KAREN BURNETT-KURIE'S PRIORITIES
While she has been a lifelong independent, Karen Burnett-Kurie is running as a Democrat with the goal of bringing balance to Ossipee, Tuftonboro, and Wolfeboro’s representation in Concord.
AFFORDABILITY
HOUSING
Housing is essential to everyone - individuals, families, seniors, communities and businesses. And yet two out of three of our communities in District 7 (Wolfeboro and Ossipee) have lost housing stock in the last 15 years. This while the mean house price has increased substantially. NH ranks 42nd in housing affordability. 40 to 50% of young adults are living with their parents (national average is 30%). The average age of a first time home buyer is now 40 years+. This issue is reshaping who lives in New Hampshire. We are losing young adults and young families to other states. But we need these young people to stay and move here. As our state’s population continues to age, and deaths outnumber births, these young people are critical to our businesses, communities and economy. THREE MUNICIPAL FUNDING PROGRAMS were established by the NH legislature to combat the state's affordable housing shortage. They are all under the Housing Champions umbrella: Housing Planning and Regulation Municipal Grant Program Housing Production Municipal Grant Program Housing Infrastructure Municipal Grant and Loan Program All three were zero funded in our present budget. In order to assure seed funding for these programs I propose converting the existing Education Tax Credit (ETC) program – which allows businesses to donate their business taxes to an eligible scholarship program (which benefits individuals) – to a Housing Tax Credit which benefits everyone. This tax credit model has produced between $2.5 to $3.5 million annually. If redirected to housing this funding would directly impact New Hampshire’s affordable housing crisis. NH limits total aggregate donations to $6,000,000 per year, translating to a maximum of $5.1 million in available tax credits. There would be no change to this limit. NH Businesses will continue to earn a tax credit toward 85% of their BET or BPT taxes (up to $600,000) while supporting housing for their workforce. This will support employees which NH businesses desperately need. Too often, potential workers are unable to find and hold on to affordable housing in the Granite State which has created the workforce shortage many businesses face. In addition, I propose two cuts of the BET be reinstated and the added revenue be dedicated to these Housing Champions Funds. By generating dedicated revenue on an on-going basis these instrumental initiatives can be sustained and have the long-term impact needed. SUPPORT FOR WATER AND SEWER INVESTMENTS Town/municipal water and sewer infrastructure is one of the greatest limitations on expansion of housing in many communities. Years ago, the state legislature committed to supporting funding for these needed infrastructure expansion and upgrade projects. But recently the Legislature has reduced or suspended their financial support. Restoring this funding is key to many communities supporting affordable housing projects. In order to provide necessary state funding I would eliminate any program established in the last ten years, which did not come with an associated dedicated funding mechanism, which is not constitutionally or federally mandated. The funds used for this/these programs would be redirected to these investments. Additional funding would come from a tax on large trust funds invested in New Hampshire or a capital gains tax. If we can tax unrealized gains on a house, a basic necessity, it is not unreasonable to tax capital gains.
CHILDCARE
SCHOLARSHIPS It can easily cost $30,000 per year to have two children in day care in New Hampshire. This is a heavy burden for low and modest income families. For them, NH’s Child Care Scholarship Program (NH CCSP) is essential. It means, for eligible families, they pay no more than 7% of their gross income on child care. NH CCSP pays their portion of child care fees directly to qualified child care providers for children up to age 13 (and through age 17 for children with disabilities). This not only allows families to have two incomes but also provides businesses with needed employees. While the state increased the funding for the NH CCSP in 2024 there is still a significant unmet need for scholarships. I propose creating a Child Care Tax Credit similar to the existing Education Tax Credit to increase funding for child care scholarship and start-up costs for new providers across the state. Modeled after the existing Education Tax Credit this would increase funding and NH businesses would earn a tax credit toward 85% of their business taxes, up to a maximum of $600,000. In turn, these tax credits will support employees which these businesses rely on. CHILDCARE CAPACITY NH has lost child care capacity in the last decade. Tuition has not covered overhead costs, even with the modest wages, typically $15 per hour, earned by the workers. (Wages which are 45% of public school educators wages.) The result is an almost 20% turnover in staff annually. Plus, NH does NOT accept childcare federal money because of DEI rules directed at providing childcare for special needs children. This has severely impacted some workers' ability to return to the workforce. (Evidence of our capacity to change this situation is in the free childcare provided during WWII). Rural areas lack local centers and if they have a center there is typically a one year wait list. Some parents drive 45 minutes to an hour each way to access childcare – adding to the cost and stress on the family. Home based centers have been closing rapidly due to many factors including insurance and staffing which is difficult for all providers. As a result we are short over 9,000 child care slots in this state. We need to realize childcare is not like a normal small business. It, in fact, is a public good/service with the associated legislatively dictated standards and regulations which are necessary for the safety and benefit of our children, but which also increase costs beyond the ability of parents to pay. There are many innovative ways New Hampshire can increase its childcare capacity. Some apprentice programs, partnerships, college credit collaborations and parent coops are already being tested. In order to foster these and other innovations, I propose two of the previous cuts to the BPT be reinstated with the revenue produced dedicated to the building and maintaining childcare capacity in the state. This would provide ongoing funding for sustained impact and would support the workforce NH businesses require.
HEALTHCARE
MEDICAID Starting later this year, a NH single Mom making $60,000 per year will be charged $270 per month for Medicaid healthcare for herself and her children. This is an untenable charge and will too often mean the entire family will be without healthcare. The whole point of Medicaid is to address the lack of healthcare for low income families. The impact of the loss of Medicaid will be higher costs for all of us because of the increases in the uninsured population. In order to return Medicaid insurance to its qualifying status for recipients, I propose the following sources for the $23 million per year needed to cover the state’s cost resulting from reduced funding from the federal government. Adding some combination of excise taxes to achieve $23 million. Adding excise taxes on: a. fireworks – an 8 to 12% fireworks safety fee would collect taxes from our substantial number of out of state buyers as well as in-staters buying fireworks. *potential earnings from this excise tax TBD b. beer and wine sold outside of NH liquor stores - given grocery stores and convenience stores already collect/submit prepared food tax, tobacco taxes, and in some cases gas taxes, this will be a familiar mechanism for them to manage. In addition, it will collect from out of state buyers on top of NH buyers. *potential earnings from this excise tax TBD c. a luxury tax on non-essential, high-value goods and services such as recreational vessels, aircraft, premium travel & services. MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PLAN New Hampshire needs to assure all seniors in the state have access to a Medicare Advantage Plan. These Advantage plans are often the only affordable options for Seniors to obtain the supplemental insurance they need. Carroll County was singled out in 2026 for not having a ‘regular’ Medicare Advantage Plan. This absence needs to be addressed in a coordinated effort by our NH Commissioner of Insurance, our federal delegation and the state legislature. Thousands of seniors should not be left without care because their county is suddenly dropped by companies serving all other parts of NH (and neighboring Maine). If Medicare Advantage companies want to serve NH Seniors they need to provide plans in all counties in the state. Given the small size of the state – geographically and by population – the state should be considered one Medicare Advantage market to be served equally statewide. This can be achieved with companies singularly or collaboratively providing coverage statewide. RURAL HOSPITALS In addition, all Granite Staters deserve reasonable access to healthcare facilities and resources. This has been achieved through our network of rural hospitals. However these hospitals are struggling financially. Too often they are ending services if not closing all together. Birthing care is becoming increasingly challenging. These hospitals rely on Medicaid and Medicare funding to stay open. In order to fund the state’s contribution for Medicaid, NH instituted a tax on hospitals. This originally was matched by federal dollars. However, the federal government has now dictated that this tax must decline by ½% per year which will result in one billion less in state funding for Medicaid unless NH alters its funding strategy. NH needs to establish a more sustainable method of paying its share of healthcare for low income children, the disabled, and seniors, as well as keeping rural hospitals afloat.
MINIMUM WAGE
NH needs to raise the minimum wage to a rate comparable to our neighboring states. It is detrimental to our economy and businesses to be known as the only state in New England to have such a low minimum wage. This may be seen as symbolic to many, since most jobs in NH pay above minimum wage. But it sends a critical message to young people and it is those young people who our Granite State businesses need to attract and retain as employees. These young people need to know they are valued. It will take a constitutional amendment to raise our minimum wage. Yet, it is worth it for our state’s workforce and economy.
Making sure all NH Residents can afford to call the Granite State home.
FAIR TAXATION
PROPERTY TAXES
Relying on property taxes for 63% of all state and local revenue is not a sound or sustainable tax policy. And increasingly, it is undermining the very New Hampshire advantage we’re trying to protect. For too many Granite Staters, especially seniors and young families, high property taxes are making it harder to stay in the homes they love or buy a home in the first place. It’s time to stop pretending that New Hampshire’s property-tax burden is the price we have to pay for being a low-tax state. We don’t have to give up being low-tax New Hampshire while having a more just and equitable tax system. Other states maintain low overall tax burdens while having a broader mix of revenue sources—some even have lower overall burdens than New Hampshire. So let’s stop boxing ourselves in. If we want stable taxes, stable services with our slowly growing population of taxpayers and aging population, we need to rethink where state monies come from. And, no, this does not mean we have to have a sales or income tax. It means we need to rebalance sources and follow through on obligations. An immediate way to lower property taxes is to eliminate SWEPT. This tax was intended to be temporary to begin with and it serves no purpose in providing equity in school funding since all monies raised through SWEPT stay locally. Eliminating SWEPT will reduce property taxes immediately throughout the state. We have proof this works because a recent reduction in SWEPT lowered property tax rates in all three of our District 7 towns as well as other towns that year. This should be done in conjunction with legislation which reserves property taxes for local and county expenses only – NO state expenses. The state has innumerable ways of raising revenue. Towns and municipalities have very limited funding options with property taxes being by far the most substantive. The state can replace this $363 million of ‘fake’ funding so all towns actually receive adequate funding from the state. Presently some towns raise enough through SWEPT that the state sends no additional adequacy funding. Those towns are charging themselves more in property tax to pay themselves the state’s adequacy support. The state can use income from two or more of the following sources to replace the $323 million: a. Reinstate the interest and dividends tax which NH had for over 100 years. This would provide more than half of the funds needed since it earned $185 million in 2024. b. Eliminate new (optional) education programs or funding which have been created without a ‘new’ dedicated funding source in the last ten years. Also, return the Education Trust Fund to its original purpose. Constitutional obligations should be fully funded before new or optional programs are even considered. For example, the Education Freedom Account voucher program would be funded differently or eliminated. It will cost $60 million this year and more the year after. While Charter Schools have been permitted in NH for decades, the new subsidies for rent/lease/purchase and twice the student adequacy funding are ‘new’ funding obligations. They need to be funded separately or eliminated. c. Legalize marijuana and sell it through our NH Liquor Stores, with profits going to the Education Trust Fund. Rather than avoiding, denying and fighting against this constitutional obligation the state needs to step up and pay its fair share. It needs to rip off the bandaid.
THE STATE MUST MEET ITS COMMITMENTS
Between 2015 and 2025 the NH Municipal Association calculates $3 billion in costs have shifted from the state to local property taxes. As well the Legislature has cut tax rates which has reduced the funds shared with towns e.g. room and meals tax. That’s a double hit for municipalities. The state needs to meet its commitments and pay its share of: * retirement system for teachers, firefighters and police. * bridges and * water and sewer infrastructure projects
LOW TAX BURDEN
There are low tax burden states which have a lower burden than NH. They are able to adequately fund their programs and services, including state funding for public education, at a higher level than the Granite State. And none of them depend on one funding source for 63% of all revenue statewide like NH does using property taxes. We need to examine these other state models and determine what we can adopt in order to make a fairer and more sustainable tax system. NH ADVANTAGE NH ranks eight out of the ten worst state economies in 2026. The NH Advantage no longer exists for working class Granite Staters. Sadly it is only working for the wealthy and for large corporations. Protecting New Hampshire’s Advantage means making sure it remains an advantage for all the people who live here—not just a slogan we repeat while property taxes continue to rise and young people move away. Part of the changes, which have undermined the NH Advantage, have come through the state legislature using various rules and tricks to stop or pass unfavorable bills: * excessively killing bills proposed by democrats * passing bills that received thousands of negative responses from NH citizens * attaching unfavorable bills to unrelated favored bills in order to pass the unfavorable * hiding bills in the budget in order to pass them. These tactics are unproductive and the resulting legislation frequently does not last. After all, policies passed on narrow partisan margins rarely endure. If built on broad public consensus they are substantively more durable. Our Legislature needs to return to bipartisanship and actually represent the people rather than focusing on ideology.
NH Residents deserve reasonable taxes used to better their lives.
PROTECT & IMPROVE PUBLIC EDUCATION
EDUCATION FUNDING
Did you know, last year NH spent more on EFA vouchers than on Special Education Aid? Did you know, local property taxpayers pay for 90% of all special education costs and 70% of all public education costs? Did you know, EFA spending was higher than the amount budgeted every year since EFAs were created? And 90% of the recipients have never attended public school. This means we’re paying for 10,000 students who cost us nothing in the past. Did you know, every dollar spent on EFAs comes directly from the Education Trust Fund, the state account established for adequacy funding for public schools. This use leaves less funding for public schools. Now some would say there were/are excess funds in the Trust but that is only because the state has chosen to continually underfund public education. I’m just trying to imagine going to a local school board meeting and hearing the district had spent 33% more than the voters approved and so they took the money set aside for other municipal departments to cover the overage. The very idea is insane. Minimally we need guardrails for EFAs, if we don’t eliminate them all together. And if EFAs are continued they need to be funded through a defined alternative revenue source – not the funds that are intended for adequate funding of traditional public schools.
HB 1300
House Bill 1300 was signed into law in July 2026 and requires a question to appear in the November 2026 general election in all towns and city wards across New Hampshire. It concerns the growth of the local property-tax levy used to support school districts, together with a separate limit on school administrative-unit central-office spending. This is NOT a cap on your entire property-tax bill. It is not a promise that your individual tax bill cannot or will not rise beyond a certain percentage. It is not a cap on county taxes. It is not a cap on municipal spending. It is a restriction on how much the local school property-tax levy may grow. The ballot question says, for a two-year period, the levy generally may not grow beyond the previous year’s amount with adjustments tied to inflation and new construction. It also sets a 6 percent limit on SAU central-office spending as a share of total school district spending. No one has provided an explanation for the basis of the 6% figure. It should be noted, municipalities already have the right to establish a tax cap. In fact some NH towns already have a cap. Voting against this article does not change an existing tax cap and it does not automatically mean higher taxes. What happens if school costs rise faster than inflation? A tax cap limits revenue growth only. It does not limit costs. School districts still have to contend with salaries, health insurance, transportation, special education, utilities, building maintenance, contractual commitments and other expenses. Some of these costs can rise faster than general inflation. If that happens while revenue growth is constrained, the district will have choices to make. It might reduce or defer certain spending. It might reduce staffing. It might delay purchases or maintenance, or it might eliminate certain programs. An issue for many is this law/requirement is an example of the state intruding into local control. By requiring this question be on the ballot, using language which is confusing and the state provides no guidance on, and specifying a threshold (6%) which has no known basis – the state is overstepping its role in local decisions. The state needs to respect local control and respect the decisions made by local voters. It is continuously ironic when the Legislature complains about the decisions made by the people who elected them; and works to force their methodologies on us, rather than addressing them themselves.
DEFINING ADEQUATE EDUCATION
Everything Concord and Washington requires schools to do should be included in the definition of an adequate education. This means, if an entity requires transportation of students, then transportation is part of the cost of an adequate education. If Washington requires schools to provide special education services then all costs associated with this requirement should be included in the definition of an adequate education. If Concord requires traditional public schools to provide services to charter schools, then this is part of the cost of an adequate education. If Concord requires public schools to provide services and courses to EFA students then this is part of the cost of an adequate education. The NH Legislature needs to understand that each and every time they add a rule, regulation, standard, requirement etc. there is an associated cost. That cost belongs to Concord, not just local taxpayers. Defining an adequate education absolutely should not be used by the Legislature to limit its financial obligations. The NH Legislature, utilizing a mediator and engaging various stakeholders, needs to commit to a comprehensive definition of an adequate education and its resulting financial obligations. They then need to commit to this definition/calculation for at least ten years in order to provide some stability to the funding system.
All NH students deserve an adequate education to prepare for a successful future.
PRESERVING WATER QUALITY & NATURAL RESOURCES
WATER QUALITY
The State of Our Lake Report from August 2026, by the Lake Winnipesaukee Alliance, indicates water quality trend lines are going in the wrong direction. Water clarity is declining, phosphorus is increasing, cyanobacteria abundance is increasing and invasive species are adversely impacting our lakes. We know what needs to be done: manage stormwater runoff, address faulty septic systems, limit road salt use, reduce use of fertilizers with phosphorus.
CYANOBACTERIA
Cyanobacteria monitoring, notifications and mitigation should be funded by an excise tax on fertilizers with phosphorus, fines for landowners who do not repair/replace faulty septic systems, and/or disturbances of shoreline property in ways contrary to existing laws.
NATURAL RESOURCES & ENERGY
New Hampshire has high energy costs. Renewable energy sources are a viable option and have become cost effective. There are entire countries who have reduced their dependence on oil and gas by 90%. We need to reinstate initiatives which encouraged and supported investments in these renewable energy sources.
We must protect the Granite State for NH Residents of today and the next generations.
RESPECT RIGHTS AND LOCAL CONTROL
Democracy requires citizens to engage, participate, volunteer and lead. Granite Staters all need to decide our state’s future. We have been our version of a ‘free state’ for centuries, with values which extend well beyond liberty and freedom.
Granite Staters understand the role of the majority in decision making, but also respect the needs, viewpoints and contributions of the minority. We do not want to become someone else’s Free State. We want to continue being the more relaxed, gentle and welcoming free state we’ve always been.
VOTING RIGHTS
NH has a tradition of fair, secure, transparent elections. However, we are moving toward being a more difficult place to vote; with one of the most expensive states to vote in. We don’t allow online registration, or registration at the DMV and offer only minimal voting by mail. Realizing the frequency of voter fraud is .000845% according to the Heritage Foundation it is unnecessary for NH to be instituting citizenship requirements plus other hurdles for voter registration. Review by experts found only 47 instances of wrongful voting – out of around 8.3 million ballots - between 1998 to 2024, in NH. At most 8 of those involved a non-citizens voting. 8 over 26 years! The Legislature needs to focus on the real issues in our state.
LOCAL CONTROL
NH is the 18th most regulated state in the country according to the Josiah Bartlett Center. It is more regulated than all other New England states except Massachusetts. Yet, Granite Staters value their local control. Up until the last ten or so years the state has respected this value. The state has been intruding into local control more and more over the last decade. Most Granite Staters are against ‘big brother’ telling us how to do business. The state needs to respect NH’s commitment to local control.