Marine Patrol Funding Woes
Glendale facility falling into the lake!
Quote:
|
Hb 411
HB 411 also contains a clause that funds canot be diverted to the general funds. I think that is what sinking the bill.
Because of this clause, I am all for this bill. It is the only way that our dollars will benefit the boaters and not the legislatures whims. |
Quote:
|
Mcdude, thanks for posting....
Here is the thing that I find most troubling here.... Was the current MP headquarters built just before the moved there??? or was it an already existing structure... Because if it was built for them originally, why is it failing!!!!!! Bottom, line NH is still out of control with its methods for funding state agencies and it government from an overall perspective. As BroadHopper points, out the fact that this bill takes away the ability of the legislature, to re-appropriate funds is actually a good part of the bill.... |
I believe it is still the same building the state bought back in the 60's. "The Goodhue Boatyard operated for many years until a spectacular fire in 1960 destroyed the building. John (Goodhue) rebuilt and operated for several more years but sold out to the State of NH for use as a base for the expanded Marine Patrol." Source: http://www.gilfordhistoricalsociety....es/7_24_08.pdf |
Why not sell the existing MP HQ for a handsome sum while retaining rights to dock MP boats and park there, and build a new HQ away from the lakefront where land is cheaper. Seems like a win for everyone.
|
Quote:
|
They don't want to lose the view.
|
Why do they need a 9 or 11 million dollar building??
|
Quote:
"189 to 153, with only 10 Republicans — and only one of 13 Republicans from Belknap County — voting with the majority." Can you tell me why more Republicans didn't vote for Huot's Bill that would help the NH MP at least maintain their existing revenue? . . . |
Quote:
Michael Connor, Director Bureau Of Public Works Design & Construction 7 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03302-0483 Tel.: (603) 271-3516 michael.connor@nh.gov |
Quote:
|
What is the building on 106?
Quote:
As I said maybe they should take a look at spending and come up with a way to work within their means. We may, all be surprised to find out just how much money they get and where it goes. Then again maybe not, just saying. |
Quote:
Political party alignment first and safety second. I'm not trying to make this thread into a political debate, I'm just commenting on what the article said. |
Quote:
However as we all know once there is an increase it is difficult to go back to budgets of old. Just look at how many tolls were put in with the promise they would be removed once the road construction was paid for. When the bill came out of legislative services without the provision to basically reinstate the Navigation Fund as truly "DEDICACTED" fund it lost almost all support from the Republicans including the cosponsor of the bill who signed on at our urging. He even spoke against the bill on the floor. If this provision had been included as intended it would have taken the house by a consent vote. Now it is in jeopardy of being killed which will be devastating to the Marine Patrol and Safety. Unfortunately we saw this coming last session and tried to rectify the situation, however now that it is time critical some legislators felt this was an easier way to keep the increase at their higher levels without having their power limited to a "dedicated" fund. Quite simply this is now a tax on boaters. No longer a fee. One can also argue that if the Navigation and Safety Fund had not been raided over the years to close the budget gap that the Marine Patrol would have already had enough money to build their new facility and perhaps they would not need to remove the sunset provision and our registrations would actually come back down. Currently there is discussion of adding back the initial clause as a floor amendment, however it has not yet been finalized. Best not to speculate and to talk to the people making the laws before jumping to conclusions. Unfortunately there is much more going on here than meets the eye. |
OCD, do YOU know why they need such and expensive building?
|
Quote:
Good luck with the "discussion of adding back the initial clause as a floor amendment, however it has not yet been finalized." I don't think it stands a chance of passing but it won't hurt to give it a try. |
Quote:
Of course this did not happen and even less of a chance now with the new legislative synergy in Concord. I agree this will be an uphill battle for the amendment however we need everyone to call their Senators and asked to support this effort. Complaining on a forum will get us no where. As boaters we need to stand up and tell them what is right. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.