N.H. Puts a Price on Panoramas

He looked at a "600" view, which was a panorama of mountains and receding hills such as Wilder's in Plainfield. "If you were standing up there looking at it, it would blow you away," Roberge said. For that quality, Roberge said, land such as this would be worth six times its original value, for an increase of $240,000 just because of the view.

To which some landowners say: That's all there is to it?

"The formula sucks pond water," said John Frado, 60, whose property in Winchester jumped in value by $70,000 because of another assessing company's opinion of its overlook.

When Wilder contested his valuation in court, a local judge came to a similar, though more decorously worded, conclusion: The appraisal was "not supported by evidence of anything other than the subjective judgment of the appraising company." He ordered it reduced, though the case has been appealed.

After protests across the state, state lawmakers are now considering ways to ensure that, in the future, assessors give more evidence to support the values they place on views.

"What do you see?" asked state Rep. Betsey L. Patten (R). "I want you to explain."

For now, though, what residents call the "view tax" still has many longtime residents worrying that the mountain on the distance will soon force them off the land beneath their feet. When farmer John Lynch, 65, found that his view had been valued at about $65,000, he confronted someone from the assessing company: "How do you think we're going to hang on here?"

Lynch, who lives in the town of Hill, N.H., said that one of the odd parts about this controversy is that, with his attention always on the land, he rarely spends time gazing out at his valuable view.

"You very seldom look," Lynch said. "Well, to see the weather or the sunset . . . ." Suddenly, he was troubled by the thought of a tax on sunsets.

"Oh," he said, "don't tell them about that."