Comments on: Amendments! Who knew there were amendments. http://zipymonkey.com/blog/2006/10/31/amendments-who-knew-there-were-amendments/ blog personal Mon, 21 May 2012 02:47:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Z.Monkey http://zipymonkey.com/blog/2006/10/31/amendments-who-knew-there-were-amendments/#comment-775 Z.Monkey Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:53:18 +0000 http://zipymonkey.com/blog/2006/10/31/amendments-who-knew-there-were-amendments/#comment-775 So basically, this is us codifying things that are already done. Those state reps and sens really make our voting choices easy don't they. Hurray for New Hampshire! So basically, this is us codifying things that are already done. Those state reps and sens really make our voting choices easy don’t they. Hurray for New Hampshire!

]]> By: weird old guy http://zipymonkey.com/blog/2006/10/31/amendments-who-knew-there-were-amendments/#comment-773 weird old guy Wed, 01 Nov 2006 06:13:58 +0000 http://zipymonkey.com/blog/2006/10/31/amendments-who-knew-there-were-amendments/#comment-773 Amendment #1 is one of those feel good amendments. It is consistent with existing state legislation and certainly consistent with case law in NH. That is the story I have been told by a number of knowledgeable legal minds. Certainly that is how we have been advised. By the way the railroads have been granted emminent domain authority by the US Government back in the 19th century (and still retain it)and people have seemed to forgotten this. That authority is entirely to benefit a private party. There have also been quasi-governmental authorities granted said rights. Reedy Creek Development Authority (Disney) was granted the equivalent of municipal status by the Florida Legislature to allow Disney to develop Disney World. Thankfully I am not aware of any such rampant abuses in NH. Another thing people are not aware of are friendly takings. We have done that several times to clear a totally murky and impossible title problem. One instance potentially thousands of individuals with interest in this property may exist (5 to 6 generations later). This was requested by the owners of the property (and also involved a railroad)and they picked up the legal expenses. Amendment #2 What is a reasonable deviation? I have developed redistricting plans in 1980, 1990 and 2000 for two different local governments in two states. The general rule is if your ward or district is within +- 5% of the average population for said district (divide the total pop by the number of wards or districts)you should be able to with stand most any challenge. If you deviate from that you better have a very good reason. This amendment appears to be reasonable on the surface. Of course in application, any scheme can be abused. This appears to be what we do now in many communities. Amendment #1 is one of those feel good amendments. It is consistent with existing state legislation and certainly consistent with case law in NH. That is the story I have been told by a number of knowledgeable legal minds. Certainly that is how we have been advised. By the way the railroads have been granted emminent domain authority by the US Government back in the 19th century (and still retain it)and people have seemed to forgotten this. That authority is entirely to benefit a private party. There have also been quasi-governmental authorities granted said rights. Reedy Creek Development Authority (Disney) was granted the equivalent of municipal status by the Florida Legislature to allow Disney to develop Disney World. Thankfully I am not aware of any such rampant abuses in NH. Another thing people are not aware of are friendly takings. We have done that several times to clear a totally murky and impossible title problem. One instance potentially thousands of individuals with interest in this property may exist (5 to 6 generations later). This was requested by the owners of the property (and also involved a railroad)and they picked up the legal expenses.

Amendment #2 What is a reasonable deviation? I have developed redistricting plans in 1980, 1990 and 2000 for two different local governments in two states. The general rule is if your ward or district is within +- 5% of the average population for said district (divide the total pop by the number of wards or districts)you should be able to with stand most any challenge. If you deviate from that you better have a very good reason. This amendment appears to be reasonable on the surface. Of course in application, any scheme can be abused. This appears to be what we do now in many communities.

]]>