Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.


The government revenue hounds aren't interested in your privacy

To The Daily Sun,

How would you like to have a green plastic box tucked below your steering column keeping track of your speed, braking, how many miles you drive and where? Oregon already uses such a device to calculate residents' tax bill at a rate of 1.5 cents per mile.

Revenue from the standard per gallon gas tax is diminishing as required vehicle mpg rises. States are looking for other ways to raise money. California has authorized its own mileage tax pilot project. At least 19 states considered 55 measures related to mileage-based fees, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Oregon's experiment is the first involving ordinary citizens. Other states have been watching closely since the program began this July. New, more fuel-efficient cars have decreased gas tax revenue. The assertion is that gas tax rates have not kept up with inflation. This is hard to understand since Social Security recipients got no COLA this year and they have not been much in the last decade.

In Oregon the assertion is that the effective tax rate will fall to less than 24 cents per gallon in inflation-adjusted terms within 10 years, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. A mileage, or road usage, tax also erodes with inflation, but is immune from improvements in fuel efficiency. The tax discussion is not centered on need. Rather, it is about how best to raise tax revenue.

For purposes of the experiment, Oregon charges 1.5 cents for every mile driven. Every driver who participates in the program, whether they drive a fuel-efficient car or a pickup truck, pays the same rate for driving on Oregon roads. The state reimburses drivers who paid more in traditional gas tax than they would be assessed using the mileage calculation.

The Oregon Department of Transportation compared a 2014 Toyota Prius and a 2014 Ford F-150. The Prius averages 50 mpg and the F-150 gets 18 mpg. The average Oregonian drives 12,962 miles a year. Given those numbers, the Prius owner would use 259 gallons in a year and pay $77.77 in gas taxes, while the F-150 owner would use 720 gallons and pay $216 in gas taxes.

The annual road usage tax due for both drivers would be $194.43. The average Prius owner pays the state $116.66 (that's the $194.43 in road usage tax less the $77.70 in gas tax), while the average F-150 owner gets a $21.60 rebate (that's the $216.03 in gas taxes less the $194.43 in road usage tax).

Interestingly the revenue hounds are not interested in your privacy rights. Nor are they interested in discussing whether lighter, more fuel efficient vehicles wear roads at the same rates as historically experienced with larger heavier older cars. They also don't want to discuss why miles driven have been declining largely due to reduced spendable income which is largely the result of rising tax burden.

Just thinking about taxes coming to a legislature near you. Keep your eyes and ears open.

Marc Abear


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 166

Reporter put dark tone on intent of our Gilford zoning initiative

To The Daily Sun,

Gail Ober's article in last Friday's Sun, headlined "Gilford article would prohibit churches," was not accurate and put a dark tone to the intent of our pending warrant article for Gilford's March ballot.

Churches are allowed and would continue to be allowed in Professional/Commercial and in Resort Commercial and Commercial zones by Special Exception. Had the reporter talked to Sue or me, we would have said that the Arbos, who operate a faith-based home business, are good neighbors who have done a nice job of keeping the old Guild property looking great, have operated their business quietly and respectfully, and seem to be doing well.

Secondly, the Gilford Zoning and Planning Boards, in our opinion, worked hard to learn the Arbos' needs for a home business and established some fair parameters for their business and the Curtis Road neighborhood. We hope the Arbo's successes continue. This requested zoning change will not prohibit a church if someone were to apply to build one here in the Limited Residential zone, but would require the granting of a variance.

Lastly, the 25-plus voters who signed our petition did not necessarily agree or disagree in whole or part, but felt strongly enough about the issue to see it brought to the voters in March. None of this would have made exciting news.

The author did report that we opposed the Arbos plan for a home business. We supported it with conditions that affected hours of operation, size of functions, traffic flow in a residential zone, etc. Our concerns were voluntarily met by the Arbos or were part of the Planning Board approval process. The Arbos are neighbors. They live here. We see them daily in their yard or working on their home. And there is no backlash against the Planning Board, as suggested.

Our petition makes the institutional use "Church" non-permitted in Limited Residential, bringing all four of Gilford's residential zones into alignment. The other four zones in Gilford are various Commercial or Industrial Zones and seem more appropriate to the establishment and building of a new church. There are lots available, good parking, major highway access, etc.

Arbo Ministries, which is home-based, is not affected by this zoning change at all. However, they or any other party that wished to build a new church in the Curtis Road neighborhood or anywhere in Gilford that is not commercially zoned would need a variance if voters approve the petition.

Adrian & Susan Curtis



  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 178