HB-847 - The Fiscal Issue - Where do We get the $$?
 

Hola Guys & Gals!

I trust everyone is enjoying the snow? LOL!

Where is the money for HB-847 going to come from? There was no fiscal note attached. Inquiring minds want to know... especially given the current financial situation!

Yesterday, Gov. Lynch stated he will be looking for $50,000,000 in cuts from various state agencys and that he will veto any bill that requires spending $$$ from the general fund. I know the NHMP get most of thier funding $$$ from the Navigation fund, but where is the money for HB-847 going to come from? There is a signifigant cost associated with training and radar certifying the MP officers, purchasing and calibrating the equipment, deploying the MP resources (2 officers req'd to operate a radar patrol sortie) not to mention the court costs incurred when a person issued a speeding citation fights the citation in court. All of this costs money that as of now does not exist!

Is it really necessary to spend this money at all? The NHMP Recreational Boat Speed Survey report ( http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/s...rveyreport.pdf ) definitively showed that speed was NOT an issue on Lake Winnipesaukee. Out of 3852 boats clocked, only 36 were going faster than 45 MPH! Out of those 36, only 3 exceeded 60 MPH! Capt. Gallagher of the NHMP while testifying before the House Transportation Committee, when questioned about the radar units and thier use, repeatedly testified that meeting the burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) as required by the NH courts for a successful speeding prosecution would be very difficult.

So if HB-847 is not really necessary to begin with given the NHMP reports (Boater Safety Report and Speed Survey Report), difficult at best to enforce, and costs some serious $$$...

Tell me again why we need HB-847?

Woodsy

Maybe the state could add an extra tax to island property owners to cover HB-847???:rolleye1:

They will have to raise $$$ somewhere. If This was to pass, They should require that canoes, kayaks and other paddle boats get reg numbers. It failed last time, but we willl just have to keep trying. I think there will be enough people that will be fed up with their free ride.

Woodsy

The Marine Patrol doesn't need to do all those things. Many NH lakes already have speed limits and it has not required any special spending.

You seem to believe that if this law passes a speed limit task force must be trained and deployed. I disagree.

The speed limit will, for the most part, be self enforcing. Officers don't need radar to determine if a boat is going 80 mph. I don't really care if lots of tickets are passed out, or if they stand up in court.

Once again the reason we need HB847 is to send a message. The message is "there are limits".

Bear Islander...

So basically what your saying is that as long as there is a speed limit, you really don't care if it is enforceable or not?

kinda odd...


Woodsy

My Dad always taught me that if I didn't have anything nice to say, not to say anything at all. So this is me not saying anything regarding this post. :rolleye2:

We pay enough, thank you... Unless you would like to bill only the ones that support it! That works for me...:D

Am I reading this correctly? With as much time and effort as people have spent pushing for it, the added load it put on the legal system to research and hold hearings on it, and the work that the MP did to radar test and you could care less if it has any effect at all if it passes? That is the funniest thing that I have read all week.

Does the state need another useless law on the books? This ranks right up there with the following beauties all ready on the lawbooks:

"You may not tap your feet, nod your head, or in any way keep time to the music in a tavern, restaurant, or cafe."

"You cannot sell the clothes you are wearing to pay off a gambling debt."

"It is considered an offense to check into a hotel under an assumed name."

"It is illegal to pick seaweed up off of the beach."

"Any cattle that crosses state roads must be fitted with a device to gather its feces."

"You may not run machinery on Sundays."

"On Sundays citizens may not relieve themselves while looking up."

reported to div-mot-veh
 

First speeding violation-say goodbye to good driver automobile insurance discount.

Second speeding violation-say hello to high risk pool


Third violation-don't want to go there?

..............

I Don't know about you, but as someone who knows first hand what one New Hampshire +15mph speeding violation ends up costing, and how long it lasts before it disappears, just one violation is what it took to educate me.:coolsm:

FLL, That only is true if you can prove that said person was speeding, and make it stick in court, which it won't!

I also see a floor amendment coming, so that it won't go to your driving record.

...maybe yes, maybe no, but I think you've been reading the Union Leader too much. Come on, before reading that paper, it definately helps to take a double dose of Ex-lax.:coolsm:

I don't think enforcement will be much of a problem. Obviously some boats will go a little over the limit and get away with it.

Some boaters will go way over the limit, here and there, and get away with it. But do that to often and you will see a flashing blue light astern.

I doubt boaters will speed or not speed based on how well a ticket will hold up in court.

I imagine the MP might employ a speed trap here or there if they see a problem. One or two radar guns used, on occasion, by a couple of trained officers is not going to effect the budget.

Over time boaters that really want to go fast will not come to Winni.

I sure hope the busy folks from all over the sate that are considering this law get to read this one.

Make no mistake.This seems to be pretty much what the speed limit supporters goal has been.Eliminating boats that they don't like.

So, what do they call a Baja-Fountain-Formula-Donzi-Skater that's been equipped with dual 48" BigJon electric downriggers, and a 36amp bow-mounted trolling motor? Why, it's called a well equipped FISHING BOAT! Toss a box of granola into the boat, and it becomes a VERY well equipped FISHING BOAT!

Sorry guy, we don't want to evict your go-fasts, we just want to evict your NEED FOR SPEED. It's not about the boat, it's about the attitude.....dig!:coolsm:

Whats next.
Big boats?
Ugly boats?
loud boats?
Expensive boats?
Cheap boats?
Red boats?
Boats with engines?
Boats with people on them?
People in the water?
People near the water?
Houses on the shore?
People on the shore?
Roads within a mile of the shore?
I am sure their are people who object to all of these.
It's about the attitude.....Dig?

How can you possibly think enforcement of HB-847 will not affect or impact the MP budget substantially?

The teeth of HB-847 is the provision for a speeding violation in your boat to be reflected on your drivers license. In order for that to happen, the MP officers HAVE to be Radar Certified in accordance with NHSP standards. PERIOD! There really isn't any way around that. Radar Certification Training costs substantial $$$, as does the aquisition of the radar equipment and the calibration & maintenance of the equipment. Then there is the two man requirement for a Radar Patrol... so instead of having two boats on the water, the MP will have one. Not really the best use of available NHMP resources, and very expensive! Thats just out of the NHMP budget... then there are the court costs borne by the state in order to prosecute the speeding violations. That comes out of the general fund.

If the MP officers are not Radar Certified, there is NO CHANCE for a successful prosecution... this effectively nullifies HB-847. NHMP Capt. Gallagher testified to the House Transportation Committee that while radar did work, it was highly dependent upon water conditions. He also testified that due to the limitations of the device, meeting the burden of proof for a successful prosecution in court would be difficult at best! Of course people are going to continue to speed if they know the speeding tickets will be tossed out in court! What do you think would happen on the highways if people found out the NHSP were not Radar Certified, and the ticket the officer wrote wasn't worth the paper it was printed on?? You can bet the top speed on 93 would be alot higher than it is now. In fact there is a proposal in Concord to raise the speed limit on the state's highways to 70MPH!

If you think the guys with the big speedboats are going to leave.. you are sadly mistaken... most are seriously vested on Lake Winnipesaukee. They will just trade thier speedboats in for big cruisers... so instead of 38' speedboats you will be dealing with 38' long wide ass beam cruisers! I am sure your gonna love those wakes! You think your dock takes a beating now... just think of how bad it will be when its the SeaRay regatta going by Bear Island everyday!!

No doubt they will be WinnCRABS next target!

Woodsy

I will say after spending a lot of time at the boat show this weekend and speaking with a few local dealers that performance boat sales have plummeted however so haven't all sales. This could be attributed to the proposed bill or just the lousy economy in general. The boat show had a terrible turnout, on Saturday afternoon it was quite dead and during the week they were practically turning the open aisles into bowling lanes.

I hope that they are happy when dealers have to re-evaluate their business and lay off people in order to survive, or raise their rates to keep the doors open and the gas pumping. Nobody can tell what the actual reason is, but be careful what you wish for!

I hope that all the people on this forum that are against HB 847 are not just typing that here. CALL your reps!!!!! Don't email. It's far too easy for them to ignore. Call Call Call. Winnfabs will. Will you?????? I have spent 3yrs fighting this, and quite frankly I am tired of people who talk about how it won't happen, and assume others have it under control... I will tell you right now without all your calls, this will pass the house. Hopefully the Senate still has the wisdom they did last session.

Woodsy

If HB847 passes will you be contacting the MP insisting they train more officers, buy more radar guns and set up speed traps all over the lake? I didn't think so!

Many other lakes have enacted speed limits without the sky falling. Lake George officials say that enforcement has not been a big problem since they enacted their speed limit.

Most people are law abiding.

...over in Lakeport
 

If you live in the Lakes Region and want an informed insider's opinion on what's up with HB 847, then go take a drive to Lakeport in Laconia. At the newly enlarged HK Motorsports, there's Republican minority leader, State Rep Mike Whalley of Alton, and at nearby Irwin Marine, there's John Irwin Jr., president of the New Hampshire Marine Trades Assoc. They're a couple of terrific guys;, hardworking, dedicated, community leaders who would no doubt be happy to share their opinions with you about HB 847.

What information do you think they would have to tell you tomorrow, on Tuesday, Feb 22?

Bear Island wrote in part:
Well well well, for the first time we agree on something that is actually backed up by fact! Yes indeed, most people are law abiding and I would add reasonable. In fact the Marine Patrol research his past summer bears out that fact. I draw your attention to Page 5 of the report that shows graphs of the results of their research.

The numbers show that MORE THAN 99% of the boaters on Lake Winnipesaukee did not exceed 45 miles an hour even though there is currently NO SPEED LIMIT!

There are laws on the books right now that would allow the Marine Patrol to arrest the operator of a boat that they determine was operating in a dangerous manner.

HB 847 is an unfunded mandate in search of a problem! It is not only a waste of time, but a criminal waste of limited resources.

You (the anti-powerboat crowd) will be the first to scream bloody murder if, while the Marine Patrol is tied up with stationary radar duty, they are needed somewhere else on the lake but are delayed in their response and someone is seriously injured or dies because of it.

Bear Islander...

Why do you use Lake George as an example? You don't boat there! Why not use NH's own Squam Lake? Oh... Thats right although Squam has a 40MPH daytime speed limit and a 20 MPH nighttime limit, there has NEVER been a ticket written! Because the speed limit on Squam is a paper tiger, as is the speed limit on Lake George! I boat on Lake George, and its a gorgeous lake, but is nothing like Lake Winnipesaukee! I have PERSONALLY witnessed a 165MPH runby on Lake George... and guess what? The LGMP watched it too.. no ticket! On Lake George they don't have a 150' Safe Passage rule, so I can run 45 MPH 10' away and its perfectly legal! Most of the tickets the LGMP write are to PWC operators operating too close to shore (they have a 500' on-plane rule for PWC's close to shore). They also write ALOT of tickets for noise!

While I do agree with you that the majority of people are law abiding, if HB-847 passes, it needs to have teeth. So to answer your question, YES, I will want the MP to train & certify officers, set up speed traps, write tickets and attempt to have them upheld in court... and fail. Then perhaps the cost/benefit analysis will be apparent to even the most dimwitted supporters of HB-847.

I have always been of the opinion, nothing calms the waters more than the sight of an MP boat. Better funding for the MP, getting more officers on the water would make the lake far safer for everyone than HB-847... cost less and not eliminate a personal freedom enjoyed by myself and others!

Lake Winnipesaukee has a long and storied love affair with the speedboat... and you would take that away for purely selfish reasons! Unfortunately, your crusade really isn't about safety, thats easily apparent just by reading the NHMP annual safety report. HB-847 isn't really about speed either, as speed is a non-issue according to the NHMP study. Your crusade is all about one thing, and one thing only! Your dislike of speedboats and the perceived image of their operators!

Woodsy

Hey there Woodsy, it's 'i before e, except after c', therefore perceived is spelled perceived, and not percieved. Just thought I'd throw this in as a friendly reminder so's my perceptions would not be miss percieved.....oops....perceived. thanks :D

For the record, Squam has a 40mph day, 20mph night limit instead of the 45mph you mentioned.

I don't understand why you think HB847 needs TEETH. It doesn't. And once the bill passes you will not want any.

If you want to use Squam as an example, fine.

It has a speed limt....

It has no enforecement problems...

Case closed. Thank you for reminding me of that excellent example.

Bear Islander...

Case closed??

Great way to debate... its like having a debate with a 5 year old spoiled child! All the logic, reason and data in the world will not change your mind. A mind is like a parachute, it only works when its open!

There is no speed issue on Lake Winnipesaukee! The MP report proved that! But yet your hatred for speedboats continues....

You should be very very careful what you wish for... you just might get it! Lets assume you get your wish and HB-847 passes... then some of these big guys go buy big cruisers. They have the $$$ and they aren't going to leave the lake. They are heavily vested in the area. I assume you'll be complaining about the big cruisers next? The shoreline erosion, dock damage, boat damage, wakes etc... I have seen the beating your boat & shoreline take on the day of the SeaRay Regatta and I used to feel bad for you. Now I am thinking you reap what you sow. Still others don't trade in thier boats, and continue to zoom around, safe in the knowledge that HB-847 is a paper tiger. Then no doubt you will be complaining about about how HB-847 isn't enforced enough.... I will be here to remind you every chance that I told you so!

Squam doesn't have an enforcement problem because the speed limit on Squam HAS NEVER BEEN ENFORCED!!! Squam is also a much smaller lake, controlled by the wealthy property owners... Go read up on the battle to get public access to Squam and how the Squam Lake Assoc would buy the property to prevent a public boat launch! That is until the state threatened to take some land by eminent domain....

Woodsy

Ruminating the Eliminators...
 

We saw recently that people 150 feet on shore isn't far enough to avoid the prospect of being "eliminated".

While some ocean-racers bear the model-name "Eliminator", there are no kayaks doing any "eliminating". :rolleye2:

BTW: Maine is considering a 500HP limit law for Long Lake. Now that's "eliminating". :(

Lake Winnipesaukee needs calming? :eek:

That would be a good thing. (See below).

Because the divisiveness—that everyone doesn't want—will finally end? :confused:

Squam has no enforcement problem and no significant speeding problem. At least that is what the Squam Lakes Accociation has reported.

You are incorrect when you say I will be complaining about the big cruisers next. I have always been complaining about them.

Now that was funny.:laugh:

And I'll have to say, your sincerity has impressed me, even though I think you're wrong..:)

FLL's version of leap year... :D

Jan 21 to Feb 22 in a day... :eek: :laugh:

Hey, isn't that Feb 22 like George Washington's birthday! So, I just sent old GW an email, and he answered back and says that the answer to all of Winnipesaukee's problems is 'the 14' Alumacraft rowboat equipped with an Evinrude 15hp' and that is what President George Washington says in his email.....everyone except for himself must use that Alumacraft Evinrude combo.....President Washington wants a 47' Fountain w/ three 600hp MerCruisers......geeez....I don't know.....and wasn't:D he a Democrat?

Read all about it in today's www.citizen.com!

99% of boats
 

[QUOTE=Airwaves;61746]Bear Island wrote in part:


The numbers show that MORE THAN 99% of the boaters on Lake Winnipesaukee did not exceed 45 miles an hour even though there is currently NO SPEED LIMIT!
************************************************** *****************************
Guess what, at our lakefront cottage we have a total of 3 boats, and over the years their has been numerous others, but just for now lets say we have three boats, None of them will do over 45 miles an hour.

I really wonder how many boats on the lake will actually do 45 miles per hour. That and then how many of them are making them go 45 miles per hour? and for how long? perhaps between gas pumps!

I would hazzard a guess that perhaps 75% of the boats on Winni9pesaukee will not do 45 miles per hour going down hill!:eek:

Actually thinking back to my childhood , I beleive he was a Whig, not a Democrat;)

Jefferson was a founder of what today is the Democratic Party. Washington came before that and was not a member of a political party. Clay started the Whigs later. Of course Jefferson would never recognize the current party that evolved from his party. From wikipedia "The party insisted on a strict construction of the Constitution... The party promoted states' rights ...the party opposed such Federalist policies as high tariffs...

John A Birdsall wrote:
The over 99% of boaters was taken from the MP report of which I provided a link to.

The actual percentage was 99.1% and it was in response to a post in which I agreed with Bear Islander. His statement was that most people are law abiding and I added the word "reasonable" given that 99% of the boats were clocked at under 45MPH thus proving no additional law is required.

So I would venture to say if you are representative of a lakefront owner with boats and none of your boats will do over 45 miles an hour then it makes the case even further that a speed limit is not needed.

The Cost of Living Free...
 

If the "Live Free or Die" state makes I-93 the fastest Interstate in New England, the resources saved by turning a blind eye to excessive highway speeds would be moved to Winnipesaukee, where excessive speeds have noisily grown into a problem.

If you're familiar at all with budget strategics, a policing entity that can show a marked increase in telephoned complaints from residents will receive more funding.

With speed limits on Winnipesaukee, ample calls will arrive at Gilford for enforcement—just what Director Barrett never wanted.

However, funds for the Marine Patrol will appear—via the complaints.

Huh?
 

APS wrote:
Did you even read the results of the MP report? Where did you see the MP even suggesting "excessive speeds have noisily grown into a problem" on Winnipesaukee?
If I recall correctly, Governor Lynch has told his department heads he wants $50,000,000 in cuts. So since the MP is funded via boat registrations and the governor is looking to cut the general fund...NH will get an income and sales tax before any money is going to be going to the MP from the general fund.