Local Control Under Attack

Our far right legislators love to talk about how much they hate big government. Big government imposes its will on the people, Big Government takes away the voice of towns, cities, and states… yesiree Bob, they hate Big Gummint…until they love it.

By the time you read this, there will have been a hearing on HB 1749, a bill that would remove the right of NH cities or towns to establish their own gun ordinances. Your town doesn’t want target shooting on town land? Your city doesn’t want guns on town property? Tough luck. The libertea gundamentalists are going to eliminate local control, and give that control to the state. That’s right - the same state they complain about all the time.

According to this bill, “the general court will have exclusive authority and jurisdiction by statute over the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing, permitting, taxation, or other matters pertaining to firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, and knives in this state.”

Take that, taxpayers of Anytown, NH. Your town doesn’t get to make decisions about guns, ammo, or knives, because the legislature controls your town’s decisions. You still get to pay taxes, but if you don’t want Bubba and his drunken cousin shooting targets in the park, that’s tough luck.  In fact, they’ll probably be able to shoot at the school playground too, because the bill opposes banning guns at schools, and schools are public property. Nothing goes together like small children and firearms.

It’s a bold power grab. Lead sponsor JR Hoell has never respected local control, and the bill reflects his disdain. Line I makes a point of saying that NH is not a home rule state. That NH has a long-standing (nigh on to sacred) tradition of local control is of no interest to the parade of far right activists that have signed on to this. Free State Project mover Ed Comeau of Brookfield is the only sponsor from the top half of the state, an area where folks are pretty serious about local control. There are no sponsors from Grafton or Coos County. There’s a hearing on Wednesday, and the executive session will follow the hearing. The vote will probably be scheduled for the following week. They don’t want voters to know about this until it’s a fait accompli. 

The other sponsors (from the bottom half of the state) include Representatives Al Baldasaro, John Burt, self-styled Constitutional expert Dan Itse, and James Spillane. Representative Michael Sylvia of Belmont is the other Free Stater sponsoring the bill. The founding document of the Free State Project calls for people to move to NH, take over and dismantle the state government, and then threaten secession. I trust I’m not the only one to see the humor in the would-be dismantlers of the state government, attempting to take local power away from municipalities and hand it to the state government.

They’re counting on the fact that voters aren’t paying attention, and if they hear about it at all, will interpret it as “nobody gonna tell me what I can do with my gun” and leave it at that.

The silence around this bill should concern all of us. There was endless publicity about “Constitutional Carry,” the name the out-of-state special interests came up with for eliminating the permitting process for concealed carry firearms. All the gun groups churned out continuous propaganda emails. The governor made it his very first legislative priority. To get a concealed carry license, a gun owner had to apply to the police chief in his/her town. The “Constitutional Carry” bill eliminated that step. It was the first step in eliminating local control. This latest move to disempower municipalities should come as no surprise.

It should come with rejection. This is the second attack on local control. If these radicals succeed, they’ll be further emboldened. What will be next? What will be the next erosion of local control engineered by the radical ideologues of today’s GOP? What do towns control that these folks hate? Hint: schools. I predict that will be next on their agenda.

There have been amendments proposed to the NH Constitution at different times to make NH a “home rule” state. Every time, the most vehement opposition comes from the liberty crowd. They hate big gummint, until they become the big government - and then they’ll do anything to protect and expand their power.  

For years we’ve heard that it’s the evil liberals who want big government to control every aspect of our lives. It turns out that it’s the NHGOP that wants their idea of big government to run our towns from Concord. It’s a brilliant strategy. The average Republican voter would expect this from liberals, but never from his own party.

Dear Republicans: your demise is being engineered from within. 

This was published as an op-ed in the January 12, 2018 edition of the Conway Daily Sun newspaper 

When Freedumb Fighters Become Tyrants

HOUSE BILL 1749-FN

AN ACT relative to the state's authority to prohibit or regulate firearms and relative to the selectmen's authority to manage town property.

SPONSORS: Rep. Hoell, Merr. 23; Rep. Comeau, Carr. 5; Rep. Itse, Rock. 10; Rep. Sylvia, Belk. 6; Rep. Burt, Hills. 39; Rep. Spillane, Rock. 2; Rep. Notter, Hills. 21; Rep. Baldasaro, Rock. 5; Rep. McConnell, Ches. 12; Rep. Wallace, Rock. 33

COMMITTEE: Municipal and County Government

-----------------------------------------------------------------

ANALYSIS

This bill revises the law on the state's authority to prohibit or regulate firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, and knives.  The bill also renders the selectmen's authority to manage town property subject to the provision of RSA 159:26.

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Eighteen

AN ACT relative to the state's authority to prohibit or regulate firearms and relative to the selectmen's authority to manage town property.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1  Legislative Findings and Purpose.  The general court finds that:

I.  New Hampshire is not a home rule state.

II.  Municipal ordinances and regulations regarding firearm regulation may differ from municipality to municipality which may place a citizen in danger of inadvertently violating the law.

III.  A growing number of towns and local boards are violating RSA 159:26.

IV.  The issue is a growing problem as in the last 6 months, the following events have transpired, all of which violate RSA 159:26:

(a) The board of selectmen of the town of Milford has banned target shooting on town land.

(b) The city of Lebanon school board is attempting to ban firearms in or on school property and at school events that take place on non-school property.

(c)  The Lebanon police department has pledged to enforce the illegal gun ban enacted by the Lebanon school board.

V.  It is in the best interest of the citizens of the state of New Hampshire for the resources of local units of government to be used to enforce current law and not to waste time enforcing decisions that are in clear violation of statutes.

VI.  Repealing and reenacting RSA 159:26 to clarify the intent and further, to include penalties, will prevent these violations of state law.

2  Firearms, Ammunition, and Knives; Authority of the State.  RSA 159:26 is repealed and reenacted to read as follows:

159:26  Firearms, Ammunition, and Knives; Authority of the State. 

I.  The general court shall have exclusive authority and jurisdiction by statute over the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing or permitting, taxation, or other matters pertaining to firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, and knives in the state.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, all delegations of legislative authority shall be by statute and shall explicitly state the extent and limits of the jurisdiction or authority delegated.  Except as otherwise specifically provided in statute, no ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy of an agency, political subdivision, committee, or other governmental unit of the state, or agent thereof may prohibit or regulate in any way the sale, purchase, ownership, use, possession, transportation, licensing or permitting, taxation, or other matter pertaining to firearms, firearms components, ammunition, firearms supplies, or knives in the state.  

HB 1749

Local control has always been sacred in NH. Past tense. Some municipalities are enacting gun ordinances for THEIR towns that the freedumb and libertea crowd disapproves of. This bill would remove local control and hand it to the legislature. 

These people (especially Free Staters Ed Comeau and Michael Sylvia) all bray about gummint tyranny - but vote them into government and they become the tyrants. 

JR Hoell - Who Needs Local Control?

GOP Favors Local Control Except When They Don't         h/t Tuck

Restoring Local Control

This was published in the Conway Daily Sun on February 4, 2005. Given that "Silent" Joe Kenney is now the GOP nominee for Ray Burton's Executive Council seat, it seemed a good time to remind folks of Joe Kenney's less than stellar career in the NH Senate. 


Two years ago, the citizens of Tamworth learned of Club Motorsports, Inc. (CMI), and learned of their intent to build a racetrack on Mount Whittier in Tamworth. Tamworth was chosen by the developers, because it remains one of the few towns in New Hampshire that has no zoning laws- therefore, a perfect spot to put the kind of businesses or attractions that most towns have intentionally planned against.

In the spring of 2003, a group called Citizens For the Ossipees formed in reaction to the proposed racetrack. CFTO filed two petitions, one for Emergency Temporary Zoning (ETZ) and the other for a Race Track Ordinance (RTO). The Tamworth Board of Selectmen formed a committee to develop the RTO. The committee included representatives from CMI, members of CFTO, and the selectmen. They met throughout the summer of 2003, and had two public hearings about the RTO. CMI was at all of those meetings, providing input at every step. At one point, they threatened a lawsuit unless the noise restrictions were eased-and so changes were made. The RTO was written with public input and with compromise from all sides. CMI was quoted four times in the press saying that they could live with the RTO. The RTO was enacted on Oct. 1, 2003, by the Tamworth selectmen.

On Oct. 4, 2003, the town voted against Emergency Temporary Zoning, just days after the RTO was put in place. Anti-zoning signs sprang up all over Tamworth like mushrooms after a spring rain. Later, the residents of Tamworth learned that CMI had funded the anti-ETZ campaign. Zoning has long been a contentious issue in Tamworth, and because the RTO had been adopted only days before, the citizens believed the RTO was all the protection they needed, in order to have a say in the regulation of the racetrack. CMI was sitting pretty at this point. They'd help to write the RTO, said they could live with it, and they'd ensured that no zoning, temporary or otherwise, would be coming along to mess up their plan.

That wasn't enough. At this time last year, SB458 was gliding silently through the N.H. Legislature. SB458 turns a racetrack into a "private driving instruction and exhibition facility," which, due to lack of zoning, is exempt from regulation by the town. SB458 did not redefine the term racetrack-it vaguely and magically transforms nearly any two-mile loop of pavement into a private driving instruction and exhibition facility. Any town that does not specifically prevent a private driving instruction and exhibition facility in their zoning ordinances could find one happening to them. SB458 slid silently through the Transportation Committee, and silent Sen. Joe Kenney chaired the hearings and never uttered so much as a peep to his Tamworth constituents about the bill. SB458 went on the consent calendar and passed unanimously. It was signed into law by former Governor Benson on March 5, 2004. On March 10, the voters of Tamworth overwhelmingly voted in the RTO-with 84 percent of the vote. They didn't know that some members of the state Legislature had sold them down the river. They wouldn't learn about it until the day before the Legislature ended the 2004 session.

Most of the sponsors of SB458 were from the southern part of the state-save for Sen. John Gallus. In an unusually scathing editorial last year, George Epstein suggested keeping an eye on the campaign contributions of the sponsors, Gallus in particular. George's instincts were excellent. Every one of the legislators who sponsored CMI's special interest legislation received a campaign contribution from them. Senator Gallus (who owns a Corvette, by the way) received $250 from CMI.

Silent Joe Kenney did not get a contribution, but he has failed to express outrage at the legislation, and failed to take a stand against it-and is no longer compelled to, since he was re-elected. Reps. Harry Merrow and David Babson began the repeal process as soon as they learned of SB458. They were outraged that a developer could draft, lobby, and pass special interest legislation that trounces local control.

This is an affront to the way we do government in this state. Local control is revered and protected in New Hampshire. That it could be so blatantly bypassed should horrify everyone, regardless of their feelings about the racetrack project. This goes beyond Tamworth. This could happen in any town in the state. Reps. David Babson and Harry Merrow filed HB90, a bill that repeals SB458 and returns local control to the town of Tamworth. Supporting HB90 sends a clear message to our state Legislature-that we the people are paying attention and we won't tolerate special interests writing their own laws. Supporting HB90 sends the message that we value local control, and they have no right to sell it off to developers or big business.

There will be two hearings on HB90, in two locations, which is a rare and wonderful gift from the Legislature. The first hearing will be on Feb. 17, at the K.A. Brett School in Tamworth, from 5 to 7 p.m. The second hearing will be on Feb. 22, at the Legislative Office Building in Concord, beginning at 10 a.m. Testimony will be restricted to the topic of repealing SB458 and restoring local control to the towns, where it belongs. This is an issue of crucial importance. No matter how folks feel about the racetrack, we should all be united in maintaining the tradition of local control, and not allowing developers to ride roughshod over the voters in any municipality.

"It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error." -Robert H. Jackson 

Who Needs Local Control?

Remember local control? We NH folk used to be in favor of it. A couple of excitable state representatives NOT from Concord decided that local control was for ....NOT them the other night at a Concord City Hall meeting.  This picture shows Rep. George Lambert (short guy in far right (!) corner with red tie) and next to him, Rep. JR Hoell, the taller one with the blue blazer, peering over the shoulders of the Concord City Councilors. 

Lambert is from Litchfield. Hoell is from Dunbarton. Neither of them represent the City of Concord. 

This was an open meeting, and the Council was gracious enough to hear a great deal of testimony from people who aren't from Concord. Other state reps said their piece and went back to their seats. Not these two. They hovered, desperate to hijack the hearing. 

Hoell was updating his Facebook page while hovering. An excerpt:

Local control be damned, Concord! State Rep. JR Hoell (from Dunbarton) thinks you have issues, and you need to replace your City Council! Who needs local control when you've got  Hoell?