New MP HQ
 

The Government at work. New building with a life expectancy of 50 years. Planned obsolescence before it is even built. There are private residences on the lake older and still functional and will be for more than 50 more years to come. The Government is the only disorganized entity with that proverbial MONEY TREE. These seems a bit extreme for a facility that functions from May to October. I wonder how the residents of Gilford feel about this project? Would the money be better spent incorporating it with Gilford PD or GFD and be used year round. I don't know but seems a waist for a seasonal entity.

I was told last year that Marine Patrol employee's were part of the NH state police and they all carried weapons. I am not sure if this is accurate or not.

In fact, wasn't that posted on this forum?

Current HQ are failing. This project has been in the works for the past 3yrs +. Money has been allocated as well as federal grants I'm sure. Commercial buildings have a different set of specs for building than residential. And yes everything is now figured out with life expectancy. The 7.8 million is a budget. My guess is bids will come in lower, then generally do all depends on materials being used etc. and yes the budget is for all work, which includes demo and removal of the existing HQ. All things have a life expectancy, look at all the roads and bridges that were built no more than 50 yrs ago. Everything has a timeline. There will always be people that don't agree with spending money for something that has outlived its useful life. Renovating the current building is not an option due to the type of construction that is there (prestressed concrete panels and block) believe me when I say they need a new building.

http://i44.tinypic.com/1499wms.gif Wreckn1, I was just browsing through the forum and noticed that you are fairly new to posting on the forum after joining back in July 2008. We are glad that you have come aboard and joined us. Have fun and enjoy the Winni Forum while making many new friends.

Thanks for joining on the thread and hope to see your name (Wreckn1) on more of the forum threads in the future.:)

http://i54.tinypic.com/2e56yqf.gif

What're we looking at?
 

Hey, web, in that picture at the top of this thread, I was trying to imagine what part of the lake the pic is showing. The island arrangements don't look right. My best guess is it's from above Center Harbor, looking south. That's the only thing that makes any sense in the foreground. Perhaps the screwy placements of the islands further out is from camera distortion. Any other thoughts?

7.8M is a big number, but a drop in the bucket if compared to amount of $$ this country gives away.
It sounds a little like 'Live free or Die' has has evolved into 'pay for it so stick around awhile':) the gov. from the other 49 states is leaking in.

I would like to look at it as if 'they' are going to spend this much on a building to help police the lake, how much are they going to invest to preserve the lake.

They Are Armed
 

I asked Tim Dunleavy that question at a talk he gave at the Belknap County Sportsmens Club this past spring and he stated that all MP officers are now armed. The Marine Patrol is now part of the NH Division of State Police under the Department of Safety.

Yes, Center Harbor looking south-east down the Broads. Black Cat, Three Mile and the Beavers are visible left to right, with Bear further down through the Three Mile-Beaver passage.

Ridiculous
 

Talk about out of control spending.. they can not even man the boats they have now! This is all to make our precious time on the lake more enjoyable:confused:

Everyone does have a price . . .
 

Just a quick question what is the breakdown of personnel whi will be house in the new facility?

Huge waste of money!

My guess is that most of you who post negative comments about your local government and who are quick to comment about how nothing is right with how your community leaders are doing things with "your money" have never volunteered for an advisory board or attended a public meeting. You spend more time on these forums spreading misinformation and poison than you've ever spent walking to your car and driving to community meetings. It should be a requirement that you attend at least one open meeting regarding anything at all related to how your government operates before you are allowed to post a remark.

Thank God for the men and women of the Marine Patrol and praise them for how well they operate with such a limited budget and let's hope the Coast Guard never gets jurisdiction of this lake.

Isn't a personal opinion and being able to voice it the basis of our democracy? I've been on Town Meeting and a steering committee. Why should my opinion be worth any more or less than my neighbor's?

Can you give me an example of the "misinformation" and "poison" that someone has posted on this thread. Start with the webmaster comment that started this topic.

No, it's not that simple--citizens in a democracy have a responsibility to participate in that democracy. Criticism without participation (and, I daresay, apathy) is the very antithesis of democracy.

It actually is that simple. The First Amendment guarantees that. And Participation comes in many forms including voicing your opinion in places like this forum, voting and volunteering.

No, you're getting the freedom of speech and democracy confused. The first amendment protects your, and others', rights to criticize, but democracy cannot work by criticism alone.

If people here have issues with the construction of a new MP headquarters, they are free to complain, but it's useless to the larger picture unless they're going to get involved. And uninvolved complainers are annoying. I think that was the original point.

I'm not confused at all. Free speech is a product of a functioning democracy. What you view as complaining is actually someone voicing his/her opinion.

When I was on Town Meeting I got comments just like the one above from people in my precinct, especially during the annual town budget. I chose not to see them as "uninvolved complainers" but as tax paying townspeople with every right to their opinion. I would never discount feedback or an unsolicited opinion. Being able to listen to viewpoints other than mine is essential to the committees I am and have been on.

This discussion is a little off topic but I believe that the 1st Amendment only protects you from the government limiting speech ("Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech"). Although a forum like this gives you plenty of opportunity to speak freely it is not protected by the 1st Amendment unless Congress tried to make a law limiting it. As the site operator I could limit your speech here all I want to. Newpapers can publish or not publish anything they want and if someone tried to tell you their opinion on the street corner you could tell them to "shut up" and they'd have no Constitutional right to speak.

We all believe in free speech but don't get carried away with what is protected by the 1st Amendment.

That price is peanuts to what some think their property on the lake is worth! This is easily fixed by increasing the taxes on all waterfront homes in NH... 40% increase and wha..la, paid for!

Obviously, you don't own waterfront, one of the lets tax others for your own benefit crowd, uuuggggghhhh

Opinions
 

Yes, everyone has an opinion. But here are some things to ponder.

Since the existing building is old, and sinking, something has to be done. Some people have speculated about why the facility needs to be on the water. There are numerous reasons.

1. When a significant incident occurs on the lake (major boating accident, plane crash etc.) supervisors can leave their offices, jump in a boat, and respond immediately.

2. When there is an arrest the prisoner can be transported, booked, and held for court without involving other departments.

3. When a Marine Patrol officer has any mechanical issues with his assigned boat he can return to the office and change boats.

4. Marine Patrol officers reporting for their shift can start immediately rather than have to drive (on the payroll) to a different location to get in a boat.

5. Repairs to the boats can happen on site without a need to pull them out of the water to trailer them elsewhere, adding unnecessary expense.

6. Morale and professionalism will increase when they work out of a state of the art facility that they can be proud of.

7. Citizens will find it convenient to visit when any need arises. I know that has happened to me in the past when I got a warning for a burned out stern light and the ticket was written so that by appearing at the Marine Patrol office and showing the repair the citation was waived.

I am sure that there are other reasons, but this facility needs to be built and the waterfront is the right place for it.

MP - practically never around!
 

I spent a lot of time on the lake this summer and hardly every saw the Marine Patrol out on the water. When I would go past the MP HQ .... all the boats sitting on the dock. I was cut off, passed too close just about every time I drove my boat around the Weirs/Meredith area... never MP around. They did stop over at Advent cove to "double check" that I was properly rafting my boat (I was).

Is their mission to show up at an accident and take a report? If that is the case, I don't think they need new HQ.

I didn't reread this entire thread, so I apologize if this is already in here. But.....

Is there a vacation planning board (of sorts) that may possibly have some insight as to future planning of the 'Lakes Region'. If future refurbishing of areas around the lake are in the works, it makes sense to have phase A be preparing the policing force first prior to larger crowds, and then trying to play catch up. Larger summer or winter events could play a role.

I'm speculating, and hoping many areas that are complained about get the attention they need.

I too, don't always agree with out of control tax dollar spending, so hoping this project improves the area is all I can hope for.

I think you will find that there is no local, state or county organization that holds much sway over tourism or master planning. Most of the maintenance and funding seems to be by the towns and spending will vary based on their tax base.

Funding Source
 

Just a clarification for anyone thinking their tax dollars are paying for the new Marine Patrol building. According to the Governor and Council approval, funding is from the Navigational Safety Fund. This fund is made up from registration fees from boats that must be registered. While some of you will say it is still the taxpayer that carries the burden...I agree, but only if you register a boat.

Interesting fact...this fund is a revolving, dedicated fund that had a several million dollar balance under Dave Barrett who worked to save for the purpose of a new building. Then along came Speaker Bill O'Brien and his followers who took the funds and applied it to the general fund as revenues. So...if you want to talk about unfair taxes...did you know the boaters paid an unfair amount to the general fund that others didn't have to?

Just some facts to consider.

Thanks, I think(?). :)

It's great to hear Mr. Barrett had a plan and stuck to it, making this undertaking possible ! Mr. O'Brien on the other hand, hopefully a guy like this has achieved something positive on his own without repeatedly stealing from Peter to fund Paul.

Facts are always appreciated.

Just Curious
 

Although I am in favor of a new facility for the MP, I am curious if anyone here knows what the impact or lack thereof will be for those who put in at the town docks while the project is underway?

Artist Rendition of new building
 

http://thecitizen.villagesoup.com/p/...-ahead/1299132

The Architects are from Ashland also design the 'Twins'. The two rest stops off I-93 in Bow.

Who raided the Navigation Safety Fund?
 

I think some closer inspection will show that aker Terri Norelli and her crew raided the various dedicated funds, including the rainy day fund, and that by the time Bill O'Brien was Speaker, the money was all gone. I don't usually like political stuff on this forum, but if you're going to post this stuff, perhaps it should be a separate thread and should have some specifics, like dates. and bill numbers.

From the meeting I was in, there should be little to no impact at the town docks, that may have changed from 3 months ago, but the state is being very conscious of the summer time residents. Again that was 3 months ago at the meeting. They also wanted demo and pile/sheet driving done before residents started arriving for the spring/summer however I can tell you for a fact demo will not be starting when they originally wanted it to, due delays with the paper work end of it.....hope this helps

Thank you!

Descant-Closer Inspection...House Bill 2 (HB2) 2011
 

224:220 Navigation Safety Fund. Amend RSA 270-E:6-a to read as follows:

270-E:6-a Navigation Safety Fund. There is established the navigation safety fund which shall be [nonlapsing and] continually appropriated to the department of safety, division of [safety services] state police. The state treasurer may invest moneys in the fund as provided by law and all interest received on such investment shall be credited to the fund. The fund shall only be used to promote the safety of navigation and the administration and enforcement of RSA 270, RSA 270-B, RSA 270-D, and RSA 270-E. Any balance remaining in the navigation safety fund at the close of each fiscal year shall lapse to the general fund.

Items in brackets were deleted from the statute's language upon passage.

I believe Speaker O'Brien's rule was 2010-2012.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...11/HB0002.html

The relevant language in this legislation is below. It can be found approximately 2/3 of the way through the document.

"224:220 Navigation Safety Fund. Amend RSA 270-E:6-a to read as follows:

270-E:6-a Navigation Safety Fund. There is established the navigation safety fund which shall be [nonlapsing and] continually appropriated to the department of safety, division of [safety services] state police. The state treasurer may invest moneys in the fund as provided by law and all interest received on such investment shall be credited to the fund. The fund shall only be used to promote the safety of navigation and the administration and enforcement of RSA 270, RSA 270-B, RSA 270-D, and RSA 270-E. Any balance remaining in the navigation safety fund at the close of each fiscal year shall lapse to the general fund."

..... Ellecoya Community Sailing facility
 

A new home for the Marine Patrol, in an architect designed, single purpose, waterfront building that can be used for the next hundred years is a great improvement. Just take a look at the Town of Meredith's Police Dept, Fire Dept, and Community Center; all super-duper, public town buildings that totally improve the Town of Meredith....big-time!

You do not see any 268-unit storage businesses being proposed on a Route 3 vacant lot in Meredith....now do you......which is the very ugly, imminent storage case in the Weirs.........too ugly bad for the Weirs!

Wouldn't it be nice if the State of NH changed its mind, and agreed to build a new community sailing building facility on the beautifull stretch of un-developed sandy beach that fronts on Lake Winnipesaukee at the Ellecoya State Park-RV Campground. That proposed community sailing center there at Ellecoya should be re-visited once the legislature wakes up and figures a way to power up the state's parks and recreation facilities.

ITL proposal
 

Rep. Dave Huot propose to shoot down O'Brien grab from the Navigation fund last year. Only to be oppose by O'Brien and declared ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate) Huot had the backing of the NH Marine Industry and SBONH.

Now that O'Brien is out of the way Marine Patrol was able to move forward with this proposal. Problem is most of the money is gone and bonds will need to be issued.

I think Rep. Huot should once more reestablished the navigation fund now that O'Brien lost power.

Comments in jest?
 

Does driving past run down homes and a trailer park make those Meredith facilities all that more fantastic? Driving past that empty Aubuchon and pizza place is pretty swanky too. No one even sees those buildings. I'm sure you are making your comments in jest so I won't comment on the thought of building another building on a prestine beach.

And putting another building on the beach is a fantastic idea.

And the total for the building exceeds the $7.8M. You have a $600K+ architect cost and the $1.5M cost to buy the industrial building.

need more $
 

Hey, just raise the gas taxes like the feds plan on doing
MONEY MONEY MONEEY