Fearing another boondoggle

Rutland Herald

April 18,2014

 

In regards to the April 15 article, “Plan could bring mountain bikers to Killington,” I sure hope this is not a case of “here we go again,” like what happened with the Green Mountain National Golf Course. In that case the town of Killington duplicated an already existing amenity in the town, which cost the town significant amounts of money, which we are still paying for. These funds were diverted from essential municipal projects, such as road maintenance, for which the town recently approved borrowing millions to address, and taxes are going up to pay for now and in future years.

This proposal also flies into the face of the hypocritical “non-compete with local businesses” philosophy that the town has espoused in the management of the golf course, thereby hamstringing its operations by not allowing it to engage in revenue-generating activities, such as after-hours restaurant and lounge operations, cross country skiing, clubhouse rental for functions, etc., which further increases its dependence on taxpayers to pay off its debt. Killington Resort already has an extensive mountain bike trail facility, as well as a golf course. Mike Solimano has also announced expansion of the network this summer. This proposal would directly compete with their operations. I thought we were in kumbaya mode with the resort wherein the town and resort would partner in economic development and not compete with each other. So much for that partnership.

Additionally the townspeople were promised that the golf course would not cost them a penny, as it would be self-sustaining. While not exactly the same situation as this proposal, which looks to get some funding from other agencies, the promise again seems to be the townspeople will fund little to nothing for this project. My fear is that the ball will get rolling on this, little to no money will be forthcoming from outside sources and the taxpayers once again get stuck with the bill.

VITO RASENAS

Killington

Pig Roast set for Killington

Rutland Herald

April 15,2014

 

KILLINGTON — The Mogul Sports & Pub Restaurant will host the 19th annual Pig Roast from 1-9 p.m. on April 27.

The event will include live music with The Gully Boys, DJ Dave and Rick Reddington & The Luv. Horsehoes, ping pong and drink specials will be available, along with kid-friendly options such as mini golf. The restaurant is offering free food all night. Cover tickets will cost $10 and all proceeds will go to the Rutland Meals on Wheels program.

— Staff reports

 

Comment:

This is an example of a business which has taken the initiative on its own to improve its business without having its hand out to the taxpayers. Support it the event and the business if you can. Congrats Sal on a successful reign with this event.

Vito

Plan could bring mountain bikers to Killington

Rutland Herald

By Bryanna Allen
staff writer | April 15,2014

KILLINGTON — Killington is known for its vast amounts of fresh powder, extreme terrain parks and active nightlife. But when the snow melts and the skiers leave, another side of Killington emerges — a side less known to the rest of the world. Other than weddings and a few festivals, Killington isn’t as famous for its summers.

Town manager Seth Webb wants to change that.

Webb has a plan to bring more activities and attention to Killington during the summer as way to make the area more of a tourist destination and bring in more revenue for the town.

“There is so much to offer in this part of Vermont in the summer, as well as in winter,” said Webb, who brought the idea of a mountain biking trail to the town Select Board on April 1. The board voted unanimously to bring the application to the U.S. Forest Service, where it awaits approval.

Webb’s plan is to build a 15-mile mountain biking trail in the Green Mountain National Forest. A similar system of trails was built in Burke, a small town in the Northeast Kingdom. Those trails became nationally recognized when Bike Magazine! named them the “2008 Best Trail Network in North America,” which attracted an additional 40,000 tourists annually, according to Burke town officials. That influx of people brings in an estimated $4 million dollars per year to the local economy.

Seth Webb imagines something similar for Killington.

“This will encourage fun for all ages and boost our viability as a summer destination,” he said. The plan in the town’s application would have the trails ready for summer 2015.

Kaleb Charles is an avid mountain biker and frequent skier at Killington, and said he would love the chance to ride somewhere new in the area.

“I’ve been to the trails in Burke, and they’re amazing,” Charles said. “If we could have trails like those close to home, it would be a great way to spend the weekend and a great way to keep it local.”

Webb predicts the project will cost between $300,000 and $400,000, and much of that cost could come from funding, such as the Vermont Mountain Bike Association and the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation. The town plans to pursue all sources of possible funding.

The U.S. Forest Service is reviewing the project, along with analyzing how trail construction and bike traffic will affect the biological and ecological aspects of the forest.

Phil Black, owner of the Lookout Tavern, has wanted more mountain biking trails in the area for the past decade.

“We’re behind in the tourism industry,” said Black, who wants the trails for economic as well as personal purposes. “People want a green, outdoor experience. We have the green land, we just need a great way to utilize it. This is the way.”

bryanna.allen @rutlandherald.com

Comment:

Well I sure hope this is not a case of, "Here we go again." like what happened with the Green Mountain National Golf Course (GMNGC). In that case the town of Killington duplicated an already existing amenity in the town, which only cost the town signifcant  amounts of money which we are still paying for. These funds were diverted from essential municipal projects such as road maintenance for which the town recently approved borrowed millions to address and taxes are going up to pay for now and in future years. 

This proposal also flies into the face of the hypocritical "non-compete with local businesses" philosophy that the town has espoused in the management of GMNGC thereby hamstringing its operations by not allowing it to engage in revenue generating activities such as after hours restaurant and lounge operations, crosscountry skiing, clubhouse rental for functions, etc., which further increases its dependence on taxpayers to payoff its debt. Killington Resort already has an extensive mountain bike trail facility as well as a golf course. Mike Solimano has also announced plans to expand the trail network this summer. This proposal would directly compete with their operations. I thought we were in kumbaya mode with the resort wherein the town and resort would partner in economic development and not compete with each other. So much for that partnership.

Additionally the townspeople were promised that the golf course would not cost them a penny as it would be self sustaining. While not exactly the same situation as this proposal which looks to get some funding from other agencies, the promise again seems to be the townspeople will fund little to nothing for this project. My fear is that the ball will get rolling on this, little to no money will be forthcoming from outside sources and the taxpayers once again get stuck with the bill.

Vito

Time to address property taxes

Rutland Herald

April 15,2014

The reform in education has gained momentum this year as property owners question their rising taxes and the results of quality education in our schools. A recent approval of a 4 cent increase in residential tax rates and a 7.5 cent increase on nonresident taxes for 2014 and more to come next year certainly have caused 23 towns to reject their school budgets. This should be of concern to our state representatives. The state Legislature and governor blame these increases on our local school boards and voters. Not so fast. The Brigham decision was meant to equalize education throughout the state so that each school would benefit from equal spending per student. Unfortunately, Vermont has lost 15 percent of its students under Act 60/68 while the spending continues to rise.

Currently, Vermont has 85,000 students, and the costs have risen from $600 million to $1.4 billion per year over the past 12 years. To pay for this increase, property taxes continue to rise. One reason is that the state has not funded its share of these increases by large amounts. It has found surplus funds to help cover the gap, but this will go away after this year.

Another big issue is income sensitivity. Approximately, 70 percent of Vermonters are voting on school spending while at the very same time they are not being affected by the rising cost. This is because 70 percent pay their property taxes based upon income, which is “capped” at 1.9 percent of their income. As such, if these income-sensitized voters are capped, they really do not care because if they get a $5,000 property tax bill, they only pay 1.9 percent or, let us say, at $50,000 income, or only $950. The rest of the taxes due come from those who have higher incomes above $90,000, which includes every out-of-state property owner. And these nonresidents cannot vote.

Another negative to this whole Act 60/68 dilemma is the equity value of our homes. Property owners, which includes nonresidents and higher-income residents, are paying larger taxes, and this is contributing to lower values of homes and in turn the selling value. In fact, the assessed values in many towns based upon the coefficient of dispersion are over-appraised. The “equity” value of a home is decreased by the taxes paid on the property. As such, the market value is going down while the taxes are going up, even when there are fewer students.

One must ask just one or two questions to our legislators. If plumbers, electricians, carpenters, roofers, lumber sales, carpeting and Realtors are not making a solid living, why would they continue to live in Vermont? The second question is: Why would anyone want to build a new house or remodel an old house, if their property taxes are going up?

EDWIN J. FOWLER

Killington

Comment: Thanks Ed for your insightful commentary. You make a lot of good points. In answer to your question as to why anyone would continue to live in Vermont The answer is they aren't, they are leaving in droves. Killington's population is down over 20% in the last 10-15 years and the Rutland is down double digits as well.

Vito

Traffic jams help Killington

Traffic jams help Killington

April 02,2014

Am I the only one who thinks that the narrowing of the vehicular travel lanes on Woodstock Avenue is a good idea? Before your readers think I am crazy, let me explain.

As a Killington resident of over 40 years, I remember that during the late 1970s and 1980s that my wife and I would avoid doing errands in Rutland on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and holidays, because the traffic was backed up, in many cases, to the Pico Ski Resort, with red brake lights running all the way into Rutland on Route 4.

The local Killington restaurants and night spots and entertainment venues benefited from the skiers who did not want to get tied up in the traffic jam going to Rutland. As a matter of fact, many of the locals, including us, who could not wait to do Rutland errands discovered Stratton Road, Post Road, and if we could get down that far, Town Line Road. However, now Stratton Road is not a good option because of the Rutland High School and Stafford Tech traffic.

The skiers, along with the locals, quickly discovered that they/we could make it to Woodstock in less time than it took to get to Rutland.

I also wonder why our local developers are being asked to fund traffic impact studies from neighboring towns, but, to the best of my knowledge, the town of Killington was never asked for our input on this bizarre change.

If this is being done solely for a handful of bicyclists, I can think of many more scenic and safer bike routes in Rutland County than one of the highest traveled intersections in the state of Vermont. As a matter of fact, after the snow melts some of the very best mountain biking trails in the East are located right here at Killington Resort.

It was great to read Mike Coppinger’s Rutland comments relating to the Downtown Rutland Partnership’s results and progress in Monday’s edition. That good news is most welcome to all of us during these times of economic doldrums. I hope for Rutland businesses’ sakes, on Woodstock Avenue and also downtown, that they do not suffer from the results of this ill-conceived idea.

However, this will certainly help keep our ranking as the fourth highest taxed state in the USA, without using clear discretion on how we spend our hard-earned tax dollars in Vermont.

BOB MONTGOMERY
Killington

Comment: Below is the article on the proposed traffic engineering changes on Rte 4/Woodstock Avenue in Rutland.
Vito

(Rutland) City eyes changes to Woodstock Ave

By Gordon Dritschilo
Staff Writer | March 26,2014

Albert J. Marro / Staff Photo

Rutland City is considering a plan to convert Woodstock Avenue from four vehicle lanes to two vehicle lanes, a center turning lane and two bicycle lanes.

City officials and residents argued Tuesday night about whether fewer lanes on Woodstock Avenue would make for better traffic.

More than two dozen people attended a Public Safety Committee meeting about a plan to adjust the lanes on Woodstock Avenue during the routes 4 and 7 paving project scheduled for this year.

The plan calls for changing the road from two travel lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction with a left-turn lane in the center and bike lanes on the sides. An additional lane would run between the corners of Hillside Road and Stratton Road, giving one lane for drivers turning into McDonald’s and another for those turning onto Stratton.

The design follows a model promoted by the federal government and suggested by the Rutland Regional Planning Commission. It is not mandated, and the plan is to have a 30-day trial after the city’s Board of Highway Commissioners decides whether to continue with it.

The plan proved controversial at last week’s Board of Aldermen meeting, with a discussion ending with the board voting to have the city attorney draft a letter in opposition to the plan and then referring the issue to committee for more discussion.

Alderman Ed Larson, chairman of the committee, said the road sees 12,400 cars a day on average from North Main Street to Stratton Road and 16,600 from Stratton to Gleason Road. Larson and others expressed doubt that channeling that many cars into half the number of lanes would improve traffic.

While much of the discussion Tuesday focused on whether it was worth sacrificing the travel lanes for the bike lanes, Mayor Christopher Louras said the proposed change was motivated by the turning lane and claims of traffic-calming, and bike lanes had not figured into the decision-making process.

“I have not been looking at this from any perspective other than the safety of vehicular traffic,” he said. “We did not discuss, at any level, bike lanes when we were at the department head meetings.”

Louras said after the meeting that bike lanes were included because they were part of the model suggested by the state. He said he was skeptical about claims that the change would improve traffic, and only agreed to it with the provision that the city would have complete authority to call off the 30-day trial.

Jon Kaplan, project manager for the state Agency of Transportation, said the configuration is referred to as a “road diet” and is one of nine safety measures promoted by the Federal Highway Administration.

He said it has been found to reduce rear-end and sideswipe crashes, which together made up more than half the crashes recorded on Woodstock Avenue in the last six years.

Kaplan also said two sections of the one-mile road, each of them about three-tenths of a mile, were on the state’s list of “high crash” zones.

The existing configuration causes problems, Kaplan said, when somebody tries to make a left turn during high traffic. As the person turning waits for a space to get across two oncoming lanes, traffic backs up behind him. If another driver gets impatient and tries to go around the person turning, he runs risk of sideswiping or getting rear-ended by a driver in the other lane.

The center turning lane, Kaplan said, takes someone making a left turn out of the traveled lane and only leaves the driver one oncoming lane to get across. In addition, he said, the center turning lane serves as a “low-conflict” lane for emergency vehicles.

Kaplan said two examples of “road diet” can be found in Vermont, both of which have higher average traffic volumes than Woodstock Avenue. One is Colchester Avenue in Burlington, which sees an average of 18,000 vehicles a day. The other is Williston Road in South Burlington, with an average of 20,000 vehicles a day.

Several people identified themselves as Woodstock Avenue merchants and said they were vehemently opposed to the change as they it would damage their businesses by making it harder for customers to get to them.

One, however, said it would make turning into his business easier. Having been hit by a car while trying to cross Woodstock Avenue on foot, he said, he supported anything that would slow down the traffic there.

While he was not present at the meeting Tuesday, Thomas Donahue, executive vice president of the Rutland Region Chamber of Commerce, has commented that his informal survey showed his membership along Woodstock Avenue is evenly divided on the issue and the chamber would likely remain neutral.

Alderman Christopher Siliski said he arrived at the meeting skeptical.

“Although we’ve heard from aldermen about their strong beliefs ... we’ve also heard real statistics about how it might work,” he said. “I would go with the research and the statistical history. ... I’m very skeptical, but I think I’ve heard enough from the state to at least try it.”

Alderman Thomas DePoy, on the other hand, said he remained unswayed and that the two Chittenden County roads were not comparable to Woodstock Avenue.

“I don’t even want to see a test period done on this,” he said. “I think this is a mistake.”

Alderman Jon Kiernan said he remained skeptical, but the city should try it. However, he said, the city needs to make sure residents don’t see the new lines and think the change is a settled issue, and that they know how to register whatever complaints they might have.

The committee made no recommendation to the full board, and Alderwoman Sharon Davis commented that authority rests with the highway commission rather than the board in any case.

Larson said he expects to distribute various communications he has received to the rest of the committee and then call another meeting to review them.

@Tagline:gordon.dritschilo

@rutlandherald.com