WHEN YOU CAN’T DEFEND THE TAX, STRIKE THE EVIDENCE? HAMPTON’S LATEST MOVE EXPOSED

🔥 THE QUESTION HAMPTON DOESN’T WANT ANSWERED: WAS THE TAXATION LEGALLY AUTHORIZED?

Hampton's latest move in the property-tax battle is breathtaking: instead of answering the legal question, the Town wants the New Hampshire Supreme Court to strike the argument raising it.

The taxpayers' supplemental argument does not invent a new lawsuit or sneak a new issue into the appeal. It goes straight back to the original question raised in Rockingham County Superior Court: Did Hampton actually have lawful authority to impose property taxes using the valuation framework it employed?

That is not some technical side issue. It is the foundation of the entire tax bill.

Before arguing about whether someone's assessment was too high or too low, there is a much bigger question: Was the valuation methodology itself legally sufficient under the statutes governing property taxation?

And what is Hampton's answer? Apparently, “Strike the argument.”

That's not an answer. That's an attempt to make the question disappear.

The taxpayers' supplemental filing

provides additional statutory and regulatory evidence explaining why the valuation methodology matters. It does not ask the Supreme Court to invent a new controversy. It asks the Court to examine the legal foundation of the same governmental action challenged from the beginning.

Hampton can argue that the taxpayers are wrong. Hampton can defend its methodology. Hampton can explain how its valuation process satisfies the Legislature's requirements.

But asking the Court to STRIKE MATERIAL THAT DIRECTLY ADDRESSES THE ORIGINAL LEGAL QUESTION is something entirely different.

The public should understand the distinction:

You don't answer a question about the legality of the tax by trying to erase the question.

The Supreme Court can ultimately agree with Hampton. It can disagree with the taxpayers. That's what courts are for. But the relevant statutory framework should not be swept off the table simply because it makes the Town's position uncomfortable.

💥 THE BOTTOM LINE

Taxpayers aren't asking the Supreme Court for a shortcut. They're asking the Court to examine the legal foundation beneath the tax itself.

And Hampton's response?

Don't answer it. Strike it.

That is precisely why the Supreme Court should be allowed to see the whole legal picture before deciding whether the taxpayers' argument succeeds or fails.

The issue isn't whether Hampton likes the argument.

The issue is whether Hampton can legally tax under the methodology it used.

LET THE COURT DECIDE. DON'T TRY TO ERASE THE QUESTION.

Needless to say, taxpayers filed an Objection on August 17, 2026.

APPELLANTS' OBJECTION TO APPELLEE'S MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL ARGUMENT REGARDING STATU.

Download • 130KB