Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fat Jack
I thought this thread was about the cost of implementing and enforcing a speed limit?
Why did you guys give up on that discussion and try to turn yet another thread into a "discrimination against cigarette boats" thread?
What happened to the concerns about buying all those signs to float around the lake?
What happened to the argument that we have to send every MP officer to an 8 hour training course in the busy summertime instead of sending just 1 officer to a 2 week instructor-certification course in the slow wintertime?
What happened to the argument that officers will have to spend hundreds of OT hours in court to enforce a half dozen tickets?
And why no mention of the CG's Recreational Boating Safety Program ( http://www.uscgboating.org/grants/state/rbs.htm) that we already take part in, which will provide upon application half of the state's costs for;
" Providing facilities, equipment, and supplies for boating safety education and law enforcement, including purchase, operation, maintenance, and repair" and " Training personnel in skills related to boating safety and to the enforcement of boating safety laws and regulations".
Let's get back on topic. |
Fat Jack...
I still haven't seen any proposal from you yet on how to pay for HB-162. The response from most of the supporters has been that HB-162 requires no financing.
Island Lover has stated "HB162 doesn't require ANY expenditures."
Bear Islander has stated "As pointed out, it doesn't have to cost one dime."
There will be a cost incurred. Especially where a speeding violation is tied to your driving record. There will be training required, there will be equipment costs, there will be court costs and there will be signage costs. We can debate all day as to what those costs will actually be, but without a doubt there will be a cost associated with HB-162. How do you intend to pay these costs? The only one who has had a possible solution is Evenstar who recomended we require registrations for canoes & kayaks.
Your claim that tourism will be increased is blatantly false. There are less hotel/motel rooms available to rent on Lake Winnipesaukee today than there were 2-3 years ago. The only new hotel built on the lake is Rusty's Church Landing. The rooms he added doesn't offset the rooms lost by almost all of the mom & pop motels selling out and being converted to condos. How will we cater to the demand of increased tourism on Lake Winnipesaukee? Build more lavish hotels? I am sure Rusty is salivating over that thought...
There were many at the hearings who complained about congestion on the lake now. What will they be saying when all of these tourists rent boats from Rusty & Merrill and Thurstons? Maybe all of the marinas like Shep Browns & Channel will start renting boats to offset the loss of revenue from the hi-performance boats that they are no longer selling. This will drive the cost of renting a boat down, thus increasing the number of rental boats on the lake. Are we sure thats such a good idea? Merrill & Rusty do as it adds more money to thier bottom line, even if thier profit margin is decreased.
If our MP only write 5-6 speeding tickets a year, as they do on your much touted Lake George, can I expect your silence then? I don't think for one minute that any of the vocal supporters of HB-162 will be silent if our MP only writes 5-6 speeding tickets a year.
Woodsy