Limits the authority of municipalities, counties, and school districts to issue bonds to cases involving declared emergencies, essential infrastructure at risk, securing matching funds, or express voter approval.
limiting the authority of a municipality, county, or school district to issue bonds.
Some municipality administrations have shown the incompetence to issue in-debt themselves for decades into the future on short-term items and labor (which should always be ANNUAL budgeting). They keep piling on debt service until a huge portion of budget is absorbed by obligations. The discipline of priorities will keep towns solvent.
Dear Chair Pauer and Honorable Committee Members, On behalf of the City Council for the City of Rochester, we write to express opposition to HB 1427. Bonds are essential for municipalities, counties, and schools to provide the services and infrastructure our citizens rely on in their daily lives. HB 1427-FN would remove the ability to purchase vital equipment, conduct necessary repairs and maintenance, address and promote growth, rehabilitate and construct public facilities, maintain roadways, and satisfy regulatory requirements. The consequences of this bill would negatively impact our citizens’ quality of life and could hurt our local economy. Further, HB 1427-FN’s exemptions are limited, restrictive, and do not apply to New Hampshire’s cities. For these reasons, the Rochester City Council recommends opposition to this bill. Respectfully submitted, City Council Rochester, New Hampshire
I have represented my school, my city and my county over the past 20 years. In each entity, they use capital reserves for mid-priced expenditures such as snow plows and project under $500,000. For high-priced expenditures such as building projects, they use long-term bonding. This bill, besides being insulting to the hard-working public officials in schools, towns and counties, is incredibly naive in its logic. Is the next step for this bill's sponsors to pass legislation that would prohibit families from taking out mortgages for their family's housing needs? Or prohibiting business from borrowing for future growth? This bill would stymie all growth in our communities and negatively affect our economy. I must also point out the disingenuousness of its sponsors by saying on one hand that state cuts in aid give towns local control, and then on the other take away all local control. The sponsors of this bill are either just plain stupid, mean-spirited or both.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.