![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Calendar | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Laconia NH
Posts: 5,576
Thanks: 3,214
Thanked 1,103 Times in 794 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
The delay was sought the make both side 'feel good' about the law. Politically speaking. As the law is one of the biggest 'hot potato' NH have seen. After the two year test period, the transportation committee and the Dept of Safety will have a valid report to present to legislature to prove that we need or do not need the SL law. Right now there is no substantiated valid claim to either side! Sorry to burst the opponents bubble on this, but most of the representatives are sitting on the fence to see the clear picture. The reason why 162 was defeated was the 'not in my backyard' syndrome as it effected all bodies of water. You can see the seacoast representatives voted against it. The latest reincarnation is Winnipesaukee only. So the representatives voted just to get it out of the way. I.E. 'not in my backyard'. That's politics folks. Pork barrel at its best!
__________________
Someday may never be an actual day. |
|
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|