Gilford Dock Owners losing access to Glendale Launch Ramp
 

Gilford (condo) Dock Owners, an important public hearing with the Gilford Board of Selectmen is happening TONIGHT (Wednesday 5/24/23) at the Town hall at 7 PM to remove your ability to use the Glendale Facilities (the boat launch ramp)!

If you can't make the meeting, please be SURE to email or call the Gilford Selectmen early as possible TODAY! Their phone number is 603-527-4700, but perhaps an email is better: selectmen@gilfordnh.org

They will be discussing the proposal to remove access to the Glendale Facilities to those that own a dock (slip).

If you have a boat and only own a slip (e.g.: MVYC, Gilford Yacht Club, Glendale Yacht Club), they are proposing that you will lose access to use the Launch Ramp at Glendale!

Here's the link to the notice about the hearing.
https://www.gilfordnh.org/agenda/item-2789

You need to open the two links to read the details.

Here is a link to the proposed amendments to the Glendale regulations:
https://www.gilfordnh.org/assets/mun...s.6-1-2023.pdf

The TLDR is that you must reside at your property to be allowed to use the Glendale Facilities. And there is no consideration of those that may own live-aboard boats.

So Gilford taxpayers that own a boat and need to use the ramp to get their boat(s) in and out of the lake may not use the Glendale Ramp. Yet thousands of other Gilford taxpayers that may not even own a boat can still use the Glendale launch ramp.

FYI If you don't know this they already removed your access to the Gilford town beach in a previous meeting this year.

No Launch?
 

Hi Rich;

Just curious...don't all of those places you mentioned, MVYC, Glendale Yacht Club, Gilford Yacht Club, etc, etc, have their own launch facilities?? I can't imagine someone owning a boat, paying the required fees at these places and not having a launch??...Is this in fact the case??

Thanks!

Dan

Hi Dan,

Both MVYC and GYC have a boat lift, which is used for large boats, which they charge a fee for launch/haul.

Both Gilford Yacht Club and Glendale Yacht Club do not have a launch ramp for trailers.

I'm not sure if MYVC has a launch ramp for trailers.

But for those of us with smaller boats or PWCs, we use a trailer and need a boat ramp.

Strange thing is that I talked to the Town manager (administrator?) about the issue, he said things are getting so crowded that 'we need to do something'.

Yet 95% of the time, when I use the ramp during the week I rarely meet anyone at the ramp. Of course on a weekend it's busier and I'm sure it's most busy in the mornings, but later in the day, I have never had to wait nor was someone waiting for me at the ramp.

Wow, Thanks for the info!! I didn't know these places didn't provide a ramp! Seems crazy to me for what they charge!

Dan

I'm sure the issue is space for a ramp!

I know at GYC, we don't have a place we could add a ramp. We have never needed a ramp because as taxpayers in Gilford, we could always use the Glendale launch ramp. We tend not to use the parking there as we can always park at 'home'.

Mt. View does in fact have a ramp for trailers.

In theory we could probably turn the lift launch slip into a dual purpose lift/ramp, but that would not be cheap. Excavate out the approach and leave the docks on each side for the lift to run on. The lift would straddle the ramp. Not ideal and not a ton of space to maneuver, but doable. Trying to get the club to bite (and write the check) would be the difficult part.

I will try to make the meeting. Slip owners are not causing the congestion at Glendale.

Out of curiosity, Dave's Motorboat Shop is dropping in and pulling boats there daily. Is he running a valet service or is it customer boats that are Gilford residents coming in and out for repairs?

Dave's stores and repairs a lot of boats and they come and go through Glendale. This time of year they are launching several boats a day.

THIS ^^^^ is an issue!

Is GYC Glendale YC or Gilford YC?
It seems to me that slip owners at either place would mostly launch in the spring and haul in the fall. This presents minimal Glendale traffic.

When I got a guest parking pass this spring ($25) they asked if I wanted Guest launching privileges too. ($50?) Never used guest launch, but, will this go away?

I'd suggest when you register a boat in Gilford (so they get the revenue) you get e.g. 8 coupons to launch/haul. That covers spring and fall and a couple of times to go for repairs or to fish another lake.

Am I right? This is being suggested by the same Gilford residents who pushed to make the beach residents only instead of taxpayers?
I have to guess that many slip owners, esp. at Glendale YC, are island residents who are paying $7-$8 K a year in property taxes, as well as a tax on the slip. These aren't the folks who are crowding the Glendale ramp on weekends.

Right, but my question is he charging for/selling a valet service and using the launch to do it?

Sounds to me like the town is either inviting a lawsuit or tax abatement requests from those tax payers that are prohibited from using the services.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Many don't use town services, schools, etc., but there is no break in the taxes. Gilford (and other towns) has been reducing Glendale use a little bit at a time for many years. No docking between 2 and 4 am, I think was the first rule, then no swimming, then parking passes, then islanders docks, no commercial vessels, etc. etc. Still one of the best run municipal dock facilities around.

Thanks to everyone that called or emailed! We made a difference! I heard they voted to amend the rules to allow dock owners access last night!

I apologize, as an owner I tend to use GYC to mean Gilford Yacht Club.

I agree!

Or change our underutilized Beach to a ramp. It's been kind of ugly now that they installed those kyak racks.

I have also mentioned a removable davit at the corner of the Tammy lift well for use by PWCs since these are our greater need during the season vs boats being spring/fall launched/hauled for the season.

Thanks. I didn't know this! I've been through there but never noticed it. Where is it located?

No Valet at Dave’s Motorboat Shoppe
 

For the record, I’m pretty sure that Dave’s Motorboat does not offer valet service.

It's just beyond the office building. I've never used it, as I always use Glendale, but it's there and available to members.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Glad you brought this up.
 

I talked with a selectman and he explained the situation to me. He was under the impression the slip condo owners have launch privilege at their associations and should be using them. Thus, avoiding the Glendale launch and parking. There were complaints from the island owners.

I am a property owner in Gilford. I launch occasionally in Glendale and I don't see that happening. Maybe because I use it early morning or late evening to avoid the crowd.

He was also told that the selectmen should be thinking about residents only, not landowners who lived elsewhere. Well, that should go big with the island folks! There has always been a problem regarding Gilford residents and the island folks. Especially day docking! I have trouble docking during the day while the Gilford Island docks have plenty of slips!

It will go on and on! I can see why the other lake towns avoid parking privileges for their island residents.

People serving as selectman/woman need to be smarter than this. The blow hard loudmouths want to sound like they have good ideas and are the majority but seldom are.

This is why it's so important to pay attention to what they are doing and to research and attend town meetings if you still have that right.

is this the point that we should have the " what do Gilford Island owners get for the thousands of tax dollars they pay " conversation??

More than the Meredith island owners:laugh::laugh::laugh:! Seriously, it does seem like it is in a town's best interest to help ensure access to island property. I would think it increases property values, hence revenue, with minimal corresponding impact on services. Of course, that is from the perspective of an islander!

Selectmen don't have a say in property valuation. The state AKA education tax AKA view tax had placed a huge burden on farmers and those who have undeveloped land. This is one reason large landowners decide to join non-profit conservatory trusts.

So take it up with the state, not the local municipals.

Most island owners outside of Gilford own their slips on the mainland.

Meredith could care less about islanders...Luckily they have a fire boat though!

Gilford has invested a lot in infrastructure for islanders. Glendale is a great facility. Their new fire boat is awesome. It saved our house last week when Meredith called in for mutual aid.

Hopefully they figure out the parking situation and solve the real problem. The islanders and slip owners aren't the basis for it.

$$ Millions, not thousands.

We will reach a point where islanders will have to have their own mainland access point instead of relying on Glendale as their "free" summer marina. The Selectmen will go to four hour docking as other towns have done. We already see other towns where island real estate will only sell/rent if there is "guaranteed" mainland parking and dock access. OR, return to the old days when you kept your boat at camp and took a water taxi to/from Glendale.

The difference is that a taxpayer choosing not to use a service is far different then a taxpayer being prohibited from using a service.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Its my understanding that as an island resident of Gilford you cannot put children in the school system, even though you theoretically could live on island 8 months out of the year (year round if equipped with means to get across the ice safely). I have a friend that was denied for this. I'd call that being prohibited from using town services. Their island home was extremely nice and they were probably "contributing" $14-16k per year at least to the general fund.

We looked into that for Blake and were told the same thing.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

You know what, I never knew that and don't think it's right.

This is very interesting. Does your friend list the island house as his (and his kids') primary residence? I would guess that's the issue

Could it be that an island property cannot be a primary residence due to permitting?

I know that many residents around here had to sign off on various town services to build on non-conforming lots were the ''road frontage'' could not be meet due to the access being below standards.

There have been people living on a Gilford island for 12 months a year, (boat snowmobile, Subaru and hovercraft to Lockes Is.) but I don't know of any that tried to enroll children in school.

That’s the issue. The island home would need to be listed as your permanent address, as shown on your driver’s license, or government issued ID. If your island home were truly your permanent place of residence, there would be no issue having your child attend the Gilford school system.

Then that makes sense. And if they were living on an island for 12 month it would have to be their primary or permanent home.

Gilford BOS did its job
 

Regarding to the changes in Glendale regulations it wasn't the Selectcritters who proposed this, but the Glendale Committee. The Board of Selectmen held a public hearing on the matter and prior to that public hearing received a lot of public input - e-mails and phone calls from what I heard at the public hearing - and the BOS realized that part of the changed Glendale regulations were unworkable. The BOS chair made a motion to remove the proposed changes affecting those who have been using the docks with a few exceptions (the exception being use by barges, if memory serves). The motion passed and the crappy part of the proposed regulations were dead.

The BOS did it's job and listened to the public. The BOS doesn't always know how people will be affected by changes. That's what public hearings are for. It's one reason they are also revisiting the Gilford Beach regulations because the changes went too far.

They have since sold and moved on, but I believe at the time they were claiming the home as their primary residence.

Really? And the kids still were not allowed to go to school? That's not right!!!

Do not know if this is up to date... https://www.gilfordnh.org/file/2016/..._Ordinance.pdf

But it stipulates that properties not connected to the mainland (IR zoned) cannot be used for permanent residence.

If it is up to date I still don't see why it's fair. They pay property taxes. That obviously means they can't vote either?

A lot of second home/seasonal properties/vacation home condo associations and homeowners associations have a provision in their bylaws that states that you cannot declare said property as a permenant/primary residence. This was often a requirement of the county, for example in our assocation Belknap County requied this be put in, in order for them to grant status of the assocation and file titles and deeds.
This was a measure used back in the 80s/90s to stop people from using their second homes to register their kids in the school system instead of where they were living and to have allegedy no further burden on town services. - some towns dont do trash pick up, possibly registering vehicles and the like.

Some of this has fallen off as you can register vehicles and toys because guess what the money is too good, and for example Laconia will still offer curb side trash pickup for associations. but forget anything else

Still a non resident when it comes to:
any type of License like fishing or hunting
voting/representation in the town as a property owner
not being able to speak in town meeting as a resident if there is one
town dump and other possible services
schools
food assistance/health assistance (except emergency of course)

but the tax rates do not reflect the lack of services you are eligible for vs those eligible for everything - "taxation withouth representation"

I have often wonderd why I am not able to vote in local elections only for the property I own in that town.

I don't know the rationale for the rule. But if the rule was published before owners bought those properties, then they knew what they were buying, and therefore it is fair. Presumably this is one reason that island land values are lower than other waterfront, and this is reflected in tax assessments

Because you knew when you purchased that you couldn't.
Taxation without representation is a historically incorrect statement. When I go to Mass or Florida, I pay their sales taxes... I didn't vote for those taxes or have anyone in their Legislature or Executive branch that I voted for.
In fact, in NH, prior to the 14th Amendment after the Civil War... and then some time due to social delay... only Protestants were allowed to vote. Jews and Catholics could buy property and pay taxes, but could not vote, hold elected/appointed office, or teach in a public school.

If permanent residence was acquired before the zoning change, and maintained to the current day, then it would be grandfathered.

Seasonal homes are a business. You can't vote anymore than Walmart can vote. And, if you vote at your (primary) residence, then that's your vote-- you can't vote in two places.
On the other hand, it appears I could live on my boat as a tenant at a local marina and vote if I declared that as my primary residence. People live year round on boats elsewhere, most often on salt water where boats do not come out of the water seasonally. (There are local marinas where boats stay wet all year.)

I doubt the local marina's are zoned for year round permanent residency... most are no doubt zoned commercial/resort with restrictions. But it is an intriguing thought.

Bottom line in this whole mess is that NH's "no income tax" structure works for NH residents, not out of state property owners. So if you are an out of state property owner you have 3 choices.... become a NH resident and give up whatever tax advantage you may have in your home state, or sell your NH property, or perhaps just be happy that you have the means to have 2 homes.

Woodsy

I agree with the current law when talking about federal & statewide elections. Where I have an issue is local elections. I feel that people should be able to vote/have a voice in local elections/matters wherever you pay property tax. Unfortunately, I am in the minority.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

And people can live in an rv and declare their rv park as their residence.

You know, I think you are exactly right. Federal and State Elections are different than local. Obviously you shouldn't vote for those twice. But, if you pay taxes thereby contributing to the budget of a town, you should have a say on how it is spent. (Even though most don't even bother)

So would all the shareholders of Lowes/Walmart/Home Depot be able to vote?
Or are you just suggesting that some property owners paying taxes should have that option?

We also pay property taxes to the State... so your option is to either recognize the system when you enter the agreement, or abide by the agreement and change residence.

And we pay taxes to the feds. So you vote once in your state and to the fed. If you live in California or NH there is only the one federal budget and elections. But you pay two sets of taxes to two different towns with TWO different budgets if you have homes or property in two different towns. So why shouldn't you have a say in each town?

Yes, I also agree with RBG. Just as a matter of neighborliness and good faith, I would put this and beach/dock access into a separate category

I don't pay property taxes to the feds.

The dock/beach issue is too many users for an amenity designed and constructed for a lower number of users.

Only fix is to restrict user base or build a bigger amenity... AKA more taxes.

Easiest fix for the other issue... declare residency here.
Or you have to let every tax payer of every business vote on the issues.

Saturation point?
 

At some point of saturation, the problem will be self solving. As the Yogiism goes: "It's so crowded, nobody goes there anymore".

If we aren't at the saturation point now, we're probably pretty close. The shoreline is completely developed, to the point that tear-downs are common, and the new houses are huge compared to the camps that used to exist, with lush green lawns right down to the lake. Boat docks and moorings are pretty much unobtainium, and are now astronomically priced. Boat traffic is at an all-time high, with bigger and faster boats being driven erratically by entitled, inexperienced newbies. The water quality has gone from pristine to marginal, if not unsafe, in many areas of the lake during peak times.

Granted, having been on the lake for over 50 years, I'm in the old geezer shouting "get off my lawn" demographic. Despite all the above, I still love the lake though.

Rant off.

If the shareholders in Lowes/Walmart/Home Depot can produce a property tax bill from the town for their share of the tax then yes, they should have a vote. But, as you are aware, the tax bill goes from the town to Lowes, not each individual shareholder.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

No you don’t pay property taxes to the state. You pay your property taxes to the town/city and the town/city pays their assessments to the state.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

That may be the "easiest" fix, but that does not mean it is easy if you are a summer resident--you need to stay 183 nights.

I don't think this is the case. Pretty sure the state you are leaving is the place you have to be able to show you are NOT there for 6 months. I can't, for example, declare my NH property as my home because I am spending more than half the year in MA. When I retire, I can declare NH as my residency - but want to be able to prove to MA that I am NOT in Massachusetts for at least 6 months out of the year. I can live in NH for 5 months, travel for 2, and live in MA for 5.

The transference is a matter of ease. The taxing authority is the State.
Same thing for the county tax.

I didn't say property tax. I said taxes. Since you work you obviously pay income tax.

Sorry, the fact is you “pay” the town. Your check is written to the town. They take their cut and send the state what is required. The state grants the town the authority to collect property tax so, legally the town is the taxing authority.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I'm not a lawyer, and your post makes sense. But the point remains the same--it is damn difficult for a summer resident (from Mass in your example) to declare NH their primary residence. They still need to spend 183 nights away from Mass

We spend almost 8 months on Mark but only 4 months in Epping...still won't fly.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

The DRA sets the rates... because the State is the taxing authority.
The State acquires that power under NH Constitution Part Second Article 5.

Towns/Cities are only municipal corporations, and can be taken by the State into receivership. We are a Dillon's Rule State.

The town collects those taxes under the authority of the State.

The authority to tax, and the mechanism of collection are two different things.

For instance, the restaurant cannot set/set aside a Meals Tax... but it remands a portion based on the State statute.

I get a vote at the federal level.
But my father paid taxes his whole life... and never got to vote because the rules are citizenship (sort of like resident).
The payment of taxes does not guarantee the right to vote.

And your father didn't want to become a citizen of the US? If he did, he would be able to vote- the same as islanders on the lake if they want to become residents of NH. They should be able to vote in NH and their town if they are residents. primary residence that is. Or is it illegal to make an island property your primary residence? People have lived on the islands all year.

The islanders had the option pry to the zoning change. They would have been grandfathered in at that time.
Currently, the zoning makes it illegal to make an island property in Gilford your primary residence unless it is connected by bridge to the mainland.

They could seek to change the zoning...
But on the issue at hand, it is really too many users for the existing infrastructure.

So the proposal was for those that had another access at the marina to use that one. If they determine that isn't an option... then they will still need to come up with a proposal to reduce the usage.
Or expend some money to increase the capacity of the facility.

The issues at the beach are the same.

Infrastructure is outdated and built when the Town of Gilford had a lot less residents and even less seasonal.

We build a lot of homes and condos, but forget about all the infrastructure that makes that possible.

OK, so that is why. The zoning law makes it illegal for islanders to claim their property as their primary residence. Is that just Gilford?

Each municipality is zoned, or not, separately.

You would need to research each one around the various lakes to see if one is different.

But voting is really not the issue with the restrictions. Some mainland residents of Gilford have dock access to the lake. The town is simply looking for a means to maximize the use of the current infrastructure without having to raise taxes to build out new infrastructure.

All the infrastructure is currently becoming concerning around the lake.

You mean you don't know? I thought you had the answers to everything!! I am disappointed in you!

Even for Gilford I didn't know.
I simply looked it up and then posted the link.

I learned a long time ago how to use a computer with an internet connection to find the information that I was looking for.
I'm just not willing to search each municipality around all the lakes in NH to discover what they are zoned.

Like I stated. It isn't really pertinent to the discussion, because the issue is too much demand for the existing infrastructure.
Some municipalities will build out the infrastructure, others are concerned for a future change in demand... which would mean too much investment in infrastructure that goes unused.

Mia culpa, you are correct. The state is the taxing authority in that it is state law that provides for taxation of property. The municipality is acting as an assessor & collector. The DRA does “set” the tax rate but in reality is setting the education tax rate and approving a property tax rate requested by the municipality.

However, when I write my property tax checks to the municipality, I am thinking mostly about the municipal services that are driving the tax rate and my assessment, not the broader state services. I believe most people feel this way. If they didn’t you wouldn’t see some the topics on this site that you do. (As an example we have the current thread on the proposed Moultonborough project). People who pay local property taxes expect something in return, and some say in how their taxes are paid. They expect to be treated equally with other residents.

The beach & ramp issues could be handled other ways then excluding certain residents. By day, by time of day, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Because the State is the taxing authority...
It would need to change the law to allow a local municipality to have non-residents vote on only that local taxation. They still couldn't be involved in the county or State part of the taxation (the State part most likely to become much larger as the ConVal lawsuit is not going well for the State).

The State would also need to carefully define the option within a constitutionally valid format.
For instance... every shareholder of Walmart, Home Depot, Lowes... etc are taxpayers in the town of Gilford. Optioning a voting right, while denying them the right could prove constitutionally rife with lawsuits and damages.

Allowing them to vote, could cause a logistical nightmare for the town.
Also, most residents... those that would need to make the change after the State would allow it... may question whether non-residents have the collective best interest of the town.

So it is a very tall order to change the process that NH has used since it was a province of the crown.

I would agree with all except your assertion that shareholders are local taxpayers. Shareholders do own a piece of the corporation but the taxpayer is the corporate entity. It is a far stretch to go from there to local taxpayer.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I think that England might have questioned whether the colonials had the collective best interest of the British colonies. Regardless, I’m not sure how that makes any difference. If I am paying part of the freight, I should have some of the say. Just because something may be difficult to accomplish doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be evaluated. I still fully believe that all residential taxpayers (and again, Lowe’s shareholders aren’t taxpayers) should have a say in local elections, meetings, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I always thought the ramp was for Gilford residents only. A boat slip is not a residence. A house or condo is a residence even if it is a second home.

The colony question was why the colonies could have taxes directed directly to them... but not have a representative in Parliament.

It would be more like Puerto Rico having a tax imposed directly toward them... but not have a member in Congress.

The Parliament felt the levies realistic as the colonies were the ones that benefited from the military expenditure for the French and Indian War. The colonist argued as recognized citizens (which would be our format of resident) that they should not be singled out without representation.

They didn't of course have a problem with all those that paid the levies that were not allowed a say. Voting was a restricted right.

The shareholders... per court findings... are the owners of the corporation and own a share of each property the same as a deed that has both a husband and wife or two partners listed on it.

The finding that corporations could make political contributions was based on the fact that each shareholder had a First Amendment Right that could be used individually or collectively, and not be restricted.

So what your proposing is that voting should be a restricted right... which is what it currently is by only allowing residents to vote.

Owning a second home in Gilford doesn’t make you a resident.
You don’t need to own property to be a resident; renters are residents.
I understood the ramp was open to Gilford property owners even if they were not residents. A boat slip is property.

DMS is not a marina with a valet service.

however there is labor time incurred to haul or launch a boat that has been serviced or stored etc, but is not for a reoccurring valet. totally different animals.

Dave's Motorboat is for sale. It was listed last week after being quietly shopped around for a while. Some of the property is a little "tired" but there is certainly value there. One of the advantages the property has is being close to the Glendale launch ramp.

If an investor buys it to use the 6.25 acres of land for something like condos it will leave about 300 boat owners scrambling for a place to service their boats.

https://rocherealty.com/mls-4957091-...-NH-03249.html

this is not good, I store there in the winter

Dave's For Sale
 

Considering the lot is in the Resort Commercial Zone any condos likely wouldn't be for year round residences. Of course getting enough water for that many residences in such a small area may be problematic. Considering the amount of water pulled by both the Meadows and Timber Hill Farm for irrigation, selling condos that may or may not have an adequate supply of water will be tough.

It wouldn't surprise me if one of the other boatyards/marinas may snap it up after the bulk of the boating season is over.