(Eau Claire Lakes Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
83,587 messages
Updated 4/19/2024 12:42:53 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Eau Claire Lakes Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,260 messages
Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
ALSCN
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 8:58:20 AM
|
This article shows some of the thoughts of the representatives and senators....
"This is eminent domain on the water," said Senate Minority Leader Jabo Waggoner, R-Birmingham, who voted against the bill.
"It's a big money bill. It's driven by big money," said Rep. Mac Gipson, R-Prattville when the ban passed the House. "They want a place to put their million-dollar homes (on Lake Martin)."
URL: article
|
| Name: |
Lakeshore
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 9:25:11 AM
|
I haven't the time to sift thru all the posts on this subject but I found this interesting.... my apologies if it has already been posted...
TALLADEGA DAILY HOME
Public hearing on big boat ban held with no opposition invited
David Atchison
04-05-2006
MONTGOMERY — A Senate committee Tuesday held a public meeting on a proposed ban of houseboats and other large, powerful boats on three Alabama lakes, but questions remain over just who was invited.
Only those in favor of the legislation were present at Tuesday’s hearing.
"I didn’t know there was going to be a public hearing," said Lake Martin resident Dick Bronson, who is in favor of the ban. "Nobody did."
He said about 10 residents showed up in Montgomery for the Senate Economic, Expansion and Trade Committee meeting, to which House Bill 756 was assigned.
The legislation would ban boats longer than 30 feet, 6 inches on Weiss, Martin and Harris lakes. The legislation would grandfather in existing boats over that length on the three lakes. The legislation excludes sailboats. It does, however, outright ban boats longer than 26 feet, 11 inches long, if those boats can exceed 60 mph.
Bronson said Lake Martin residents, in favor of the legislation, thought they were going to attend a Senate committee meeting, not a public hearing.
Bronson also said he didn’t like that the public was not notified of Tuesday’s public hearing. "But regardless of how this was crafted or why, this is a good bill for most of us on the lake," Bronson said.
He was one of three Lake Martin residents who spoke in favor of the legislation. No one in opposition to the legislation was present at Tuesday’s public hearing.
The Logan Martin Lake Protection Association has been vocally opposed to the legislation, and others on Smith, Martin and Harris have expressed negative concerns about the measure. But they weren’t represented at the hearing.
"They had nobody at the public hearing because I didn’t know about it until I got here," said Sen. Jabo Waggoner, R-Vestavia, who says he does not support the legislation. "They held it without even letting the committee know."
Waggoner is crying foul because neither he nor Sen. Del Marsh, R-Anniston, who requested the public hearing last Friday, were informed about the meeting until about 10 a.m. Tuesday.
Waggoner said he was notified at about 10:15 a.m. Marsh said he was contacted at about 10 a.m., as he was driving from home to Montgomery Tuesday.
"He asked for it; I gave it to him," said Sen. Pat Lindsey, D-Butler, who serves as chairman of the committee.
Lindsey said he couldn’t help that people in opposition to the bill didn’t show up. "If he requests a public hearing, he better look out for it," Lindsey said.
Waggoner said he thought Lindsey’s committee was planning to deny their request for a public hearing.
"I never turn anybody down," Lindsey responded.
Sen. Gerald Dial, D-Lineville, who first introduced the legislation, was there with supporters. He said he was notified of the public hearing Monday.
Asked why Waggoner wasn’t also notified Monday, Dial said, "They probably couldn’t find him. He was probably on his boat at Smith Lake."
An Alabama Power representative, whose company has been involved since the early goings of the legislation, was also at Tuesday’s public hearing.
"I heard a public hearing was requested last week," said Willard Bowers, vice president of Environmental Affairs for Alabama Power Co. Bowers said he also found out about the public hearing Monday. "I found out yesterday," he said Tuesday.
Bowers said he was notified by Alabama Power’s Governmental Affairs people in Montgomery. Alabama Power has been on board with the legislation since its inception. Officials of the company said they wanted a ban on all 11 Alabama lakes without locks because of contamination from houseboats and safety issues associated with overcrowding and speed, but they later settled on the three lakes closest to Atlanta when opposition began to make its voice heard.
"I knew last week they were asking for it (the hearing)," said Sen. Jim Preuitt, D-Talladega, who also serves on the committee addressing the proposed ban. But he refused to say whether he knew of or when he first learned a public hearing was actually going to take place Tuesday.
Preuitt, who did not attend Tuesday’s public hearing, said he was busy with other public hearings and committees Tuesday morning.
Marsh said it concerns him how this legislation was handled and that the public affected by the bill was not afforded an opportunity to speak at Tuesday’s public hearing.
Called the "stealth legislation" by some critics because the general public was not aware of the proposal until media reports alerted them, the bill was met with opposition as provisions began to surface. By that time, the proposed legislation had already passed in committees and was on the House and Senate floor calendars ready for a vote to become law.
Dial was the bill’s sponsor in the Senate. Rep. Richard Laird, D-Roanoke, introduced a companion bill in the House, and eventually, it made its way through with a substitute bill in the House when the Senate hit a snag and couldn’t agree.
Initially, the bill banned boats longer than 30 feet, 6 inches, including sailboats and houseboats and vessels with engines larger than 500 horsepower. The list of lakes stretched to 11, including Logan Martin Lake, before it was whittled down to three lakes, Weiss, Harris and Martin, and sailboats were excluded.
That bill made it through the House and is now pending in the Senate.
Dial has said all along that the legislation was prompted by Georgia resort developers wanting assurances that houseboats were banned from Lake Harris in his district before they would move ahead with any further plans to build a multimillion dollar resort community there.
There is a "no houseboat" policy for Lake Harris, but there is no law backing up that policy, Alabama Power officials say.
Alabama Power has 10,000 acres on Lake Harris, 3,500 acres of which could be developed, and officials admit they have been in talks about a possible land deal.
Matt Hooton, president of Randolph Properties, Inc., in Wedowee, who has also been in talks with developers, owns a significant amount of property there, but not enough to entirely serve developers’ needs, he said.
Alabama Power maintains it did not "drive" the legislation, that it only had "input," citing safety and health concerns on state lakes.
The bill could hit the Senate floor for a vote as early as today.
|
| Name: |
WSMS
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 11:15:07 AM
|
What is Gipson talking about when he says "They want a place to put their million-dollar homes (on Lake Martin)."? How is clearing the lake of some big boats going to free up land for million dollar homes?(Which, by the way, are in no short supply on the lake already.)
People talk about how this opens things up for big developers to take over Lake Martin; that would make sense only if the land around the lake wasn't owned by two large corporations (Russell Lands and APC) both of which have been very sticky-fingered when it comes to selling large chunks of land to other interests.
|
| Name: |
roswellric
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 11:28:58 AM
|
I don't get a lot of this....That''s typical political rhetoric though. I love politicians. Hey! You could have Cythia McKinney!
|
| Name: |
ALSCN
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 12:03:35 PM
|
Okay, have you ever thought that maybe just maybe, they weren't trying to make the lake more presentable for developers??? You are crazy if you do not think development has anything to do with this bill.
|
| Name: |
FLee
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 12:15:32 PM
|
I can empathize......we have Corrine Brown!
|
| Name: |
WSMS
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 1:02:22 PM
|
Again, WHAT DEVELOPERS? And I'm not talking about Wedowee/Harris, which is apparently a target of some Georgia developers; I'm talking about Lake MARTIN, the shoreline of which is almost completely owned by Russell Lands and Alabama Power, neither of which is known for selling huge chunks of land to other interests.
|
| Name: |
ALSCN
-
|
|
| Subject: |
New Article
|
|
Date:
|
4/6/2006 2:00:06 PM
|
But times are changing... We all know that the other lakes were kept in this bill because of development. We also know that APCO was strongly supporting leaving Lake Martin in the bill, so maybe they are getting ready for it.
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Eau Claire Lakes Topics Forum
Reply
»
Wisconsin Lakes
»
Eau Claire Lakes
Login
|
Home
