HB 90 & RSA
287-G: history & background
Developer Club Motorsports Inc (CMI) wants to build a private
race track in Tamworth. The developer advertises the facility as one
where members and rental groups can drive high-performance cars and
motorcycles at speeds up to 120 mph. Its advertising tag line is
“Feed your need for speed.” Tamworth residents first heard about
these plans in April, 2003.
Tamworth
has no comprehensive zoning ordinance that would regulate the
operation of such a facility, so in the summer of 2003 a committee of
Tamworth residents created a Race Track Ordinance (RTO) under the
authority of RSA 31:41-a and RSA 31:42. (Those RSAs allow
municipalities to enact ordinances to control amusement parks,
drive-in theaters and race tracks.) The RTO regulated 22 separate
elements of the operation of a race track, including hours of
operation and noise levels.
The
RTO committee included supporters and opponents of the project. Some
members were recommended by CMI, and the meetings were attended by CMI
representatives. The CMI lawyers asked for and got an easing of
restrictions on noise. Many compromises were made and no one got
everything they wanted, but CMI representatives were quoted several
times in the local press saying that they “could live with” the
RTO and that the RTO was “good for Tamworth.”
The
RTO went into effect October 1, 2003, when it was signed by the
selectmen. It was a warrant article at Tamworth Town Meeting in March,
2004 and was affirmed by voters when it passed by an 84% majority.
Meanwhile,
in the fall of 2003, soon after the RTO was signed by the selectmen,
CMI drafted SB 458, defining “private
driving instruction and exhibition facilities,” and exempting that
kind of facility from regulation under RSA 31:41-a and RSA 31:42. Not coincidentally, the
definition of “private driving
instruction and exhibition facilities” exactly matches the specifications
of the race track that CMI wants to build in Tamworth.
In
January 2004, SB 458 came before the Senate Transportation Committee.
No Carroll County legislators were sponsors. The only non-committee
member testifying at the hearing was a lobbyist for CMI. The bill was
included on the Senate’s “consent calendar” of items that the
committees recommend for passage without discussion. It passed both
houses without debate and was signed by Governor Benson in March. It
became effective in May. The head of the Tamworth Conservation
Commission received an anonymous copy of the legislation, now known as
RSA 287-G, the day after it took effect; that was the first anyone in
Tamworth had heard about the bill. Even
the NH Municipal Association missed it.
Near
the end of the 2004 session there was a last-minute attempt by the
Tamworth legislators to repeal or revise the bill, but there was not
enough time. Harry Merrow of Ossipee, who represents Tamworth in NH
House, introduced HB 90 at the beginning of the 2005 session.
Co-sponsors are Dave Babson, Ossipee, who also represents Tamworth;
Betsey Patten, Moultonborough, who heads the House Municipal and
County Government Committee; Howard
Dickinson, Conway; and Donald Philbrick, Eaton.
The House Municipal and County Government Committee reported HB 90
“inexpedient to legislate” (ITL) on March 22 with a vote of 14-5, but on
April 6 the full House overturned that report and voted 273-76 to
amend and pass HB90. The amendment preserved the definition of the new
kind of facility, but removed the prohibition on regulation under RSA
31:41.
The
bill moved to the Senate Transportation and Interstate Commerce
Committee in April. The committee also reported the bill ITL, and on
May 5th the Senate upheld the ITL report 10-14, killing the bill for
this session.
How
they voted (NH legislature website): House,
Senate