Government use to provide none of this.
It was the desire of the majority of the registered voters that created all of it.
What we deem essential today... was not essential in the past.

That changes with voter attitudes.
As we moved from agrarian, we access to the railroads - generally subsidized by the federal government... and some state... with roads that handles teams of oxen and wagons; to the industrial... think modern industrial parks with all the services; to the ''tourist'' all about recreation...

Recreation became an ''essential'' service.

Some voter attitudes. It's the same as with kids, some parents want schools to totally take care of their kids, not just educate them. And look where that has gotten us.

The population of Brookline is 60,000, and they have no lake. This makes it quite reasonable to have a public swimming pool

FLL one of your craziest posts. Look if 800 people show up 480 need to vote yes. Make sure anyone who is a no shows up.

It only takes 60% of the population to not see frugality as reasoned.
I just don't think you will see Moultonborough devolve to its agrarian roots.

People love large homes and gas-powered toys.

The school education issue, according to the ConVal testimony, seems to be about State mandates.
Something that frugal legislators could change at any time... but that doesn't seem in the offering.
ConVal is a much bigger issue to Moultonborough and Alton on Winnepesaukee... Hebron and Bridgewater on Newfound; which is what stunned me seeing the movement of money toward Winnisquam - surrounding towns/Laconia not being exactly known for low tax rates. Belmont doesn't have an indoor pool... though we have pretty much everything else... and I suspect unless the movement toward homesteading becomes the major position of attitude in Belmont; we would in the not too distant future hear of a proposal.

I was talking more about the woke issues in schools but since you mentioned state education, I always felt so sorry for poor little Freedom who was a donor town, giving money to Manchester and one of the things Manchester did with the donor town money was build a new athletic field. Freedom doesn't even have it's own school.

Woke actually references the Greatest Generation coming into adulthood.
It references Admiral Yamamoto's ''Awaken'' quote.

We use it whenever a new dominate generation will be entering adulthood and changes the political-economic-social fabric of society.

It was also used by proxy by Frank Herbert in his Dune novels to reference the awakening of the Boomer generation.

All State taxes have ''donor'' political subdivisions.
Residents of Freedom receive distributions from Meals & Room taxes collected in Manchester - more than likely.

Certain political subdivisions (towns/cities/etc) produce more of the M&R taxes, and other business taxes, in their area. But those taxes are generally redistributed using a formula that does not return the taxation to where it originated. The SPT is only different because of decision in 2011. After SPT got reinstituted - historically it had been our main State tax - the concept of ''donor'' was invoked.

I tried to change M&R to return to zip code of origin... but once the legislators had someone smarter than them realize that I was a lot smarter; they caught on that Belknap County and Rockingham would do very well compared to the current formula... while Coos would take a drubbing.
Recreation taxation not being very well understood at that time.

Ahem!
 

The topic has to do with Moultonborough’s town meeting and the HUB, and you’re heading off the tracks now….��

Posted on the Town of Moultonborough Website:

This is crazy. Town Hall is .8 miles, Lion’s Club is 1.5 miles and Public Safety is .8 miles from the location of the Town Meeting. Shuttle Buses -- how many and what are the specific schedules??? If they try to let people claim to be handicapped who do not have a state issued handicap plate or placard there is going to be trouble. This has the potential to be more of a disaster than the comedy on May 11th. Yet another reason to vote YES on SB 2.

Not really.
Should the ConVal lawsuit be found in the favor the 32 town/cities suing the State, the SPT would most likely be need to be expanded to deal with the hundreds of millions more needed to be raised. And the remittance of the excess funds back to the town, last done in 2011(?), would no longer be holding down the town tax rate.

The HUB expenditure would not be able to be reconsidered after the finding and facts of those trials, which could take a few years.
Voters aware of the situation may be taking that into consideration... along with items like the possible need to move the FD from mostly volunteer to full time employees.

For now, please let us discuss Moultonborough’s town meeting and the HUB, and take on other governmental topics later. The proponents of the HUB have no interest in anything negatively impacting their extravagant plans.

I'm sure they don't.
They will keep getting the 25 signatures required to vote again and again until passage.
Any discussion here will not change that.

?
 

I'm sorry - I just don't understand the point of some people's posts in this thread.

I hear you….have you ever had someone show up and not realize they weren’t invited to the party?

Post #415 sounds awfully snarky. My apologies….my sweet and docile temperament took a leave of absence for a while. Please blame it on the Proponents of the HUB!
Sue

Just to be clear on the two or three pickleball courts in the multi-purpose gym, you will be very pleased to know it will be large enough for THREE indoor pickleball courts!

People that are not native to NH or went through school here generally don't understand our system of governance... especially at a local level.

Since it only takes 25 registered voters to petition the article. It can appear each and every time town meeting is held.

Should the article fail (bonds need 60% of the votes cast to pass), later in the meeting, the article can be brought back by reconsideration.

Because of this many times a voter will motion to restrict reconsideration... achieve a second... and sometimes win the vote (only 50% is necessary for that). But should enough voters leave, a proponent can motion to reconsider... enough votes and it goes to an adjourned session scheduled at least seven days later.

Should that happen, they will go over it again trying to gain the necessary majority of votes.

They can also go the route of capitalizing a special fund.
That would go through pretty much the same process but have a lower threshold for advancement.

So there really is no end to the saga. It is just part of living in NH. Those of us born and raised here have just gotten more used to it.

Not a bit snarky. If you don't want everybody to see everything, you hang it between sheets on the clothesline. In this case, perhaps this forum is the wrong place to post Moultonborough's unmentionable's and the voters in Moultonborough should start a closed group on FB?

What could possibly go wrong????
 

We noticed that the powers in charge of the rescheduled town meeting on June 1
want the parking areas near the main entrance to the academy to be for people with physical limitations, which is a fine plan IF ENTITLED PEOPLE don’t abuse the privilege….and they will abuse it unless the area is patrolled and the parking restrictions enforced. I am skeptical about the plan….the honor system is not for everyone, if you get my drift. Anyhow, hopefully the meeting will actually take place, the ballots counted honestly, and the HUB goes down to defeat, with SB2 in the WIN column. 🤞

This confuses me. If they are entitled, what is the abuse? I can't imagine that, in a small town, people would abuse handicap parking privileges without being publicly shamed in front of their neighbors. To me, this is New Hampshire. Granite Staters just don't do that.

I think she means people that are not handicapped, but feel entitled enough to take the spaces regardless.

Plenty of room this time!
 

Triple the number of people will fit now.

"This time, every possible measure is being taken to be able to handle what could be the largest turnout in town history."

This seems true: “There were so many people, and so many people I’ve never seen before. It’s been dividing this community since 2007. ... It’s going to be an interesting conversation, I’ll tell you that.”

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...e029601f7.html

This is the latest information on the Town Meeting on June 1, 2023, from the Town Website:

The "reentry" had been mentioned at the last select board meeting and commented on how can that be enforced. No answer then, no answer now. The BoS even joked about maybe a movie should be provided!

It probably came up because of folks getting there early to claim a seat, and then taking off to return later.

Legalities could easiily kick-in. The moderator has no authority over the building, nor its property. He has authority of the meeting. That authority can easily be overturned by a vote of the voters to overrule thhe moderator. The supervisors of the checklist control the registering of voters and handing out of the ballot cards and "secrret ballots". Do they have any authority after folks have checked-in? Doubt it. Who has authority to refrain a voter from voting after legally registering to vote at town meeting? Anybody? What is the penalty for preventing a voter from exercising his/her right to vote?

Realistically, it is probably an attempt to instill some semblance of sanity with expected problems. However, you can rest assured that all parties involved with setting-up this town meeting will be in unison, including the police department.

Going off topic for a moment but cogent to town meeting secret ballots. Many times the wrong secret ballot is used 1, 2, or 3 and nothing is said about disqualifying those votes after the moderator insructions on which to use (self-evident). The excuse in the past is because old person used the wrong ballot. Really. I'm an old person and that insults me! What if it is ballot stuffing and using more than one ballot. Pass/fail decisions by a few votes have occurred in the past. Those votes should be negated.

That kind of thought belongs in a different forum.

Back to the Community Center and the Recreation Complex.

My main concern is how many bathrooms. And for how many genders.
Will there be a family rest room for baby changing diapers and such ?

That kind of thought belongs in a different forum.

The SB2 discussion belongs in a different thread, yet it's here.

SB2 discussion is here because if we had it, there wouldn’t have been the fiasco at the cancelled town meeting…..so it’s relevant in that respect.

It's not at all relevant and your assessment is suspect, most likely dead wrong. I could bring up the current federal fiascos with inflation, debt and other maladies using your logic and I would be just as wrong as you.

Calm down!
 

ITD, you misinterpreted my comment in my last post. Let me first say to you “Calm down….it’s not good for your health to get your toga in a knot!”
SB2 and the HUB are the most highly contested warrants on the docket at town meeting. Where SB2 comes into the discussion here is that it has been noted by many that if we had SB2 instead of town meeting, the recent fiasco would have been avoided. It’s not really that difficult to understand. EOM.

Lol, I'm not uptight at all about this, but it seems the sb2 crowd feels it's perfectly logical to hijack a thread with their agenda, but it's knot (not, see what I did there?) Start your own thread rather than incorrectly stating that sb2 will solve all these problems. That is innately false, you can't know that, you are speculating. Regardless, it is a discussion for another thread. I'm not going to bother looking back, but I'm thinking that you are one of the individuals admonishing Less for his thread hijacking, this is worse.

Start another thread if you want to talk about SB 2, but leave this one to the merits or disadvantages of the HUB. Stop hijacking the thread, "it's not really that difficult to understand."

SB2 comments and The Hub comments have a common course of a 60% vote requirement to pass at the same town meeting by the same legislative body!

What facts are false?
About a month to get "informed" before voting?
All warrant articles would be voted on the same ballot?
Articles can be amended?
No new warrant article subject matter can be eliminated, nor introduced?
Absentee ballots would include all warrant articles?
Voting would occurr on the second Tuesday of the month decided by the legislative body, not the select board?
Voting from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm?
Voting in a private setting (curtained voting booth) without anyone looking over your shoulder?
There would no longer be postponed town meetings because of available floor space?

How many "pages" are needed on this thread to determine The Hub has no merit? This last comment will probably give rise to another hijacked thread. Comprehend what ... mindless babbling ... or diapers ... how about restrooms!

You posted why it's false in your quotation of me above, yet you continue. Stop it, start another thread about SB 2, leave this one alone. Unbelievable. You can certainly make up points like you did above, but they are your opinion, not facts. Stop misrepresenting them. Stop it.

SB2 meant that all the voters would not need to be in the location of the polling at the same time. So I think they are talking about the room not being large enough to hold the voters and the delayed vote due to that factor.

Honestly I can't see anybody being against SB2 except the little town clicks that want everything that they approve of to pass having their own personal agenda. Most people don't want to take the time to go to town meeting so very few end up voting. SB2 takes very little time to run in during the day and vote.

ITD
Thank you for continuing this thread.
You need to slow down and read. I did not state "why it's false" My post was an enumeration of facts, easily confirmed. Try researching the NH Municipal Association, the NH Dept. of Revenue Administration, SB2 town administrators, to name a few.

Exactly. The "perfect democracy" of Town Meeting is baloney. The largest effect of these meetings today is to impose a steep cost on voting, so that only those who have the most time and most at stake will vote. We erase a huge chunk of voters.

In this particular case, it's easy to see HUB supporters rallying every time--if they win, they get the huge reward of a subsidized pool. People who just think this is not the best thing for the town...maybe they show every time, maybe they just get tired of the hassle

We have been under SB2 for decades...
It doesn't stop what you are expecting.

The majority of town residents' attitude is what forms the basis of the town's future development.

Moultonborough is pushing a tourism/recreation town.

Veering back on the HUB track
 

In a communication with the Select Board Chair, we learned that there will be sufficient accommodations for seniors and especially those voters with mobility problems. There should not be a problem with drop offs, and spaces specifically designated for handicapped will require the necessary placard. No exceptions, we were told….so that the captain of the track team can’t come wheeling in and grab a prime parking spot! Lines should be shorter, and those needing special attention can be moved to the head of a line. Hopefully, this will answer some questions, and pass it along if so. We need lots of support, so show up and vote!