Connect with us

New Hampshire

Looking for a summer break? Head to these NH ski resorts

Published

on

Looking for a summer break? Head to these NH ski resorts


It’s summer, and just like you pack away your ski gear and pull out your summer threads, some of the great New Hampshire ski areas do pretty much the same.

Tucked away are the snow cats and snow fences, and the winter white coat is replaced with a blanket of green. What’s more: there’s a ton of great things to do.

You can find the perfect escape for whatever ambiance you’re looking for – even all of them at once. Consider these New Hampshire hills for some summer fun that may not involve the ocean, but is just as refreshing and beautiful.

Active: You want to run, jump, careen downhill and soar above it all? You’ve got choices. At Cranmore Mountain Resort (https://www.cranmore.com) in the heart of North Conway, you’ll find  all kinds of thrills like a seated zip line ride, mountain coaster, lift-serviced downhill mountain biking (lessons if you’re new), chairlift rides and more. Beginning June 30, they stay open until 8 p.m., meaning you can take in the alpenglow of a summer dusk.

Advertisement

A Cranmore bonus: It’s smack in the middle of North Conway, where you’ll find tons of dining, shopping and other fun things to do.

At Gunstock Mountain Resort in Gilford (https://www.gunstock.com), you can find feed your need for thrills on their amazing zip line tour that takes you from peak to peak; an exhilarating 1.6 miles of zipping that makes it one of the longest in America.

Then there is their Treetop Adventure that challenges you to get up high and play – literally – at the tree tops. There’s a mountain coaster too if all that’s not enough.

There are hiking trails and a cool Wetlands Boardwalk that serves as an accessible meander through nature with educational components.

Gunstock also boasts a lovely 250-site campground, tucked away in the trees at their base, where you can hunt, fish and more.

Advertisement

A Gunstock bonus: the incredible views of Lake Winnipesaukee and the Presidential Mountain Range. If you’re more mellow, you can take a chairlift ride to take it all in as well.

Quiet: Bretton Woods Resort (https://www.brettonwoods.com) in northern New Hampshire offers breathtaking views of Mount Washington. And without a city or big town nearby, you’ll see the stars well at night and hear little if any traffic during the day). But they do add a little spice to their tranquil mix.

In the Canopy Tour, guests are guided through a network of platforms high up in the ancient hemlock trees connected by nine zip lines, two sky bridges and three rappels. You’ll feel the thrill of action while embracing the quiet of nature. It’s a perfect blend.

For a more mellow time, take their gondola up the mountain for views, hiking and even dining in a mountaintop setting.

They also offer guided mountain bike tours, golf, a spa and for the truly adventurous: rock climbing lessons.

Advertisement

Wildcat Mountain In Jackson offers a true chance to serenely savor the summer mountains: Their scenic chairlift rides take you up top for what may be the most dramatic views of Mount Washington out there. You can hike down or ride back down, and without the buzz of crowds of bikers or zip liners, you’ll have a truly peaceful experience. They’ll even supply you with maps to help you hike to waterfalls.

Quaint: Quaint may seem an odd word to use for a spot as dramatic and challenging for skiing as Cannon Mountain (https://www.cannonmt.com) but come summer, it’s the epitome of New Hampshire quaint.

You can ride their tram to the top for views of gorges, mountain ranges and lakes. You can hop out and hike, or hike from the base to special spots like Flume Gorge and Artisan’s Bluff. You’ll find lots of company (it’s a popular spot), with old school simple summer mountain fun. Pack a picnic.

A Cannon bonus: The New Hampshire Ski Museum – always worth a visit – sits at its base.

Little Black Mountain Ski Area (https://www.blackmt.com) in Jackson offers summer horseback riding. If you’re 10 and older you can ride up the ski area trails and back down. Younger kids ride ponies at the base. Add to it all by grabbing a picnic lunch to go at the J-Town Deli and go splash in Jackson Falls.

Advertisement

There are so many more choices in all those categories, and many that combine them all. Your best spot for a listing of what’s out there is www.skinh.com.

 

It’s hard to beat the breathtaking view from a Bretton Woods gondola ride. ( Photo courtesy of Omni Mount Washington Resort.)



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New Hampshire

A new campaign finance law is allowing record-breaking spending in NH governor’s race • New Hampshire Bulletin

Published

on

A new campaign finance law is allowing record-breaking spending in NH governor’s race • New Hampshire Bulletin


In her quest for the New Hampshire governor’s office, Kelly Ayotte is breaking financial records. As of Oct. 30, the Republican nominee and former U.S. senator has raised $21 million since running for the office and spent nearly $19 million of it. 

The amount far surpasses the funds raised by Ayotte’s Democratic opponent, former Manchester Mayor Joyce Craig, who brought in $7.3 million as of that same deadline. And it dwarfs the $1.7 million raised by Gov. Chris Sununu during his entire 2022 re-election effort. 

But the money is unusual for other reasons: A majority of it – 70 percent – comes from a single political action committee. And none of those transactions can be traced to individual donors.

The strategy is the direct result of a 2023 campaign finance law that removes limits on donations to candidates from political action committees. And after recent validation from the Attorney General’s Office, the Ayotte campaign’s application of the law could become common practice in future elections. 

Advertisement

In an Oct. 10 opinion, the office’s Election Law Unit wrote that Ayotte’s practice of accepting millions of dollars from a political action committee supplied by the Republican Governor’s Association is legal, rebuffing a complaint by Democrats. 

Since then, Democrats have followed the RGA’s lead and embraced the technique on their own, pouring larger sums of money to Craig. 

The little-noticed law – added to last year’s state budget – allows New Hampshire candidates to accept an unlimited number of contributions from “political advocacy organizations,” without those organizations needing to disclose their donors. 

The maneuver has another benefit: Candidates can use that money to buy cheaper ads. Federal law requires that television stations give political candidates a cheaper rate to buy ads than political organizations in the 60 days ahead of an election. That incentivizes PACs to transfer funds directly to candidates in the final stretch. 

Campaign finance reform advocates have objected to the state law, arguing the removal of the limits has diminished transparency and accountability for candidates. But the new tool has proven attractive for some campaigns this year.

Advertisement

The state’s online campaign finance system shows that the Republican Governors Association contributed a total of $21.3 million to a political action committee named the Live Free PAC this campaign cycle. That “political advocacy organization” has sent much of that money – $14.7 million – on to the Ayotte campaign, and $6 million to the New Hampshire Republican State Committee.

Democrats challenged that set-up, arguing the Live Free PAC had wrongfully registered as a “political advocacy organization,” which allows it to accept unlimited donations from the RGA. The New Hampshire Democratic Party said it should have registered as a “political committee,” which would cap the number of donations it could receive from the RGA to $30,000 for the entire election season.

But the Attorney General’s Office response this month asserts that the Live Free PAC is a validly registered political advocacy organization, and is thus able to raise unlimited amounts and transfer unlimited amounts to candidates.

‘Political committee’ vs. ‘political advocacy organization’

Advertisement

The 2023 law allows unlimited donations to candidates in many – but not all – cases. 

Individual donors and corporations are still capped at donating $15,000 in total to a candidate, per the law, RSA 664:4. Wealthier individuals often skirt this cap by registering multiple limited liability corporations and donating the $15,000 maximum from each corporation.

And individuals and businesses are still prevented from donating more than $30,000 in one election cycle to a “political committee” or “political party.”

But individuals are not capped in how much they may donate to a “political advocacy organization.” And after the 2023 change, a political advocacy organization can now pass on an unlimited amount of funds directly to a candidate. 

That change means individuals or large party organizations like the RGA and DGA can pass major donations on to candidates – as long as they send those donations through a political advocacy organization.

Advertisement

And it raises a legal question: What is the difference between a political committee, which is capped, and a political advocacy organization, which is not? 

The statute is less than clear. A political committee is defined as any organization that “promotes the success or defeat of a candidate or candidates or measure or measures.” And a political advocacy organization is any organization that spends at least $2,500 for communication that is “functionally equivalent” to advocacy for a candidate or measure, even if that is not the organization’s primary role.

In Ayotte’s case, Live Free PAC has registered as a political advocacy organization in the 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 election cycles, campaign finance records show. And after the passage of the 2023 law, the PAC has taken advantage of the new unlimited powers, transferring large amounts to the Ayotte campaign, usually in tranches of $1.5 million at a time. All of Live Free PAC’s money comes from the RGA.

The fundraising strategies are a major difference between the two gubernatorial campaigns. Craig has raised $4.4 million from individual donors, or 65 percent of her funds overall. Ayotte has raised $3.7 million from individual donors, but that comprises just 18 percent of her total haul. The other $17 million comes from the $14.7 million in Live Free PAC transfers and money transfers from other organizations and PACs.

If you can’t beat ‘em …

In its Sept. 18 complaint to the Attorney General’s Office, the New Hampshire Democratic Party alleged that the Live Free PAC had wrongly registered as a political advocacy organization, when it really met the definition of a political committee. 

Advertisement

But Richard Lehmann, an attorney representing the Live Free PAC, disputed that argument. In an Oct. 8 letter to the Attorney General’s Office, Lehmann wrote that Live Free PAC met the definitions of a political advocacy organization, or PAO, and argued that neither the Legislature nor the Attorney General’s Office had issued guidelines that would prevent that registration. 

“If the Legislature intended to restrict the ability of organizations to register and conduct themselves as PAOs, it would have imposed additional conditions or restricted the ability of organizations to qualify,” Lehmann wrote. “It did not do that.”

Assistant Attorney General Brendan O’Donnell, chief of the Election Law Unit, sided with the PAC, writing in response to the NHDP that the PAC “registered as a PAO and met the statutory definition of a PAO.” O’Donnell added that just because Live Free PAC also met the statutory definitions of a political committee did not mean it needed to follow those contribution limits, since it didn’t register as one.

Following the advisory opinion, the Democrats changed tack. After months of running a political committee titled “Democratic Governors Association – New Hampshire” and adhering to the $30,000 limits on individual receipts, the Democratic Governors Association registered its own political advocacy organization on Oct. 11, a day after the Attorney General’s Office opinion, campaign records show. 

That entity, named “DGA New Hampshire PAO,” has accepted a number of funds, including a $3.2 million transfer from the Democratic Governors Association, and has transferred $800,000 to the Craig campaign and $3.1 million to the New Hampshire Democratic Party, as of the latest filings.

Advertisement

Blessing or a curse?

When the 2023 law passed, some welcomed it, arguing that New Hampshire has always had loopholes allowing large transfers of wealth to candidates. The new law, they argued, simply eased the process for major campaigns. 

“I believe that money is speech, and so I’m opposed to placing limits on that,” said Rep. Joe Sweeney, an original sponsor of the legislation, in an interview last year. 

Others, like Olivia Zink, were appalled. Zink, executive director of Open Democracy, an advocacy group that pushes to reduce money in political campaigns, says she worried last year that the law would bring in vast and unaccountable sums of money to the state.

This year, Zink feels she was proven right. And she argues lawmakers should return donation limits to campaigns. 

“I think candidates need to answer who they’re getting their campaign cash from,” she said. “Voters are being flooded with ads, and if they’re being paid for by nondisclosed, out-of-state donors, is that how they’re going to run our state?”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

Missing NH woman found dead in Mass., police say, asking for information

Published

on

Missing NH woman found dead in Mass., police say, asking for information


Authorities are asking anyone with information to come forward after a woman who was reported missing from Keene, New Hampshire, was found dead in Warwick, Massachusetts.

Justina Steffy, 31, was last heard from in early October, Keene police previously said. Investigators said Thursday that human remains discovered in Warwick were identified as Steffy.

Police say they are investigating the circumstances of Steffy’s death.

Anyone with information about Steffy or knows where she might have been before her death is asked to call 603-357-9820.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

Should NH judges retire at 70 or 75? Some aren't sure that's the right question

Published

on

Should NH judges retire at 70 or 75? Some aren't sure that's the right question


On the ballot this election isn’t just who will be the next president or governor. Granite Staters will vote on whether state judges should be allowed to serve until they’re 75 years old.

Currently, judges are required to retire at age 70, according to a limit set by the state constitution in 1792. If a judge retires before age 70, they can serve as senior active judges, which means a judge can serve on the court they retired from but they can’t fully engage in law practice. After age 70, they can also serve as referees, working on cases in a facilitating manner, in the court they retired from.

(Here’s an official explanation of the ballot question from state officials.)

Across the country, age limits for judges vary widely, according to Bloomberg. Seventeen states have no limit. In Arkansas and North Dakota, serving past a certain age can cost a judge their retirement benefits. Eighteen states have a mandatory limit of age 70, and eight states set their age limits to 75. Vermont is a bit of an outlier, with an age limit of 90.

Advertisement

Supporters of the proposed amendment in New Hampshire say the increase in age could allow judges that want to serve continue to hold their positions. Critics counter that it could also keep judges who may not be fit to serve, or those whose ideologies are out of step with modern public opinion, on the court longer.

Two-thirds of voters would need to vote yes on the constitutional amendment in order for it to take effect. When voters receive their ballots, the question about the constitutional amendment also includes language about a retirement age of 70 for sheriffs — but the amendment will have no impact on that, since the retirement age is already 70 years old for that position.

If the measure does pass, it could further solidify Gov. Chris Sununu’s influence on the state’s courts before he wraps up his term in office. Nearly three quarters of the justices currently serving in New Hampshire’s courts have been appointed since Sununu became governor in 2017, including four out of five on the state supreme court.

Many of Sununu’s appointees are on track to serve until at least 2040, even without the change in retirement age. If the retirement age is extended to 75, five circuit court judges could theoretically serve until 2060.

Advertisement

What do retired justices think?

The age limit proposal was co-authored by Rep. Bob Lynn, a retired chief justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court who now represents Windham at the State House. The Legislature, unlike the courts, does not set a mandatory retirement date.

Lynn, a Republican, said he thinks the current age limit is too young. He said life expectancy was much lower when that cutoff was established, in 1792, and is an antiquated cutoff.

“As a result of that,” Lynn said, “we’ve lost talent of a number of really very, very good judges, very qualified judges who would have stayed beyond age 70 if they were able to.” Lynn said a couple of judges come to mind that should have been able to serve a little longer on court, including his former colleague on the New Hampshire Supreme Court, Carol Ann Conboy.

“She was my epitome of a wonderful judge,” Lynn said. “She was smart and hard working and incredibly fair minded and empathetic.”

Lynn said they had plenty of “vigorous disagreements,” but he was sorry to see her leave the bench.

Advertisement

“To see her have to retire when she didn’t want to – I think that was a real, a real tragedy for the citizens of the state,” Lynn said.

Former New Hampshire Supreme Court Justice Bob Lynn being sworn in by Gov. Chris Sununu in 2018. Less than two years later, he reached the mandatory retirement cap of 70.

Conboy, meanwhile, said she always joked with her colleagues that they’d have to pry her fingers off the door to get her to retire. Now 77 years old, she lives at an independent continuing care community in Manchester. She started her term on the state’s highest court at age 62 and said she would have liked to serve at least a few more years on the bench, ideally retiring around age 73.

“It was very sad to me to pack up my books and my office furniture and say, ‘You’re done. You’re just, you can’t do it anymore,’” she recalled. “I wasn’t fired for incompetence. I was fired because the calendar turned to a certain day and that was the end. It was extremely disconcerting.”

Conboy said she would have been open to a competency test, as a way to ease public concern over judges’ capabilities.

Advertisement

But she also suggested there are other factors, beyond age, that could influence a judge’s capacity to serve. Judges might face marital and familial problems that divide their attention, she said, and that might require them to take a break until things are resolved.

“Let’s say a judge is going through a very traumatic personal experience, a spouse dies or a child is in a terrible accident that may require that that judge take some time to deal with it, just as we would hope that people in other walks of life would be given an opportunity to deal with it,” Conboy said.

Judges also face mental and physical health concerns, she said; some of those could impact their performance in the court, while others are more easily managed.

Conboy said ensuring judges remain connected to their communities, to technology and to social advances is an important factor for justices. She gave the example of how cellphones have introduced new ways of thinking around crimes committed not just in physical spaces, but also digital.

For her part, Conboy said by the time she reached the New Hampshire Supreme Court, she had accumulated a lifetime of experience, not just in the legal field: working in the U.S. Air Force, as a high school teacher, working with the state to address drug and alcohol issues, as well as 13 years as a practicing lawyer and 17 years as a trial judge.

Advertisement

“I handled murder cases all the way down to arguments over where garbage cans were going to be put in a common driveway,” Conboy said. “Those kinds of experiences actually expanded my understanding of the problems of all strata of society – from sophisticated business decisions or problems to very mundane things such as arguments with town officials as to whether you can build a screen porch on your house.”

Some say term limits, evaluations could help

Some others in New Hampshire’s legal field said the constitutional question brings up other questions about how well our justice system is functioning.

Buzz Scherr, a seasoned New Hampshire defense attorney who teaches at the Franklin Pierce School of Law, said the question of age isn’t quite the problem — he can think of some judges who he was sorry to see retire, and others he was glad to see leave the bench.

At age 72 himself, Scherr said he’s found himself paying more attention in general to how people talk about older adults, for good and for bad. He’s allowed to work until he’s 80 as a professor and plans to slowly phase out his work over time. He is also running for a seat at the State House this fall, as a Democrat.

Judges, Scherr said, are in public-facing positions, so it makes sense that people would be interested in whether they are fit to serve.

Advertisement

Lawyers on the steps of the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

A better system, in his view, would be to hold evaluations of judges and their work after age 70, but that would be a tall order. A review on a case by case basis of who is fit to serve would take a lot of time, resources and consideration to execute, Scherr said, so a blanket age limit is more practical.

“I think we over rely in society on people who are advanced age and too often credit them for being wise just because they’re older, old, rather than credit them because they are wise,” Scherr said. “I think it’s easier to have an artificial limit when you’re worried about people who are not as wise or capable as they used to be as they age.”

Edward Gordon, a former New Hampshire circuit court judge and former state lawmaker, also questioned if age is the appropriate measure on whether a judge should serve. Gordon retired before he reached the age of 70 and worked in senior judge status until he reached the age limit. He said that he loved his job.

“I sat primarily in Franklin, and I enjoy the community as a circuit court judge,” Gordon said. “You’re close to the community and you set standards for the community.”

Advertisement

Gordon said he knows of other circuit court judges that retired before they reached their 70th birthdays, so he said the increase in age might not propose immediate changes for Granite Staters, at least not in the circuit court.

There are things judges consider when serving and plan on stepping off the bench, Gordon said, like whether they can retire with benefits, which depends on both their age and how long they’ve served.

While Gordon thinks age is less of a concern, he is a believer in term limits.

“The question is, is there some advantage of having turnover as opposed to keeping judges or politicians in place for long periods of time?” Gordon proposed. “It’s good to have new blood at times. I think those are issues I think that I would raise when it comes to the issue of whether we should extend the age.”

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending