![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Members List | Donate | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,457
Thanks: 759
Thanked 796 Times in 419 Posts
|
Sounds like another case of people demanding multiple primary residences. I thought this issue was decided ages ago. How many times and places does this person think we should be allowed to vote? Perhaps we should all go to his/her voting place and start a lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 686
Thanks: 128
Thanked 85 Times in 49 Posts
|
Quote:
A lot of these properties are small, studio-type units that were converted motels & such.....some are not. I'm sure there is some case law in NH about this situation, but I don't know for sure about that. My 2cents on this issue: I don't care if you own a converted 300 sq foot condo or a 3,000 sq foot condo.....you should be able to move into that unit & become a NH resident if that is what you desire. You are paying property taxes just like the guy in the next building that does not have this clause on his deed. I understand the cities & towns use these clauses to stop people from dumping their kids in the local school system from what I understand. This "year round seasonal" situation is used in the condo behind Shaw's in Gilford to block the owners from moving there as legal residents & mostly, I suspect, from sending their kids to that school system. Last edited by Irish mist; 10-10-2011 at 04:54 AM. |
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|