There is a local issue directly concerning the Seacoast area that nevertheless has a lot of implications statewide.  It has to do with House Bill 65, which in my view as now written gives too much power and control to the Pease Development Authority, and specifically to its Executive Director, over The Port in Portsmouth.  Especially relevant to the rest of the state is that there is commercial activity at The Port that generates some income for the state and could eventually bring in more.

.

I have opposed the legislation for over a year, and it is now in the State Senate, having already passed the House.  At hearings and discussions up to this point I have pointed out that I believe there is value to the separate "departmentalization" which we now have, where there is oversight of the functions of The Port, but still a certain degree of independence as well.

.

Unifying control and power in the hands of just a few, or just one, means perhaps what some might term as "efficiency," but there is something important in spreading power out, as is now the case.  Instead of one telephone call or deal to "get something done," it might take two or three or four.  In government, that is a good thing.  Two people can keep a secret.  It's much more difficult with three.  And after all these years of being involved -- gosh, back to the mid-1960s -- I still remain a bit skeptical of government.   

.

Government can do good things, but citizens have to be able to watch it and guide it.  I believe in the value of involving our citizens in as many ways as possible.  Centralizing control of The Port in the hands of the Pease Development Authority, and giving greater oversight of The Port to PDA staff, to me is counter to citizen involvement -- and "keeping 'em all honest."

.

My observation is not to infer distrust in the current PDA Board, the Director, or the staff.  What we have to remember is that those currently in those positions will not always be there, and the system and framework that we set up now is one we will have to live with in years to come.  The solutions we come up with today aren't just about now -- they're about twenty years from now.

.

This past week The Portsmouth Herald editorialized, and I share its view, that "The governance of our ports and harbors may not be perfect, but it is certainly not in urgent need of repair and we worry that, as a cure, House Bill 65 is far more dangerous than the ills it intends to fix. It would be far better to thoroughly vet the bill and then reintroduce it at the beginning of the next legislative session than to rush and make a mistake."

I also agree with the concerns raised by the Portsmouth City Council, Rye Selectpeople, Executive Councilor Bev Hollingworth, and some other Seacoast legislators.   On this issue I find myself in disagreement with Governor John Lynch and some others who are pushing this legislation forward.

.

While I understand the difficulty at this point in stopping legislation from passing on which many people have spent considerable time, now that others have stepped forward and offered their concerns as I did over a year ago, I think there is a need to step back and take a new look at the bill, and how it will impact our future -- and the vision of the entire state as to what The Port should become for the balance of this Century, and beyond.  Let's be mighty careful in the changes we make.