserve.
3. Allow people to be taxed for property they do not own, and continue to do it after it has been brought to their attention.
4. Allow an 89% tax error rate to continue without investigating the cause.
5. Allow taxpayers to be taxed contrary to RSA 73:10. (Illegally)
6. Attempted to ignore Court Order to meet with plaintiffs referring problems back to the assessing company. (This was corrected by taxpayer threat to file contempt of court charges against the assessors)
7. Allow incorrect physical data to be part of the Property Tax Card, after the errors have been brought to their attention.
8. Allowing taxpayers to be taxed for waterfront, which extends beyond his right, title, and interest as described in the deed.
7. Allowing people to be taxed on property that can not be conveyed to a purchaser of the property.
8. Refuse to address court ordered issues.
9. Make no good faith effort to investigate the legality of plaintiff's claims.
10. Make no effort to view property for a determination of physical facts. Neither before or after court ordered meeting.
11. Made no attempt to seek Town counsels opinion on property ownership. ("legal Matters")
12. Force taxpayers to appeal to the BTLA on matters "of fact" that should have been settled at town level.
13. Not negotiate in good faith as ordered by the court. (The BTLA should NOT be used to settle plain fact of law.)
14 Attempt to convince the taxpayer that everything is fine, and they are wasting their time by questioning property tax assessments.
15. Willfull neglect of their sworn duty of office.
16. Label Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluation Committee members who participate in the democratic process, as adversaries rather than public-spirited citizens.
(As one form of retribution, the Selectmen/Assessors have enacted charges in excess of those allowed by the Right to Know law for copies of public records. (or as revised by HB 1408) "Governmental records")
These excess charges serve as a financial disincentive for those seeking assessing and other public documents.
I could go on and on, but will let the court decide. The pleadings will be available online shortly. I might even put one of them here on the Bog for you to read.
I will say that any issue not addressed by the BTLA will be taken back to court by the Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluation Committee.
The unwillingness of our assessors to act can not be tolerated, in order to preserve our rights. If they will not protect us, it's our responsibility to protect ourselves.
To this end, your committee is setting up a legal fund to protect against unlawful abuse of our rights and their power. If you would like to donate, please contact me at lartus@aol.com
Any other questions anonymous Dec. 3, 2008 9:13 AM?
If you are who I think you are...I'm unwilling to pay any part of "YOUR FAIR SHARE' of your property tax.
In short, the people at the assessing office are not our friends. Their direction is not to help us or correct the problems that exists. They can only be used to get public records, which they do not want to produce.
Sincere regards,
Leon Artus
Atkinson Taxpayers For Fair Evaluations Committee (spokesperson)
Hey, I am not this Leon person. So I will post my questions again, Thank you so much for the "wake up" call. I see what to do now. I will be at town hall when it opens to get my files and start with that. Can I bring my own scanner and laptop and not pay the 50 cents a page? Do I have to pay the selectmen for the electricity my scanner uses or have I already paid for that electricity by my taxes to Atkinson for the last 30 years?
OK. I read it now. I can scan my property records and not have to pay 50 cents a page to scan it.
Thanks!
I can donate $100 to the new legal fund. I assume someone will post the details of where to send donations.
To Anonymous December 3, 2008 9:27PM
Your donation is very generous. Please contact the Atkinson Taxpayer association at:
http://atkinsontaxpayers.org/ and we will contact you regarding your donation.
Thank you, for being a part of Atkinson people that are working to take our government back.
Is this a legal legal fund or an illegal legal fund?
What's your mission statement or are you looking for a donations to your own private slush fund?
RE: December 4, 2008 8:42 AM
Excellent question. With all this talk of transparency within the PD and EA, it is a fair question to ask.
And I'd like to know how many people are on this committee. Don't need names but all we ever hear from is one person. Is this a committee of one?
No, it's not a committee of one.
If you would like to read the filings we made to the BTLA, they are on the Atkinson Taxpayers web site now.
They are located at:
http://www.atkinsontaxpayers.org/pdf/BrownfieldVSAtkinson.pdf
and
http://www.atkinsontaxpayers.org/pdf/CambrilliVSAtkinson.pdf
One of these is posted below.
They read much alike yet have differences that are important. It's worth the time to read both and they are not long. Will let you know when the decisions are posted.
Thought of the day:
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
-- Margaret Mead
Sincere regards,
Leon
Atkinson Taxpayers For Fair Evaluations Committee
Gary Brownfield vs Town of Atkinson
BTLA Docket Number: 22931-06PT
Background of Atkinson 2006 revaluation:
Abatement requests for tax year 2006
1. 158 residential property abatement requests were filed with the Town (3000 parcels)
2. 141 abatement requests were granted. Town error rate of 89% !!
3. $89,000 of tax money granted to taxpayers for “good cause shown”
3. Approximately half of the abatement tax refunds came to “lake property”.
4. Discrepancies in assessments were widespread throughout the Town.
Due to that number of challenges through appeals for abatements, Mr. Artus, Mr. Brownfield, and
others started a loosely organized taxpayer group to challenge assessments in Atkinson.
That participation in
the democratic process has caused some, if not all of the Selectmen/Assessors to view them as adversaries,
rather than public spirited citizens.
As one form of retribution, the Selectmen/Assessors have enacted charges in excess of those allowed by the RTK law for copies of public records. (or as revised by HB 1408,
“governmental records”).
These excess charges serve as a financial disincentive for those seeking assessing
and other public documents.
The results of DRA USPAP 6 review:
1. Please see report.
2. USPAP is not enforced by DRA, only a review and advisory to ATKINSON
3. no action taken by Atkinson.. (question asked by Reed during BTLA ordered session Assessor
Wood) (Ask for stipulation now.) Stipulated
The Assessor in charge of the Revaluation for Purvis and Associates was dismissed by Mr. Brett Purvis for, as
he described it, “incompetence”.
That’s little history of the 2006 time period being presented here today.
This having been said, I do want to stress to the Board that all parties conducted themselves in a calm and
respectful manner in the Ordered settlement hearing held May 23, 2008.
End of History
Introduction of Mr. Brownfield’s case.
Mr. Brownfield has 2 issues.
Part 1 of 2 concerns illegal taxation of land not owned by plaintiff.
Part 2 of 2 pleads for proper assessment of the septic system location.
Gary Brownfield vs Town of Atkinson
BTLA Docket Number: 22931-06PT
Part 1 of 2
Subject: Illegal assessment/taxation of “waterfront”
The law:
PERSONS AND PROPERTY, WHERE AND TO WHOM TAXED
Section 73:10
73:10 Real Estate. – Real and personal property shall be taxed to the person claiming the same, or to the
person who is in the possession and actual occupancy thereof, if such person will consent to be taxed for the
same; but such real estate shall be taxed in the town in which it is situate.
Any assessments report issued by
the commissioner pursuant to RSA 21-J:11-a shall not affect the obligation of the taxpayer to pay property
taxes otherwise lawfully assessed.
Source. RS 40:7. CS 42:9. GS 50:11. GL 54:11. PS 56:14. PL 61:10. RL 74:10. 2001, 158:58, eff.
Sept. 3, 2001. 2003, 307:10, eff. July 1, 2003.
1. Mr. Brownfield asserts he is being taxed contrary to RSA 73:10. (Illegally) (as highlighted above)
2. Mr. Brownfield makes no property claim beyond the bounds of his deed. (copy of deed)
3. Referencing the registered survey indicates the relationship between Mr. Brownfield’s and the
waterfront. (See survey please)
4. The subject property has only one foot (+-) of water frontage.
5. The analysis and the determination of linear foot values relies upon the unsold properties having
the same accurate data as the sold properties.
This property has incorrect physical data attributed to
it. One of which is the waterfront footage.
6. That incorrect data has led to real property being illegally taxed to Mr. Brownfield for years.
7. Mr. Brownfield has never claimed a fee simple interest in the waterfront property.
8. Mr. Brownfield has never consented to being taxed for the waterfront, which extends beyond his
right, title and interest as described in his deed.
9. Mr. Brownfield is unable to convey the water frontage to a purchaser of his property.
10. A review of the lakeside lot line pictures demonstrates the factual nature of the waterfront.
11. The Town at the Ordered Meeting refused to address this issue because it was a “legal matter”.
12. The Town has made no good faith effort to investigate the legality of the plaintiff’s claims.
13. The Town has made no effort to view the property for a determination of physical facts. Neither
before, nor after the Ordered Meeting.
14. The Town made no attempt to seek Town counsels opinion on this “legal matter”. (seek stipulation
today) Stipulated
15. The Chairman of the Selectmen/Assessors, Mr. Sullivan, stated at the Ordered Meeting that “we’ll
let the BTLA sort this out”.
This action is not a good faith effort to settle as ordered by the BTLA.
The inaction of the Selectmen/Assessor Chairman and the complacent agreement of the
professional assessor are most egregious to the Plaintiff. The BTLA should not be used to settle
plain facts of law and demonstrates frivolous action on the part of the Town.
16. The Plaintiff requests the Board to deem the (in)action by the selectman as willful neglect of duty,
and contrary to the Order to meet in good faith (as issued by the BTLA). These actions have
resulted in a frivolous appearance before the BTLA.
17. In regard to property ownership and taxation. We request the Board apply the NH Supreme Court
opinions stated in LSP v. Town of Gilford, Belnap Num. 95-500, NH Supreme Court Appeal of
Beatrice Reid & a. BTLA No. 96-595and any other applicable cases.
18. Furthermore, If the Board grants an abatement, the plaintiff argues that it is because of a clear error
of fact, not of interpretation. The Town has made no effort to refute the facts presented at the May
23, 2008 Ordered Meeting. The Town has offered no argument of “interpretation”, The Town has
made no effort to resolve this issue. Therefore Mr. Brownfield requests a favorable determination
by the BTLA that filing fees be refunded in accordance with RSA 76:17-b Filing Fee
Reimbursed.
The plaintiff requests that the Board order the Town of Atkinson:
1. to correct the waterfront physical data on Mr. Brownfield’s property record card to
reflect only that property that is described by his deed and as marked at the bounds
of his property. Then, apply that waterfront factor in the same manner that it is
allocated to other properties in Atkinson. The Plaintiff asks for no specific monetary
amount, merely to have the data corrected on his PRC to reflect the factual water
frontage (property) attributable by RSA 73:10 as taxable to Mr. Brownfield.
2. If the BTLA so determines, filing fees to be reimbursed to Mr. Brownfield per RSA
76:17-b (as discussed above)
Gary Brownfield vs Town of Atkinson
BTLA Docket Number: 22931-06PT
Part 2 of 2
Subject: Septic System
1. The PRC lacks an accurate market value adjustment for this negative property feature.
2. The TP property has a septic system that is partially located on his property.
3. Mr. Brownfield has no legal right to access or maintain the leaching field portion of the septic
system.
4. The leaching field portion is located under the paved and traveled ROW known as Chase Island Rd.
5. Mr. Brownfield will have to disclose this adverse feature of his property when it is presented to the
“market” for sale.
6. The Town has recognized the basic negative feature but only made a 5% of land value adjustment.
($3900)
7. The 5% adjustment was arbitrary and not reflective of the true market value impact.
8. The plaintiff asserts that septic system leaching field has a finite life. Therefore the
repair/replacement is a reality for the owner of this property.
9. The very real prospect of the cost of legal proceedings to gain access and to perform repairs of the
leaching field located on another’s property looms as additional costs beyond the repair costs.
10. The plaintiff, therefore, pleads that this Board recognize the negative impact on both assessed and
market value.
The plaintiff requests that the Board to order the Town of Atkinson:
1. to make a good faith determination, based on replacement costs, of the
market/assessed value impact of the septic system defects as stated above.
2. to use that data to enter a factor more appropriate to the site specific adjustment now
recorded on the PRC.
3. to have the septic adjustment based on as they relate to a potential buyer in the
“market”.
Gary Brownfield vs Town of Atkinson
BTLA Docket Number: 22931-06PT
Summation:
Mr. Brownfield alleges that all the above issues were, and are, correctable at the
Town level.
That if the Town had performed its duties, upheld their oath of office, and
been more transparent in their assessing practices, there would be no need to be before
the BTLA today.
The plaintiff has not asked for monetary amounts because he believes that full
and accurate physical data collection and the use thereof are the foundation for fair and
equal assessments. He will be satisfied to settle for that fundamental duty of the Town
Assessors being followed to the best of their ability and in accordance with NHAAO
and IAAO accepted assessing and ethical practices.
Mr. Brownfield requests this Board (BTLA) find for him and order the correct
physical data be recorded on his PRC (for the 2 subject items).Then, a revised assessed
value be CAMA calculated and used for the tax years of 2006 and following, until such
time as the Town is revalued.
In as much as the Town has not factored these issues into their comparative
analysis that they plan to use here today, we are of the opinion that the omission
renders the comparative study unfair and inaccurate.
In as much as the Town has unnecessarily burdened both the Taxpayer’s and
this Board’s resources, the plaintiff requests the Board to find and order costs be
awarded to Mr. Brownfield in accordance with Tax 201.39 and RSA 71-B:9.
The plaintiff asserts the actions by the Town as described throughout this document amount
to frivolous actions That is, this case was not brought before the BTLA in good faith on
the part of the Town. (Such costs are requested separately from the filing fee requested
per RSA 76:17-b. elsewhere in this document.)
If the Board rules favorably for the plaintiff’s costs, the plaintiff shall submit itemized
documentation of costs within 15 days of the BTLA’s decision or as ordered by the
BTLA.
END
>No, it's not a committee of one.
And you're not answering the basic question, is your fund a legal legal fund or an illegal legal fund?
You're forever touting this committee, but the public knows nothing about it. You imply you are speaking for many, but how do we know this is true?
Have you registered this committee with the state and are your books available for review?
What, no snappy comeback?
You've been extremely harsh on the chief regarding his donation account. Much of it justified, but once you said, "Your donation is very generous. Please contact the Atkinson Taxpayer association at:
http://atkinsontaxpayers.org/ and we will contact you regarding your donation.", you crossed a line.
Don't we deserve the same degree of transparency with your donation account as we do with the Chief's?
The chief is a public official. What he does, he does in the name of the town. If the residents who employ him want information he should cough it up.
if it has to be hidden, it must be wrong!
The new Taxpayer Donation Account will be set up properly with the State. And the citizen taxpayers definitely do need a legal fund to pay for advice and representation and publicity. Thank Zeus the day has come when people can contribute to make a difference in a positive way against greed and incompetence. And it will be great to get the word out to many, many, many, more VOTERS. The Dunderhead Part Time Police Chief uses his donation account to mail everyone in town to solicit money and then play games with that money. The citizen taxpayers will go after helping others GET THEIR MONEY BACK from the town due to errors on tax cards, misinterpretation of facts, and outright stupidity of the assessing company which is not even bonded to protect us from their offenses! The Selectmen have violated their oath of office to act in the best interest of the citizens by not forcing Purvis Etc to be bonded. Finally, if you can't tell by the sentence construction, tone and vocabulary...this is not a "Leon Posting". I am another member of the Taxpayer Committee who is protected from the Chief by the 'warm blanket' of obscurity!
So, if I have this straight, the chief is a public official so he's fair game. The taxpayers association, which has been at the forefront of criticism of the chief and others, are not public officials so they get to hide. And now, we've established this group, with all of its official sounding names, has not been registered with the state.
We also know now that their are two, not one, members of this group.
You claim to represent the taxpayers, yet we only know of one name associated with this group.
Anonymity suites this group well. To those thinking of donating to this group, once it becomes legal, you have a right to know where, and to whom, their money goes. Frankly, in these hard times this money would be of better use going to the needy rather a group that hides in 'warm blanket' of obscurity!
To Anonymous said... December 7, 2008 12:06 PM
As a reader of this blog, it is my understanding that there are many organizations working in town that are fighting against the Political Establishment.
Your posting signals that you have no idea what you are talking about, and are on a "fishing trip" to discredit anyone that wants to do the right thing for the taxpayers. Why would anyone want to do that, unless you are part of the Political Establishment?
Again, as a reader of the blog, the webmaster and people that post here have made it very clear as to the reasons they want to remain obscure. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is because of fear of retaliation FROM THE CHIEF that they do so.
When people fear the public officials that are suppose to protect them, there is something very wrong.
People that support people who try to strike fear into the public, are part of what needs to be corrected in this town. It appears to me, that you are one of these people.
For one, I would like to see more tax committee's formed to work on every issue in town. They are the only ones that keep the public informed as to local government actions. I praise them for their work.
To answer your question, I do not care if they work under obscurity, as long as they work. It is perfectly legal.
Thank you
The Atkinson Taxpayer Committee is another committee in Atkinson available to help citizens with their assessing and property concerns. This Committee was formed in 1996 before Taxpayers for Fair Evaluation Committee existed! You may remember the big meeting with at the Community Center where we organized to confront Purvis and state officials regarding our tax problems. Even the Selectmen were present and talked to Atkinson Taxpayer Committee members face to face. Since that time, we continue to help people read their tax cards and understand what the codes mean and how to correct them and how to file for an abatement if the assessor does not issue a correction. Why is there no interest in our membership? We are looking for new members to help us. As you recall, we were involved with criticism of Ed Elsic who made many errors and was finally removed by Bret Purvis for "incompetance". Here is a statement by the Atkinson Taxpayer Committee made in 1996. The problems continue and our committee agrees with Taxpayers For Fair Evaluation that Purvis and Associates must be bonded to protect the citizens:
"Ed Elcik was subcontracted by Purvis Assoc., Real Property Appraisal firm, to perform work with regard to the revaluation of our property taxes in town. Mr. Elcik stated that the“View Tax” was not a part of the incorporated data, yet it is noted on several of the tax cards that we pulled, marked as view or obstructed view. He also stated that he could not defend the data or the formula, as they were not his, they were Avitar’s. He could not say who is the BW initialed on tax cards, and so we have no idea if this person is qualified/certified by the state of New Hampshire."
Since Mr. Elcik was since been TERMINATED by his employer for incompetence, do you think a bond with the town is in order or not? We think it is absolutely mandatory.
--Atkinson Taxpayer Committee posting Anonymously.
"Your posting signals that you have no idea what you are talking about, and are on a "fishing trip" to discredit anyone that wants to do the right thing for the taxpayers."
Actually, I know quite a bit about what I'm talking about, and no, I'm in no way part of the "Town Establishment". I'm just as upset with the way this town is running as many others.
However, once you solicited funds, or agreed to accept them, the game changed. Just as any other organization that is after mine and others money, we have a right to know how it is being used and the people behind it.
You continue to avoid the question. Rather, you attack the people asking legitimate questions.
It appears that some people posting to this blog are trying to confuse and intertwine all the different taxpayer groups in this town as being one group. Nothing could be further from the truth.
For clarity,
1. The Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluation Committee deals only with getting Fair & Proportional Property Tax Assessments for every taxpayer.
2. We work with taxpayers that want help finding errors on their tax cards.
3. Help write effective abatements to the assessor that will correct theses errors.
4. Appeal any errors not considered by the Town to the BTLA, (with representation.)
5. Appeal any decision of the BTLA to the Supreme Court if necessary. (Cost must be considered)
6. Write warrant articles that will correct assessing issues within the town, and present them at Town
Meeting.
We have no interest in any of the Chief issues and do not want to be confused with any committee that does.
The Chief and I have spoken several times. Some of them memorable and some not so memorable. I even offered to do an abatement for him, when he conceded he knew he was being over assessed on his property. I'm surprised he never took me up on my offer, but I still hold that door open.
To Anonymous said...
December 7, 2008 10:36 AM
December 7, 2008 12:06 PM
or any other anonymous post that tries to speak for our committee, please refrain from doing so in the future. If Our committee members wish to publish something to the public, we will do so with me as the transparent spokesperson.
PS
For the record, we are not a non-profit organization and not required to file anything with the State of New Hampshire.
Sincere regards,
Leon
Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations Committee (spokesperson)
Sorry, but based on past posts I have no reason to believe that Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations and the Atkinson Taxpayers Committee are not just different names for the same people.
The Atkinson Taxpayers Committee has a web site and it is obvious it is associated with the Coalition of NH Taxpayers.
Who did Ed Naile call when he saw the Chief speeding on I-93? It was the spokesperson for the Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations. Interesting coincidence.
You are trying to do good work but I detect deception and possible fraud.
Post December 7, 2008 10:36 AM states a new Taxpayer Donation Account will be started. OK, great. Who will be the head of the account and the trustees? Again, money has been solicited. We deserve to know by whom. The Chief has been taken to task for his efforts. We deserve to know who else is soliciting donations.
The Atkinson Taxpayers Association whose website is at http://atkinsontaxpayers.org/ is managed by CNHT, the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers. It is being funded locally, by private funds to provide residents with documentation and factual information about the town and situations in the town. This Association doesn't provide help with assessing as stated by December 7, 2008 2:54 PM, it provides information to Taxpayers.
The Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluation Committee is run by one individual, Leon Artus and as he states, it is NOT a non-profit organization. Mr. Artus is soliciting funds for his organization NOT for the Atkinson Taxpayers Association. He represents a group of people who focus on assessment issues.
These are distinct and separate groups. Atkinson Taxpayers Association is not setting up a donation fund of any kind.
Then please explain the following posts:
"To Anonymous December 3, 2008 9:27PM
Your donation is very generous. Please contact the Atkinson Taxpayer association at:
http://atkinsontaxpayers.org/ and we will contact you regarding your donation."
and
"The new Taxpayer Donation Account will be set up properly with the State."
If the two organizations are separate and independent, it is still not clear who is accepting and soliciting donations.
If it is Leon setting up the fund, why is he using the Taxpayers website to assist in that effort? And why the word "we" in the first statement if Leon is running the show for the assessment part.
Splitting hairs maybe, but the information provided appears contradictory.
Leon Artus states on December 3, 2008 2:52 PM that his committee is setting up this fund. It sounds like he is using the Atkinson Taxpayers Association as an anonymous place for people to get in touch with him. Since he is posting his email address, I don't see why the Atkinson Taxpayers Association has to be in the middle of it. People can contact Leon directly. The donation account is NOT being set up by the Atkinson Taxpayers Association.
Whoever posted "The new Taxpayer Donation Account will be set up properly with the State" should clarify what they are trying to do, and if this account is not set up yet, why ask for donations ?
I also think Leon Artus should clarify what he's trying to do here. It's causing alot of confusion.
Sound's like someone is baiting people to get information.
Once again, this is why people post anonymously. There are legal means to getting answers to this line of questioning if the poster were legitimate. I personally wouldn't go asking questions on a blog if I really wanted the facts. Be careful what you say or it will be used against you that's for sure. Right Frank?
I am not confused.
To Anon Dec. 7, 12:06;
No you have it wrong.
You said;
So, if I have this straight, the chief is a public official so he's fair game. The taxpayers association, which has been at the forefront of criticism of the chief and others, are not public officials so they get to hide.
First of all recognize that the Atkinson Taxpayers assoc. is a different, and separate group from the Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations, headed by Mr. Artus. The ATA simply tries to inform the public about it's government officials actions. If you go to the ATA site you will see it is solely a site for information, documentation, and uncontrovertable public documents. No commentary, that can be accomplished here by anyone who wishes to.
Then you said;
And now, we've established this group, with all of its official sounding names, has not been registered with the state.
We also know now that their are two, not one, members of this group.
You claim to represent the taxpayers, yet we only know of one name associated with this group.
Anonymity suites this group well. To those thinking of donating to this group, once it becomes legal, you have a right to know where, and to whom, their money goes. Frankly, in these hard times this money would be of better use going to the needy rather a group that hides in 'warm blanket' of obscurity!
Again you appear to be referring to the Atkinson Taxpayers for Fair Evaluations, and NOT the Atkinson Taxpayers Association, formed under the banner, and with the guidance of the Coalition of NH Taxpayers.
The Atkinson Taxpayers Assoc. MUST exist anonymously, or they could not exist at all, thanks to our police chief's demonstrated efforts to "shoot the messengers" critical of his behavior.
In another town with a less vindictive man holding the reigns of the police dept. a group like this could operate, and advocate openly, but that is not possible here. If you still don't understand why, just consider what Phil has done to people such as Carol Grant, Brian Kaye, Mark Acciard, Eleanor Zaremba, Elaine Woodbury, Dale Childs, Micheal Rivera, Gary Lorden, and many, many others, critical of his actions.
December 8, 2008 10:50 AM hit the nail right on head.
Donations were solicited, a fund is being established.
Leon states above, "For the record, we are not a non-profit organization and not required to file anything with the State of New Hampshire." yet post December 8, 2008 8:53 AM implies Leon is setting up this account.
Several posts have said the two tax organizations are separate, yet the taxpayers site was used to facilitate a donation.
So yes, this is all very confusing
No baiting. Just looking for the truth.
Simple question. Who is soliciting the money and setting up the donation account?
I'll go outon a limb and say maybe there is something worth looking into regarding legal compliance with these groups. But rather than ask more open ended questions that sound like I am on a fishing trip on a blog, I would say to people if you are still confused, why don't you contact these people directly and ask them yourselves? Mr. Artus states what he represents the Atkinson Taxpayers For Fair Evaluations Committee as their spokesperson and has put his contact information on this blog. The Atkinson Taxpayers Association website is on the internet. Took me about 2 minutes to find it.
Contact them and ask them your questions and if you think there is criminal behavior then you should collect your evidence and present it to the Attorney General's office.
To keep asking open ended questions on this blog is a waste of everyone's time. They've tried answering the same question you asked 5 different ways already and you're still asking who? What? Huh?
This topic is about property taxes and assessements. Back to the main topic please.
Post a Comment