Hampton Will Pitch Article to Overturn Biz Tax Exemption

The Hampton Board of Selectmen gave locals a peek this week at what next year's town meeting ballot could look like, as the board took a variety of votes to either add or remove projects and policies from consideration for 2014 warrant articles.

Among the articles that selectmen will support is a measure to overturn a tax exemption designed to spur economic growth — an exemption that passed 2,080 to 786 under Article 31 at the 2011 town meeting.

The passing of Article 31 made Hampton adopt state statue Chapter 79-E, which gives selectmen the ability to grant buildings destroyed by fire and other natural causes a tax break for up to five years as they revitalize their structures. The new Sea Spray Condominiums at Hampton Beach have already been granted $35,000 in tax relief for the next five years through the exemption.

Selectman Phil Bean proposed Monday that selectmen place an article on next year's warrant to "rescind" Hampton's ability to grant future Chapter 79-E relief because he said the "relief" isn't fair to the businesses that haven't been damaged by fire, but are still struggling to make improvements and survive in a tough economy.

Bean also said Hampton shouldn't "discount" its "greatness" and minimize the amount of tax revenue coming in.

"We are not in the position to be giving away hundred and hundreds of thousands of dollars," he said. 

The board voted 3-2 to place the article on the proposed 2014 warrant, with Chairman Dick Nichols and Mike Pierce opposing the motion. Whether the exemption is actually rescinded is ultimately up to taxpayers in March, though.

Pierce said Chapter 79-E is a "good thing" for Hampton, and that it "may have enticed" the Sea Spray developers to come to Hampton.

Nichols said the exemption is "good for Hampton in the long run" for a variety of reasons, including the fact that over the next five years of the exemption, the Sea Spray condos are expected to bring in $700,000 more than the parking lot that used to sit on the burned down former site of the Old Salt.

That's about $140,000 each year, and Nichols said the amount is expected to rise to $175,000 in the sixth year after the exemption expires.

"It gives the appearance of a fickle board" to rescind it, said Nichols, admitting that the current members of the board are different than the ones who proposed the original 2011 article. "I feel like doing a 180 on 79-E, especially three years into it, sends the wrong message."

Bean disagreed that overturning 79-E would make the board look fickle.

"I think it makes the board look strong [as it shows Hampton is] representing all taxpayers," said Bean. "It's a new board, it's a new day, and it's a lot of money."