SB27 Coming to Vote Expected to Pass

bilproject · 03-18-2011, 09:25 AM

SB27 an ammendment to the speed limit law is coming up for a vote and expected to pass. The amendment is an increase of the speed limit on the Broads from 45 to 55mph during the day time. Surprised it has not come up here yet.

Slickcraft · 03-18-2011, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bilproject

SB27 an ammendment to the speed limit law is coming up for a vote and expected to pass. The amendment is an increase of the speed limit on the Broads from 45 to 55mph during the day time. Surprised it has not come up here yet.

While I don't read the speed limit forum, it probably has come up there. Some time ago Don created a separate forum area for controversial issues.

AllAbourdon · 03-18-2011, 09:42 AM

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...802#post152802

codeman671 · 03-23-2011, 02:20 PM

I am surprised not to see the senate results posted yet. It was passed today, 13-11.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new...t_speed_limit/

Seaplane Pilot · 03-23-2011, 03:09 PM

Thank you to those level-headed Senators who voted in favor of this bill. Thank you for not being brainwashed by WINNFABS, especially by their President who claims that hundreds of island resident must cross the Broads in order to get to their island homes (Letter to the editor, March 22 issue of Laconia Daily Sun). That one really took the cake. She also stated that "Any boater-motorized or not-has to pass through the Broads on their way from one part of the lake to another or to enjoy the Broads waters." Hmmmmm.... If I go from Paugus Bay to Meredith, do I have to go through the Broads? If I go from Alton Bay to Wolfeboro, do I have to go through the Broads? In fact, I can go from Center Harbor to Alton Bay without going through the Broads. Her arguments just "don't hold water".

Dave R · 03-23-2011, 08:15 PM

I just love this: "Supporters of the current law said the "broads" is used as an intersection and should be treated no differently than the rest of the lake."

That "intersection" is more than FIFTEEN square miles. That's bigger than a lot of NH towns.

MAXUM · 03-23-2011, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave R

I just love this: "Supporters of the current law said the "broads" is used as an intersection and should be treated no differently than the rest of the lake."

That "intersection" is more than FIFTEEN square miles. That's bigger than a lot of NH towns.

For some drivers it appears FIFTEEN square miles is a little tight. Considering the source of the comment, that tells us a lot

Maybe the supporters of this need to re-do boater education!

fatlazyless · 03-24-2011, 02:56 PM

You understand that 16 senate votes would be needed to over-ride a governor's veto if it even get's passed by the 400 seat House and goes to the governor's desk, and only 13 out of 24 senators voted yes. Considering that two of the state senators from the three senate districts with Winnipesaukee towns voted no, Governor Lynch just may decide to get out his veto stamp which says "Don't even THINK about raising the Winnipesaukee speed limit....just FORGETABOUTIT....and be a SAFE BOATER!"

Three cheers for the eleven state senators who voted NO.....hut - hut - hut!

On June 28, 2010, Gov Lynch signed the law that made the 45-30mph speed limit a permanent law as opposed to a temporary two year trial law so what do you think the chances are that now, about one year later, he may think it best to veto an increase to 55mph?

If the 400 seat House of Reps catches any scuttlebutt that the Gov is thinking about a veto, would that be likely to influence their upcoming vote? Only time will tell how the bill fares in the House of Representatives. I have no clue!

Rusty · 05-04-2011, 05:22 AM

This article is in today's LDS

Lawmakers defer to Lakes Region sentiment as 55 on The Broads bill fails
committee test

By Michael Kitch
May 04, 2011 12:00 am
CONCORD — Defenders of speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee scored a victory yesterday when the House Transportation Committee, in a show of bipartisanship, voted 11 to 6 to not recommend a bill that would raise the limit on The Broads to 55 miles per hour.

The bill will go before the full House next week.

"It isn't over," said Sandy Helve of the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs), "but, this was a very good result." She said that the discussion in committee indicated that members were impressed by the strong and widespread support for speed limits among individuals and businesses in the Lakes Region.

Scott Verdonck, president of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), said that "we knew it was coming." In a prepared statement he said his group was "outraged" by the vote, charging that the committee "fell victim to fabricated stories . . . that the additional 10 miles an hour (from 45 MPH) would result in accidents and mayhem" despite statements by the New Hampshire Marine Patrol to the contrary.

Senate Bill 27, which carried the Senate by the narrowest of margins, appeared to have strong support in the Transportation Committee. The Lakes Region is not represented on the committee, whose chairman, Representative Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), has always voted against speed limits, and vice-chairman, Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) sponsored the bill.

But, Hikel alone spoke in support of the bill. The dozen Republicans on the committee split evenly while all five Democrats voted against the bill.

The split among Republicans on the committee mirrored a rift in the GOP leadership in the House between Speaker Bill O'Brien and Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt. After twice voting against speed limits and assuring Verdonck he would do so again, Bettencourt told members that he considered speed limits a local issue and would join representatives from the Lakes Region in upholding them.

"He took everyone by surprise," said Verdonck, who said his group will do all it can to ensure that Bettencourt's first term as majority leader is his last.

Meanwhile, as the committee convened, O'Brien swept into the room with five Republican representatives in tow intending to replace any absent committee members by his appointment. Three were missing; two on opposite sides of the issue and one whose position was in doubt. All three replacements voted with the minority in favor of the bill.

Hikel began by claiming that there is no evidence that speed poses problems on the lake and reminding the committee that the bill would permit "55 mph. not 85 mph.on the open water of The Broads.

No one else, either Republican or Democrat, spoke for the bill. Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy.

Representative Lisa Scontsas (R-Nashua) added that not one business owner supported the bill at the hearing. Several committee members stressed the overwhelming opposition to the bill expressed by the those who live and work in the Lakes Region.

When Hikel's motion of "ought to pass" failed 11 to 6, he offered an amendment to form a study committee to consider the issue, which was rejected by the same margin. With that the committee voted to report the bill to the House "inexpedient to legislate."

In New Hampshire, all bills are reported to the floor of the House or Senate for action, even if the committee that studied the matter voted not to recommend the legislation.

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts. The committee vote suggests that even lawmakers with a libertarian bent, disinclined to extend regulation, sense that the greater reward may lie with numbers rather than principle.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 06:37 AM

Sandy Helve is very astute, "this isn't over"

When a law is passed and does nothing it was intended to do the opposition will remain. When you change a law on lake that turns an everyday activity into technical lawbreakers, that's a problem. If anyone thinks a boat doing 55 MPH on Lake Winni is an issue, then look at the safety record over the last several decades. Emperical data will always trump F.E.A.R. (False Evidence Appearing Real)

There is a small faction around the lake (Hutchins, Helve, BI, APS, Rusty, Skip, and others) who must be very miserable if they have to spend this amount of time trying to restrict more and more activities on the lake. From reading their descriptions of the lake, it sounds like it's a miserable place to be with or without a SL.......

This is not a "victory" for anyone. I hope this fact is not lost in the discussion.

Rusty · 05-04-2011, 06:58 AM

Representative Brian Phodes was so right when he said this:

"Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy."

chipj29 · 05-04-2011, 07:03 AM

What seems to be lost by many speed limit opponents (including SBONH I think) is that winnflabs has one goal: to rid the lake of the evil GFBLs. They don’t care about safety, they don’t care about the actual speed limit. They just want to do whatever it takes to make those dam GFBLs to go away.
Any bill that adjusts or eliminates the speed limits as they are now are viewed as a threat. They think that if you allow even a 10MPH limit adjustment that there is a chance the big bad GFBLs will come back to the lake. They are not happy if there is even a single GFBL on the lake.

There is no doubt in my mind that any future legislation pertaining to speed limits will be a very difficult fight for the speed limit opponents.

Face it gang, stats don’t matter. There are more supporters than there are opponents, and as long as they continue to tell their stories of feeling safer, then the opponents don’t have a chance.

Like Rusty pointed out, supporters outnumbered opponents 7 to 1. Now change the word "supporters" to "voters" and do the math.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipj29

...There is no doubt in my mind that any future legislation pertaining to speed limits will be a very difficult fight for the speed limit opponents.

Face it gang, stats don’t matter. There are more supporters than there are opponents, and as long as they continue to tell their stories of feeling safer, then the opponents don’t have a chance....

I think its going to always be a battle because WinnFlabs gets free benefit of the doubt. To those who don't own boats the idea of speed on a lake is not something they understand. My S-I-L was a classic example when the SL discussion came up. After a ride on the boat her comment was how in the world did they justify 45 MPH and "that's not that fast at all".

I suspect a SL will likely always remain but not 45 MPH. It's just too slow for a lake this size.

Alas, this is politics so perception trumps reality. I personally don't see this as a dead issue, not even close.

As I said before, I think WinnFlabs made a huge tactical error in not supporting SB-27 as that would have been very hard to get people to change the limits afterwards. Now everything is fair game

Rusty · 05-04-2011, 08:38 AM

The author of the LDS article summed it up pretty much by the below statement:

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty

The author of the LDS article summed it up pretty much by the below statement:

Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts.

Rusty, you missed the word "relatively". Anyday WinnFabs wants to debate facts please contact me and we'll arrange it. My only request is it be recorded on video. I've yet to have anyone willing to take me up on the offer

I'll even agree to allow them to have note cards and I'll be allowed no prompts. I'll warn you that I'm no rookie and have no shortage of data to back me up.....

I did not spend my last political points on the SL as rafting is what I'm after. My BIL who is a litigating attorney (and lives in NH) also sees many faults in the rafting restrictions on the lake

Rusty · 05-04-2011, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Rusty, you missed the word "relatively". Anyday WinnFabs wants to debate facts please contact me and we'll arrange it. My only request is it be recorded on video. I've yet to have anyone willing to take me up on the offer

I'll even agree to allow them to have note cards and I'll be allowed no prompts. I'll warn you that I'm no rookie and have no shortage of data to back me up.....

I did not spend my last political points on the SL as rafting is what I'm after. My BIL who is a litigating attorney (and lives in NH) also sees many faults in the rafting restrictions on the lake

I'm sure you are the best of the best when it comes to debating.

As you said in another post about us forum members: "I have more years of education than many people on this board combined. Not arrogance, fact."

If we ever meet I will be sure to Genuflect.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty

I'm sure you are the best of the best when it comes to debating.

As you said in another post about us forum members: "I have more years of education than many people on this board combined. Not arrogance, fact."

If we ever meet I will be sure to Genuflect.

I'm just waiting for the invitation.

Bear Islander · 05-04-2011, 09:38 AM

Why on earth would WinnFABS want to debate this issue with LS when...

1. This issue is dead! The current speed limit is as good as chiseled in stone.

2. He has not shown WinnFABS even the common courtesy of using their right name.

3. His posts demonstrate he doesn't understand why about 90% of citizens support speed limits.

4. His last name is Phycho.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 10:22 AM

BI, SB-27 is dead. The SL issue remains.

I'll tell you why WinnFlabs won't debate:
1. Lack of any meaningful data
2. Deceit can not be translated during a debate
3. I do understand why many people support a SL. I also understand 90% of the state doesn't even own boats.
4. I find psycho to be an endearing term in respect to my lawn. I can hear my little green friends talking to me right now and they are telling me that it's true, a BEAR does sheot in the woods

Bear Islander · 05-04-2011, 10:40 AM

The citizens of New Hampshire do not all own boats. However they DO own Lake Winnipesaukee.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

However they DO own Lake Winnipesaukee.

You said it, not me

Edit: How are people able to travel to the Broads on Lake Winni without the use of a boat?

fatlazyless · 05-04-2011, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

You said it, not me

Edit: How are people able to travel to the Broads on Lake Winni without the use of a boat?

The most affordable boat for getting onto the Big Lake is most definately a second hand or used kayak. By searching through the New Hampshire classified ads, it is possible to find a nice, usable 14 to 16' long distance kayak for about $250 to 500. Beginner kayaks, which run about nine feet long can be found for as low as 100-dollars. By virtue of not needing a trailer, engine, gasoline or boater's insurance, it makes a kayak the least expensive way to get out onto the water.

Another major plus for kayaks is they are FUN to paddle and paddling a kayak provides a lot of exercise. Kayaks give you a feeling of being close to the water which is something you do not get in big, fast boats.

So, here's a question for Lawn Psycho. How does kayaking safety relate to the current battle between the SBoNH and WinnFabs with regard to increasing the speed limit from 45-mph up to 55-mph?

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

The most affordable boat for getting onto the Big Lake is most definately a kayak. By searching through the New Hampshire classified ads, it is possible to find a nice, usable 14 to 16' long distance kayak for about $250 to 500. By virtue of not needing a trailer, engine, gasoline or boater's insurance, it makes a kayak the least expensive way to get out onto the water.

Another major feature is that paddling a kayak provides a lot of exercise.

So, here's a question for Lawn Pscho. How does kayaking safety relate to the current battle between the SBoNH and WinnFabs with regard to increasing the speed limit from 45-mph up to 55-mph?

I have a kayak. I also know that many days having a kayak on the broads is a dumb idea when the wind wips up. For that same reason there's days I keep my 22 ft long, 8.5 ft wide bowrider off the water as well.

Kayaks and the SL are not related.

Having any craft out on the lake absent of some form of insurance is risky my opinion. If you have any assets of value then I recommend you talk to your insurance guy about an umbrella policy. I'm not one to throw money away for insurance but when you are on the water with some craft costing $100s of thousands of dollars if you cause an issue you could be up the river without a paddle (sorry, I couldn't resist)

fatlazyless · 05-04-2011, 02:19 PM

Yes, that's for sure, and it's always good to have a friendly insurance company on your side.

Attention KAYAK INSURANCE. Is there such a policy as kayak, canoe or small non-motorized sailboat insurance. Supposedly, one's homeowner's insurance provides coverage for these small, non-motorized boats but there's always some other and better way in the insurance coverage biz?

As far as kayaks and speed limits not being related, that doesn't seem too safety oriented considering that they both share the same waters and are as about as opposite as can be. One is small, slow, human powered, close to the water, and can be difficult to see, while the other is much bigger, higher and goes much faster, yet they both share the same waters. Sort of like bicycles and cars that share the same road.

lawn psycho · 05-04-2011, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusty

Representative Brian Phodes was so right when he said this:

"Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy."

Rusty, please provide factual data that supports that claim I bolded. We know there is no data that exists and we've discussed it ad nausem.

The 7:1 is based on who signed into a log at the meeting. Sorry but that's a terrible way to base voting.

Example: How many gay marriage proponents do you think showed up at the state house? WAAAY more than opposed it is. And how is that vote working out in states across the country? (Note: this is just an example and don't use this to attempt any extrapolation of my viewpoint on the aforementioned).

I woul PAY to debate this issue on the technical merits with WinnFabs.

03-18-2011, 09:25 AM	#1
bilproject Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Bear Island/Fort Myers, Fla Posts: 229 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 1 Thanked 59 Times in 41 Posts	SB27 Coming to Vote Expected to Pass SB27 an ammendment to the speed limit law is coming up for a vote and expected to pass. The amendment is an increase of the speed limit on the Broads from 45 to 55mph during the day time. Surprised it has not come up here yet.

03-23-2011, 03:09 PM	#5
Seaplane Pilot Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,177 Thanks: 662 Thanked 943 Times in 368 Posts	Thank you Thank you to those level-headed Senators who voted in favor of this bill. Thank you for not being brainwashed by WINNFABS, especially by their President who claims that hundreds of island resident must cross the Broads in order to get to their island homes (Letter to the editor, March 22 issue of Laconia Daily Sun). That one really took the cake. She also stated that "Any boater-motorized or not-has to pass through the Broads on their way from one part of the lake to another or to enjoy the Broads waters." Hmmmmm.... If I go from Paugus Bay to Meredith, do I have to go through the Broads? If I go from Alton Bay to Wolfeboro, do I have to go through the Broads? In fact, I can go from Center Harbor to Alton Bay without going through the Broads. Her arguments just "don't hold water".

03-24-2011, 02:56 PM	#8
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,528 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 296 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	You understand that 16 senate votes would be needed to over-ride a governor's veto if it even get's passed by the 400 seat House and goes to the governor's desk, and only 13 out of 24 senators voted yes. Considering that two of the state senators from the three senate districts with Winnipesaukee towns voted no, Governor Lynch just may decide to get out his veto stamp which says "Don't even THINK about raising the Winnipesaukee speed limit....just FORGETABOUTIT....and be a SAFE BOATER!" Three cheers for the eleven state senators who voted NO.....hut - hut - hut! On June 28, 2010, Gov Lynch signed the law that made the 45-30mph speed limit a permanent law as opposed to a temporary two year trial law so what do you think the chances are that now, about one year later, he may think it best to veto an increase to 55mph? If the 400 seat House of Reps catches any scuttlebutt that the Gov is thinking about a veto, would that be likely to influence their upcoming vote? Only time will tell how the bill fares in the House of Representatives. I have no clue! __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! Last edited by fatlazyless; 03-25-2011 at 01:28 PM.

05-04-2011, 07:03 AM	#12
chipj29 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bow Posts: 1,874 Thanks: 521 Thanked 308 Times in 162 Posts	What seems to be lost by many speed limit opponents (including SBONH I think) is that winnflabs has one goal: to rid the lake of the evil GFBLs. They don’t care about safety, they don’t care about the actual speed limit. They just want to do whatever it takes to make those dam GFBLs to go away. Any bill that adjusts or eliminates the speed limits as they are now are viewed as a threat. They think that if you allow even a 10MPH limit adjustment that there is a chance the big bad GFBLs will come back to the lake. They are not happy if there is even a single GFBL on the lake. There is no doubt in my mind that any future legislation pertaining to speed limits will be a very difficult fight for the speed limit opponents. Face it gang, stats don’t matter. There are more supporters than there are opponents, and as long as they continue to tell their stories of feeling safer, then the opponents don’t have a chance. Like Rusty pointed out, supporters outnumbered opponents 7 to 1. Now change the word "supporters" to "voters" and do the math. __________________ Getting ready for winter!

05-04-2011, 10:22 AM	#19
lawn psycho Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: On the move... Posts: 987 Thanks: 113 Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts	BI, SB-27 is dead. The SL issue remains. I'll tell you why WinnFlabs won't debate: 1. Lack of any meaningful data 2. Deceit can not be translated during a debate 3. I do understand why many people support a SL. I also understand 90% of the state doesn't even own boats. 4. I find psycho to be an endearing term in respect to my lawn. I can hear my little green friends talking to me right now and they are telling me that it's true, a BEAR does sheot in the woods Last edited by lawn psycho; 05-05-2011 at 05:08 AM. Reason: spelin erah I cud knot staynd

03-18-2011, 09:42 AM	#3
AllAbourdon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 61 Thanks: 22 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...802#post152802

03-23-2011, 02:20 PM	#4
codeman671 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 3,360 Thanks: 210 Thanked 764 Times in 448 Posts	I am surprised not to see the senate results posted yet. It was passed today, 13-11. http://www.boston.com/news/local/new...t_speed_limit/

03-23-2011, 08:15 PM	#6
Dave R Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 2,974 Thanks: 246 Thanked 736 Times in 438 Posts	I just love this: "Supporters of the current law said the "broads" is used as an intersection and should be treated no differently than the rest of the lake." That "intersection" is more than FIFTEEN square miles. That's bigger than a lot of NH towns.

05-04-2011, 05:22 AM	#9
Rusty Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 2,028 Thanks: 603 Thanked 687 Times in 425 Posts	This article is in today's LDS Lawmakers defer to Lakes Region sentiment as 55 on The Broads bill fails committee test By Michael Kitch May 04, 2011 12:00 am CONCORD — Defenders of speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee scored a victory yesterday when the House Transportation Committee, in a show of bipartisanship, voted 11 to 6 to not recommend a bill that would raise the limit on The Broads to 55 miles per hour. The bill will go before the full House next week. "It isn't over," said Sandy Helve of the Winnipesaukee Family Alliance for Boating Safety (WinnFABs), "but, this was a very good result." She said that the discussion in committee indicated that members were impressed by the strong and widespread support for speed limits among individuals and businesses in the Lakes Region. Scott Verdonck, president of Safe Boaters of New Hampshire (SBONH), said that "we knew it was coming." In a prepared statement he said his group was "outraged" by the vote, charging that the committee "fell victim to fabricated stories . . . that the additional 10 miles an hour (from 45 MPH) would result in accidents and mayhem" despite statements by the New Hampshire Marine Patrol to the contrary. Senate Bill 27, which carried the Senate by the narrowest of margins, appeared to have strong support in the Transportation Committee. The Lakes Region is not represented on the committee, whose chairman, Representative Sherman Packard (R-Londonderry), has always voted against speed limits, and vice-chairman, Representative John Hikel (R-Goffstown) sponsored the bill. But, Hikel alone spoke in support of the bill. The dozen Republicans on the committee split evenly while all five Democrats voted against the bill. The split among Republicans on the committee mirrored a rift in the GOP leadership in the House between Speaker Bill O'Brien and Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt. After twice voting against speed limits and assuring Verdonck he would do so again, Bettencourt told members that he considered speed limits a local issue and would join representatives from the Lakes Region in upholding them. "He took everyone by surprise," said Verdonck, who said his group will do all it can to ensure that Bettencourt's first term as majority leader is his last. Meanwhile, as the committee convened, O'Brien swept into the room with five Republican representatives in tow intending to replace any absent committee members by his appointment. Three were missing; two on opposite sides of the issue and one whose position was in doubt. All three replacements voted with the minority in favor of the bill. Hikel began by claiming that there is no evidence that speed poses problems on the lake and reminding the committee that the bill would permit "55 mph. not 85 mph.on the open water of The Broads. No one else, either Republican or Democrat, spoke for the bill. Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy. Representative Lisa Scontsas (R-Nashua) added that not one business owner supported the bill at the hearing. Several committee members stressed the overwhelming opposition to the bill expressed by the those who live and work in the Lakes Region. When Hikel's motion of "ought to pass" failed 11 to 6, he offered an amendment to form a study committee to consider the issue, which was rejected by the same margin. With that the committee voted to report the bill to the House "inexpedient to legislate." In New Hampshire, all bills are reported to the floor of the House or Senate for action, even if the committee that studied the matter voted not to recommend the legislation. Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts. The committee vote suggests that even lawmakers with a libertarian bent, disinclined to extend regulation, sense that the greater reward may lie with numbers rather than principle.

The Following User Says Thank You to Rusty For This Useful Post:
Skip (05-04-2011)

05-04-2011, 06:37 AM	#10
lawn psycho Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: On the move... Posts: 987 Thanks: 113 Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts	Sandy Helve is very astute, "this isn't over" When a law is passed and does nothing it was intended to do the opposition will remain. When you change a law on lake that turns an everyday activity into technical lawbreakers, that's a problem. If anyone thinks a boat doing 55 MPH on Lake Winni is an issue, then look at the safety record over the last several decades. Emperical data will always trump F.E.A.R. (False Evidence Appearing Real) There is a small faction around the lake (Hutchins, Helve, BI, APS, Rusty, Skip, and others) who must be very miserable if they have to spend this amount of time trying to restrict more and more activities on the lake. From reading their descriptions of the lake, it sounds like it's a miserable place to be with or without a SL....... This is not a "victory" for anyone. I hope this fact is not lost in the discussion.

05-04-2011, 06:58 AM	#11
Rusty Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 2,028 Thanks: 603 Thanked 687 Times in 425 Posts	Representative Brian Phodes was so right when he said this: "Representative Brian Rhodes (D-Nashua) reminded the committee during a four-hour hearing those speaking against raising the speed limit on The Broads outnumbered supporters of the bill by seven-to-one. Moreover, he said they included a mix of business owners, including a number of marina operators, who said that speed limits have benefited the Lakes Region economy."

05-04-2011, 08:38 AM	#14
Rusty Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 2,028 Thanks: 603 Thanked 687 Times in 425 Posts	The author of the LDS article summed it up pretty much by the below statement: Since 2006, when the first speed limit bill was introduced, the cause has drawn a large, broad and diverse constituency, especially but not exclusively in the Lakes Region while the opposition appears confined to a relatively small but articulate group of powerboating enthusiasts.

05-04-2011, 09:38 AM	#18
Bear Islander Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bear Island Posts: 1,757 Thanks: 31 Thanked 429 Times in 203 Posts	Why on earth would WinnFABS want to debate this issue with LS when... 1. This issue is dead! The current speed limit is as good as chiseled in stone. 2. He has not shown WinnFABS even the common courtesy of using their right name. 3. His posts demonstrate he doesn't understand why about 90% of citizens support speed limits. 4. His last name is Phycho.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
Rusty (05-04-2011), Skip (05-04-2011)

The Following User Says Thank You to lawn psycho For This Useful Post:
RTTOOL (05-04-2011)

05-04-2011, 10:40 AM	#20
Bear Islander Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bear Island Posts: 1,757 Thanks: 31 Thanked 429 Times in 203 Posts	The citizens of New Hampshire do not all own boats. However they DO own Lake Winnipesaukee.

The Following User Says Thank You to Bear Islander For This Useful Post:
Skip (05-04-2011)

05-04-2011, 02:19 PM	#24
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,528 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 296 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Yes, that's for sure, and it's always good to have a friendly insurance company on your side. Attention KAYAK INSURANCE. Is there such a policy as kayak, canoe or small non-motorized sailboat insurance. Supposedly, one's homeowner's insurance provides coverage for these small, non-motorized boats but there's always some other and better way in the insurance coverage biz? As far as kayaks and speed limits not being related, that doesn't seem too safety oriented considering that they both share the same waters and are as about as opposite as can be. One is small, slow, human powered, close to the water, and can be difficult to see, while the other is much bigger, higher and goes much faster, yet they both share the same waters. Sort of like bicycles and cars that share the same road. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!