Cyclists to ride ‘legend’

Rutland Herald

May 22,2014

 

By Emma Lamberton

Correspondent

Cycling enthusiast and mechanic George Carson stopped competing in Rutland area cycling because of a perceived bias against cyclists.

“People weren’t embracing it. When a pack of 150 can’t get respect, there’s a problem,” he said Tuesday in the workshop of True Wheels, a Killington extreme sporting goods store.

However, the Killington Stage Race is giving Carson hope for the future of cycling in the region.

The Memorial Day weekend race is expected to attract approximately 600 riders from New England and Canada over three days. With each rider bringing an average support staff of four-six people, the race provides an economic boost for the local community.

“It’s a huge economic benefit,” said Assistant Race Director Peter Oliver, “especially because traditionally, it’s a slow time of year for tourism.”

Bill Elles, owner of First Stop Board Barn in Killington, which, along with True Wheels, sponsors a stage of the race, agrees that cycling should be viewed positively by the community.

“It brings good activity and outside traffic to the area. These cyclists can afford to come back for vacation,” he said.

According to the Vermont Department of Tourism and Marketing, the race brings more than $500,000 to the local economy through the weekend.

The Killington Stage Race is the reincarnation of a similar race held in the area until it went bankrupt in 2000. Once considered one of the premier racing events in America, it was extinguished by years of inclement weather, trying routs and subpar logistics.

However, the future of the Killington Stage Race looks bright as it has thrived under new management. “Gary stepped up the plate,” race official Chase Morsey said of Race Director Gary Kessler. “Of the big races I am involved with, he has the best organized event.”

The race motto, “Race the Legend,” shows race organizers Kessler and Oliver are not trying to separate the Killington Stage Race from its past. “The race has a lot of history. It goes back. We’re trying to tap into that legend,” Oliver said.

The strategy is working, and racers keep coming back for more. This weekend, Andrew Boxer of Ludlow will compete in the race for the sixth time. “This race is good for a two-peak season. I train to peak at the end of May and again in September.”

The Lookout & First Stop Bike Shop Circuit Race begins the three-stage race, with the first wave of riders leaving Skyeship Base Area at 8:55 a.m. Spectators are encouraged to gather at the finish. Another recommended viewing area is the President Calvin Coolidge Historic Site in Plymouth to get a look at an interim sprint.

The Champion System Road Race is the second stage, with the first wave of riders leaving at 9 a.m. Sunday from Skyeship Base Area. Spectators will be provided with chalk to decorate the finish at the K1 Base Lodge. Another viewing option is Silver Lake in Barnard, where there will be a feeding area.

Stage 3 is the Long Trail Brewery Individual Time Trial which sends off the first wave of riders on Monday at 8:15 a.m. The stage begins at the Route 4 pull-off west of the Brewery and ends at the Killington Town Office.

With approximately 600 racers participating, Oliver sees a lot of potential. “We will be looking at the future of professional cycling.” While the race presents an exciting future, it will also exhibit the known skills of Canadian cyclist Lex Albert, as well as Canadian Olympic cyclist Susan Palmer-Komar.

Race mechanic George Carson is excited for the Killington Stage Race and the way it is changing the public’s opinion of cycling. “This is a breakthrough year,” Carson said, “It is being embraced by the community.”

Slip Road Closure Shelved

Last night the the Killington Select Board shelved any actions regarding the proposal to close the West Hill Road slip lane. Their decision was based upon, 1.) The unexpectedly heated protest by citizens against the closure, (I presented a petition with 97 signatures against it during Citizen's Input) 2.) the lack of clear legal precedent allowing the Select Board to unilaterally do so even on a temporary basis, and 3.) the actual logistics of rebuilding the slip lane if  the reconstruction was put off. Apparently there is a particular piece of road equipment that will be used during the reconstruction of West Hill Road that will not be used to do the Killington Road resurfacing. The West Hill Road sub base is being replaced but not Killington Road's and that requires the specialized equipment. Thus if the Select Board chose to temporarily close the slip lane and decide to repave it after all they would have to bring this piece of equipment at a significant cost to do a very small portion of road.
Selectman Chris Bianchi did say they could revisit issue at some future date but for now no it is shelved.
Ironically enough the slip lane will be used for staging materials and equipment during the reconstruction and repaving of West Hill and Killington Roads so will be closed during that time.
Another related topic that came up was that the town will be generating excess millings off the roads during repaving. Town manager Seth Webb was approached by a Killington Road businessman about perhaps obtaining some of these for use on his driveway and parking area. For the sake of equity Seth Webb proposed that the excess millings be made available to all abutters on Killington Road if they wanted them. The Town will announce the program, gauge demand, determine if there is enough to go around and then decide if it needs to be put in a lottery.
For all those of you who supported my efforts, Thank you.

West Hill Road Petition

I am circulating a petition with the following language:

We the undersigned legal voters of the Town of Killington hereby petition the Selectboard to cease and desist any and all actions, considerations, studies, temporary closures, and legal proceedings pertaining to the condemnation of the West Hill Road “slip lane” and direct all other agencies in Town government to do the same.

If you are a registered voter in town and are interested in signing the petition please email me at vrasenas@hotmail.com and I will come by to get your signature.
I am currently at 46 signatures after canvasing yesterday afternoon.

It is currently tabled, but all that means is it's on the back burner. They are currently researching the legal feasibility of shutting the lane down temporarily in December on a trial basis. Frankly, I know it's only my opinion but as one neighborhood personality who used to head the ski school stated in a Schwazenegger type accent, "These people are idiots, this [proposal] is stupider than a barrel full of monkeys!".
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
And by the way there is another Select Board meeting on Tuesday May 20th at 7:30 pm, where you can voice your opinion (on anything not just this issue).

Mt. Snow resort wins $2M verdict

Mt. Snow resort wins $2M verdict

May 16,2014

•  Email Article
•  
•  Print Article

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rutland Herald

 

Mt. Snow resort
wins $2M verdict

BRATTLEBORO — A federal jury in Vermont has ordered the promoter of a major winter sports event to pay Mount Snow more than $2 million, agreeing that a contract was breached when a tour stop was moved to Killington in 2010.

The jury Tuesday found against The Alliance of Action Sports, NBC Universal media and MBC Sports Venture regarding the Winter Dew Tour.

In 2012, Mount Snow filed a federal lawsuit saying the promoters breached the contract, costing the resort more than $3 million in damages related to the media value of hosting the tour stop.

Tour organizers said the contract “was never fully executed and is not enforceable.”

Board mulls West Hill “slip lane” proposal

Mountain Times:

Board mulls West Hill “slip lane” proposal

By Stephen Seitz and Cristina Kumka updated Tue, May 13, 2014 09:55 PM

Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services 0

Considers traffic experiment
KILLINGTON - The Killington board of selectmen is pondering whether to temporarily close the "slip lane" at West Hill Road.
Town manager Seth Webb explained the proposal at the board's most recent meeting, May 6.
"The engineering consultant from DuBois & King made the recommendation to eliminate that lane and convert it into a green space for two primary reasons," Webb said. "The first is safety:  it could reduce speeds on West Hill Road and improve traffic safety. We basically have a plan to build a sidewalk with a crosswalk that would come over and dump people into that area where we're currently encouraging them to speed through... Additionally, in terms of safety, it would make the intersection more predictable for pedestrians and less complicated. You wouldn't have one road to dodge and then another road if you were crossing."
The second reason the consultant gave, Webb said, is that closing the slip lane offered an opportunity to create a green space as an attractive gateway to the town's commercial district.
"We are about to repave West Hill Road this summer," said Webb." We're going to do that in August. We felt it was a good time to ask the question, 'Is this something that the community wants to do?'"
Webb noted that there would be no point in paving the slip lane if the area was only going to be torn up later.
"There's another side to the argument the consultants didn't discuss," he added. "Concerns about traffic backup, concerns about accidents have been raised."
Selectman Chris Bianchi said that perhaps a little more research was needed before going ahead.
"Since our plan is to repave Killington Road from West Hill to Dean Hill next year," he said, "we'll be back in this same area paving again. That gives us an opportunity to do an experiment this summer and next winter of closing off that road temporarily, paving West Hill up to the light, and not repaving the slip lane this year. We could easily close off that section of road, do our own traffic study, and get comments from citizens who have actually experienced the different layout. "
Bianchi said the experiment wouldn't take long.
"If we decide in the second week in December that we don't like it, we can get the bucket loader up there to remove the snow and we're back to an open road before we even get to Christmas," he said.
Killington planning commissioner David Rosenblum said the current studies didn't go far enough - namely, they don't address winter conditions.
"They gave us some beautiful pictures," he said, "and if you look at those pictures, there's no snow in them. The studies seem to be oriented to improving the roadway during summer."
Rosenblum said he liked the idea of the traffic experiment. "You don't know until you try it," he said.
Those citizens attending the meeting tended not to support the idea. Vito Rasenas, who lives in the area, said he had spoken to his neighbors and "none of them seem to be in favor of this," he said. "Why fix something that's not broken?"
Rasenas also cited potential problems for truck drivers and heavy equipment operators in the winter. "For them to make that corner in the middle of winter is going to be more dangerous than letting them go on that slip lane through the winter. Sometimes it's really hard to make that corner. If you want to slow down traffic, just put a speed bump in there."
Another man echoed the concern regarding emergency services. "Has anyone asked the fire department about this?" he asked. "Let's say Vito's house is on fire. If they can't go through the slip lane to get to his house, and they get stuck in traffic to make a right at a light. Has anyone checked on that?"
Bianchi reminded the audience that the recommendation was intended to make the area safer for pedestrians.
"We're trying to make it more pedestrian friendly because there will be more pedestrians," he said. "You can't say because there are no pedestrians, we shouldn't try to improve the area."
The board voted to table the recommendation for the time being, pending Webb's research into whether the board has the authority to temporarily close the slip lane to test the concept.
Stephen Seitz is a correspondent for The Mountain Times, saseitz@comcast.net
Alternatives proposed
By Cristina Kumka
KILLINGTON - Town officials considering removing the turning lane or "slip lane" and island from the top of West Hill Road, referred to the proposal from a 2013 walkway alternatives report.  According to the report by engineering firm Dubois & King, there isn't enough traffic to warrant the traffic configuration as it is. Additionally, cars travel at too high of speed at the intersection, causing a hazard to pedestrians. The report suggested closing the "slip lane" and creating a public park or green space in its stead, and possibly creating a new traffic pattern, like a roundabout.
In an email, Select Board Chairman Chris Bianchi echoed some of the report's finding and more.
"A dedicated right turn lane at the light would cause very little traffic delay even at peak times," he said. "It's unsightly and a much more aesthetically pleasing entrance to the business/commercial distract could be created in that much larger public space… It creates a dangerous traffic pattern (ask our police department), people turning left at West Hill have to immediately yield to the slip lane, causing a start and sudden stop action, or they even don't yield at all... some people traveling up West Hill still ignore the "Do Not Enter" sign and drive the wrong way out the slip lane... it's not pedestrian friendly," Bianchi wrote to concerned resident Richard Kropp.
The premise for the lane change is part of an overall walkway plan from West Hill Road up to School House Road, along Killington Road.
The Dubois & King report put the cost of the walkway and multi-use path project at about $318,000, with more than $255,000 coming from a grant. The intersection improvement is not included in that cost, according to the report.
The Dubois report suggested that traffic counts would only slightly increase at the West Hill intersection if the ski village is constructed.
According to state law, the town would need to hold public hearings and notify landowners and the Select Board would have to issue a final decision on the "slip lane" change before any construction could occur. However, an "experimental" closing for a temporary amount of time, could be possible.
Rasenas and some other residents asked why the town would want to spend money on fixing something they believe is not broken.
"Even going through the process of vetting the proposal would cost the town money as they have to notify interested parties and abutting landowners. Just consider those mailing costs alone. I'm sure there would other legal costs as well," Rasenas wrote.
The Dubois & King report explained that towns with pedestrian and bike friendlier roads attract a younger, healthier demographic and that the Killington Road is the most underutilized ski resort access road in Vermont.
The next Select Board meeting is Tuesday, May 20 at 7:30 p.m.
Cristina Kumka is a correspondent for The Mountain Times, cristina_kumka@yahoo.com.












-----
Comment:
As I have already written in prior posts this is Chris Bianchi's "Field of Dreams". His statement,""We're trying to make it more pedestrian friendly because there will be more pedestrians," "You can't say because there are no pedestrians, we shouldn't try to improve the area." is evidence of that.  "Build it and they will come.", seems to be his philosophy.
Add that to the fact it was upon his urging that Dubois & King put the option of slip lane closure in their report. I and others remember him urging them at a preliminary briefing to do so. I looked up the Sept. 18, 2012 Select Board minutes where it stated, "The chairman [Bianchi] noted the discussion slide was dated and went on to mention possible changes to the entrance and exit to the top of West Hill Road." While this quote from the minutes doesn't specifically state closure of the slip lane, that is what it alludes to. It does not quote Bianchi, just summarizes his statement.
In addition, his statement, " It creates a dangerous traffic pattern (ask our police department), people turning left at West Hill have to immediately yield to the slip lane, causing a start and sudden stop action, or they even don't yield at all... some people traveling up West Hill still ignore the "Do Not Enter" sign and drive the wrong way out the slip lane... it's not pedestrian friendly," was totally repudiated.  I DID ASK OUR POLICE CHIEF,  Whit Montgomery, who told me he could recall no accidents, pedestrian or otherwise, at that intersection in all the time he has served as constable and police chief. Further, he stated the only time he saw anyone going the wrong way on the slip lane was when the installation of "Do Not Enter" signs he and Scott Bigelow requested were delayed by the town administration.
And if you can believe this, Bianchi stated at the Select Board meeting that he's worried that he could get rear ended when yielding at left hand turn down West Hill Road. How fast could anyone be going after making a ninety plus degree turn and only maybe 20-30 feet to accelerate and rear end a yielding driver. They would barely have time to take their foot off the brake.
Chris Bianchi is thrashing about looking for any reason to bolster this plan and his paltry arguments are so easily refuted its almost embarrassing except for the fact there are serious consequences, i.e. the lane closure.
And what kind of statement is this by Seth Webb, " We basically have a plan to build a sidewalk with a crosswalk that would come over and dump people into that area where we're currently encouraging them to speed through..." Then don't build the sidewalk there!!!!! Are we expected to be this naive?
Apparently it's not enough that the Select Board meeting introducing this proposal was STANDING ROOM ONLY with NO-ONE  speaking in support of the proposal and every person who spoke was against it.
I wish Mr. Seitz and Ms. Kumka included the discussions at the Select Board meeting in their reporting to accurately portray the pro and cons. They are readily available on PEG-TV online (WWW.PEGTV.com, Video on Demand) and PEG TV channel 21 next showing on Saturday May 17, at 2:30 pm.

Finally the Maintenance budget for Bill's/Park & Ride

Here's my back and forth with Seth Webb regarding the maintenance budget for Bill's Country Store/Park and Ride. Notice the date the budget was prepared, yesterday. The plowing number is really low. As I stated in an earlier post I would charge $2-3,000 for that much plowing - never mind they'll probably need loader work. And I'm usually really low on my plowing rates.


Thanks Seth. I’m happy to see the landscaping and plowing expenses coming out of the account. However I do think they are are low.

Vito

From: Seth Webb

Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 2:50 PM

To: Vito & Susan

Cc: Chris Bianchi ; Ken Lee ; Patty McGrath

Subject: RE: Town Maintenance Budget for Bill's LLC/Park and Ride facility

Vito

The plan is that the annual appropriations from the Town and the Chamber (ranging from $5,250 - $6,000 annually) are designed to pay for the annual maintenance and capital costs of the park and ride.  Those costs cover: landscaping, pavement striping, plowing & sweeping, and paving in FY-24 (w/ milling and re-milling in FY-14 & 19).   The annual maintenance and capital budget is attached.  This will be integrated into the general fund budget.

Seth

Seth Webb

Town Manager

Town of Killington

2706 River Road

Killington, VT 05751

sethwebb@town.killington.vt.us

802.422.3241 (office)

           www.killingtontown.com

From: Vito & Susan [mailto:Marla@Vermontel.com]
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 4:38 PM
To: Seth Webb
Cc: Chris Bianchi; Ken Lee; Patty McGrath
Subject: Town Maintenance Budget for Bill's LLC/Park and Ride facility

Seth,

I just want a final clarification of what exactly is included in the town’s $3,000 contribution to the “Bill’s Country Store”Visitor’s Center/Park and Ride facility maintenance costs. When I asked you at the May 7, 2014 Select Board meeting whether in kind services, such as plowing,  provided by the town were included in that amount you finally answered no after about 5 minutes back and forth. Chris Bianchi chimed in that at least part the $3,000 town contribution was to be put into a “sinking fund” for use in striping and repaving when needed (along with any contribution from Bill’s LLC at least as I understood it)

After re-watching the video of the Select board meeting I conclude what was stated is that only “hard costs” were included in that number. That is, monies actually disbursed by the town and not in kind service contributions such as the plowing, sweeping, depreciation, salaries and so on that go into the maintenance of the facility.

Is this correct?

During our conversation this morning you seemed to have said all costs were covered in the $3,000 budget. I acknowledge that you also said you won’t keep track of the exact time spent maintaining the facility. If that is the case, then the $3,000 number is misleading. As I stated at the meeting, I plow and I would charge $2,000-3,000 just for plowing never mind the summer maintenance. That would be above and beyond what is budgeted.

Just because the plow trucks are already going by there doesn’t mean there is no cost associated with their plowing the lot.

Thanks.

Vito

Warrant ordered for man involved in Killington bar brawl

By Brent Curtis
Staff writer | May 14,2014

Rutland Herald

 

A man who police say identified himself as a former New York City police officer is wanted on a $25,000 warrant for allegedly beating and seriously injuring a Killington nightclub manager.

Thomas R. Stevens, 45, was scheduled to appear in Rutland criminal court Monday to answer to a felony charge of aggravated assault and misdemeanor counts of unlawful trespass and disorderly conduct. When he didn’t appear at his arraignment, Judge Theresa DiMauro ordered a warrant for his arrest with bail set at $25,000.

Stevens, of Kings Park, N.Y., was allegedly involved in a fight outside the Pickle Barrel nightclub on Killington Road during the early morning hours of Feb. 8.

But he wasn’t arrested and issued a citation until the end of March, according to court records.

Killington Police Chief Robert “Whit” Montgomery wrote in an affidavit that Stevens was responsible for repeatedly assaulting Pickle Barrel manager Robert Labate, who was in the process of ordering Stevens out of the establishment for the second time that night.

Labate, who underwent surgery to repair fractures to his face allegedly inflicted by Stevens, told police that at 12:10 a.m., he ordered the New York man to leave the bar because of his level of intoxication and Stevens agreed to leave.

But 20 minutes later, Labate said Stevens was back in the bar swearing and yelling at one of the club employees.

Labate said he tried to defuse the situation but only drew the ire of Stevens, who, he said, cursed him and told him he would fight the bar manager outside.

Labate said he declined to fight, but at the door, he said Stevens grabbed his hair and pulled him outside where he said Stevens and some members of his party punched him repeatedly in the head.

Before the fight began, Labate said he would call the police if Stevens didn’t leave, to which the New York man allegedly replied “(Expletive) you, call the police. I am the police.”

Montgomery said Stevens told him he fought in self defense after being thrown to the ground.

Montgomery quoted Stevens as saying, “I was grabbed by the bouncer and pushed backwards outside. Next thing I knew, I was on my back being pummeled and had to defend myself.

Stevens, who Montgomery said had dried blood on his hands and pants and a scratch on the right side of his face, said he was a retired police officer from New York. During the interview, Montgomery said Stevens told him that he “knows how this works” and showed him his badge.

“He stated: “Cops need to look out for one another,” Montgomery wrote.

Stevens and one of his friends were given paperwork to submit official statements but never responded, Montgomery said.

If convicted of all three charges, Stevens faces up to 15 years in jail.

brent.curtis @rutlandherald.com

What Do You Think?

One of the rationals posed for the closure of the West Hill Road slip lane is that it would save the town money not to have to repave it every ten years. I have learned that the cost of repaving that approximately 100' strip is $10,000. It would still cost to convert the slip lane into a green space as well as ongoing maintenance such as mowing. So the $10,000 savings would actually be less. Then there's the incalculable inconvenience to the residents and visitors. It certainly does not enhance the quality of life in the neighborhood .
Now let's compare that to how much money the town is spending on the combination Bill's LLC Visitor's Center/Park and Ride Facility, which mind you is a partly a private enterprise. Also it does nothing to improve the quality of life in the town (except ease the financial burden on Bill's LLC, three of whom don't even live in town). You could say it provides a place for people to park but that is the case now without the park and ride.
First, the town is spending roughly $25-30,000 in addition to the $80,000 federal grant, building the parking lot, reconfiguring exits and entrances and demo'ing the snowmobile shack The town is setting aside $3,000 per year for maintenance costs, which have been described to me as "hard costs" for items like line striping and repaving. Ten years accumulation, $30,000. The town manager and Select Board have waffled on the cost of the actual day to day maintenance such as plowing and sweeping. Can't pin them down. I gave them a ballpark number for plowing of $2,000 - $3,000. I imagine conservatively another $1,000 for summer maintenance is valid. So add another $30,000 to $40,000 over a ten year span, to the $30,000 they actually admit to and you get $60,000 to $70,000. Add the  $25-30,000 for building the parking lot and that number is $100,000.
So, on the one hand over a ten year span they're willing to spend up to $100,000 on a privately owned facility and save less than $10,000 by eliminating the slip lane. Something does not add up here. Is this sound fiscal management?
What do you think?
Another rational for elimination of the slip lane is that the traffic count is lower than it used to be. Well I thought part of the purpose of the lane closure was to enhance the  Gateway to the Killington Road business district, which in turn is part of the strategic plan for economic development. Isn't the plan to increase visitors and thus traffic? So you're going to close the slip lane because there's not enough traffic so you can increase traffic. Is this some sort of circular logic, sort of like chasing your tail, or is it just me?
What do you think?

Slip Road Followup

Having spoken to many people regarding the West Hill Slip closure proposal some interesting tidbits surfaced.
I had thought that the whole idea was Chris Bianchi's. I didn't want to say it as I only had a hazy memory of it. After speaking with others I found confirmation that was indeed the case. Chris Bianchi directed the authors of the study to include the lane closure in the Killington Road beautification study. Then months later he uses the fact the proposal was in the study as a recommendation by the consultants supporting the lane closure (I smell weasel) when in fact it was his idea all along.
The Fire Department has chimed in as well. Eliminating the slip lane would seriously increase response time as the fire trucks would have to negotiate the 90 degree turn used to substitute for slip lane. This is a big deal as the during an emergency every second counts. And apparently the ladder truck would need an additional lane on West Hill at the turn for it to negotiate the turn. And never mind that besides calls the fire trucks need to go to the town garage to refuel.
If you read the "Highway Worksheet" on the town website, https://www.dropbox.com/sh/05fx8erlwcxgckp/AACJK_RWXyEeA1O2fGVP-X0Qa/2014-05-06 /Alteration%20-%20Discontinuance%20of%20W.%20Hill%20Slip/Highway%20Workheet.pdf, there is an item "Pay compensation ("damages")." What I take this to mean is if the closure results in financial damage to property owners the town has to reimburse them. Now I know that home insurance rates are in part determined by fire department response times to a given property. This in turn affects the value of a property. Is the town going to go out on a limb and have to possibly reimburse homeowners for their increased insurance premiums and property devaluation. Never mind the legal costs if someone decides to file suit or class action.
Even going through the process of vetting the proposal would cost the town money as they have to notify interested parties and abutting landowners. Just consider those mailing costs alone. I'm sure there would other legal costs as well.
And it should be noted none of the Select board live in the area so won't be affected.
This is Chris Bianchi's "Field of Dreams" - "build it and they will come." He even stated as much in the last selectboard meeting. I don't know why anyone would come to Killington to see a green space or sidewalk. It's just like the Visitor's Center. It's being touted as part of the streetscape of Rte 4 which will attract more tourism. Let me ask you, how many places did you plan a trip too just to see the Visitors center? People only go to a Visitor's center when they get somewhere not as a destination.
On another note.
The town assumes full responsibility for day to day maintenance of the whole parking lot at Bill's, not just the park and ride section. That means plowing, sweeping and so on. Another hidden cost subsidizing a private entity. When I asked Seth Webb if he had determined what that cost would be - of course he hadn't.

Millions of State Education Funds Going to Private and Out of State Schools

From The Mountain Times: Questions to the Ledge
Dear Editor,
I truly enjoy reading Anne Gallivan's "News from the Ledge" each week. It is informative and makes me, as a reader and community member, feel connected to my representative at the statehouse.
I was hoping, to go a bit deeper with this engagement and pose a question each week that perhaps, you Anne, could help me to answer. Since The Mountain Times is a weekly paper, this should provide ample time for response. I know many folks asking similar questions, so I think it will be efficient to print the responses for all to better understand the issues.
Here is my first question:
With regards to publicly funding education, why is it that the approx. 2,500 vouchers at $14,000 given to students in school choice districts are allowed to be used at private schools (as long as they are not religiously affiliated) and at out-of-state institutions (public or private)? How much of that approximately $35 million in taxpayer money is being diverted in these ways, I wonder? According to a legislative document from 2012, over $11 million annually is diverted to out-of-state schools for 793 students (about 1/3 of the total vouchers given), leaving approx. $24 million in-state. How much of that going to private schools? How much is Vermont receiving in tuition from other states?"
Given that we have a shrinking school population and a growing cost to educate our students, it would seem to make sense to keep public education money in-state and directed at public schools, instead of funding private enterprises or other states' education systems with our tax dollars. At least it's worth examining.
Thanks for your help,
Jim Haff, Killington

 Response to constituents question from the Ledge
Dear Jim and other interested Vermont tax payers,
I read your letter in last week's paper with great interest, as you have brought up a timely question. As the state works to find ways to reduce education spending, relieve property tax pressures, and provide more equitable student opportunities across diverse districts, it is appropriate to look into any policy that may be diverting funds from our financially challenged public school system.
Your question arises just as we are in the most pressured end-of-session marathon, so it is unlikely that I can thoroughly research this in the upcoming week. I will, however, weigh in briefly with initial comments.
I do not know if districts with no designated high school have always allowed the opportunity for students to attend private schools (with no religious affiliation) with the payment by the town of the state average tuition for a public school year. I do know that this has been the policy at the Barstow Memorial School since we moved to Chittenden 40 years ago. There has been a steady flow of takers that I am guessing results in an average of one student each year. Out-of-state boarding schools are often the destination, while some local schools such as Mount Saint Joseph Academy do not qualify due to their funding by the Catholic Diocese.
The 2012 report of $11 million leaving the state for such tuitions, while approximately $22 million stays in state, is enough to raise the question of the wisdom of our policy.
I know that the debate over school choice is alive and well, with passionate voices on both sides of the issue. Choice supporters believe that the interest of meeting students' unique needs is paramount, while opponents believe that public education should be fully and solely supported by our tax dollars because it is part and parcel of a democratic society.
The current proposal for consolidated education governance districts promises to maintain school choice where it has existed, but I do not know if this would be true just for the six years of transition, or beyond. Local control would be diluted, so the future would seem uncertain. House bill 883 was passed over to the Senate last week, but may emerge as a totally different animal.
Because you have raised an important question here, I would like to look more deeply into the history of the policy, and the potential for change after the education governance bill is either passed by the Senate, turned into a study, or left to die until another session. I look forward to a deeper discussion of this topic.
Rep. Anne Gallivan, State Representative, Rutland-Windsor 1

Cars in West Hill Road ditches not reported?

Someone on the Killingtonzone board wrote:

"The lane coming from the traffic light has a Yield sign already and since the police have no record of a traffic accident in that area I see no reason to change it. Guess they don't count cars sliding off the road or turning into the ditch as an accident."

Response:


"Most of the ditchwork done by errant motorists is due to snowy or icy conditions. Yes they going too fast, but too fast for the CONDITIONS. You can be going five miles an hour or less and there are times when there is no traction at all. I live on that road and am out in all sorts of nasty conditions plowing. I am aware of the lack of traction, have studded snows on a dually 1 ton, and slow to a crawl when approaching my driveway yet I can't tell how many times I've slid at least 50 feet past it. There also have been times that the only thing that saved me was dropping the plow and being stopped by a snowbank before I ended up in a ditch.
Add alcohol to the conditions and you get people in ditches. I know its alcohol because oftentimes no police are involved when the vehicles get pulled out of the ditches. I've actually pulled some out myself.
One other item of note regarding ditch dwelling. The curve at the top of West Hill Road is actually banked the wrong way which contributes to loss of traction as centrifugal force pulls cars into the fall line.
I have brought this up before without acknowledgement. You would think they would address this issue now that they're rebuilding the road but their priorities are skewed towards backdoor spending for economic development."

Slip lane headache tabled for now

After pretty much unanimous negative input from citizens at last night's selectboard meeting the selectboard decided to table the proposal to start the legal proceedings to close the slip lane on top of West Hill Road. A entry by "Bubba" on the Killingtonzone web forum sums it up pretty well.

"I went to the Selectboard meeting this evening. Not a single voice in the audience spoke in favor of the idea. Patti seems ambivalent although appears to feel obligated to look into the concept since it came from two different consultants over the past few years. Chris Bianchi appears more in favor. Ken Lee said little. After listening for a while, I referred to it as a solution in search of a problem and suggested killing the whole thing as a waste of time. The issue was tabled with the thought that the Board might simply close the area off on a few peak days next winter to test the impact but they need to find out what their authority is to take that action. Unfortunately I don't think this is dead yet. Whether you're a resident or not, I suggest writing the Board with your well reasoned opinion."


Thanks Bubba for coming to the meeting and your valuable input. I think you summed it up pretty well with the "solution looking for a problem" statement. While the board did table the proposal, they did not take it off the table. Those guys bear watching as they like to sneak things by the public. I recall last year they tried to put the money they set aside to pay off the golf course debt balloon payment just a few months earlier up for a re-vote stating it was just a dot your i's, cross your t's exercise, when all they wanted was to raid the fund.
If not for citizen input I think they would have initiated this process and the likely outcome would have been elimination of the slip lane. As I stated at the meeting last night, once they started the process legally it needs to run its course. Notwithstanding input to contrary, given where Patty and Chris's general sympathies lie the board would more than likely vote for slip lane closure. I spoke to Ken earlier and he was fully on board with closing the slip, so at least a 2 to 1 if not unanimous vote to close the slip was almost guaranteed.

Headache update 2

Seth Webb's Email response to my questions:

Thank you for writing to clarify. I have heard a tremendous amount of misinformation on  this subject over the last twenty-four hours, and in addition to answering your questions, I wanted to take the time to give you all the info on the topic of W. Hill. 

Vito wrote: “Along with the West Hill Road “slip” lane elimination proposal, it has come to my attention that a lane on Killington Road will be reconfigured as a turn lane. Can you tell me where exactly this will occur?”

-        There is currently no plan (as you mention) to reconfigure Killington Road with a turn lane.  What was your source?  [A selectboard member as it turns out]  It has been studied by the Planning Commission and recently recommended as part of a study to improve the viability of the Killington Road.  Killington Road is being repaved this summer from Rt. 4 to W. Hill. The lane configuration will not change.

Vito wrote: “Also my understanding is these proposals are the result of the Killington and West Hill Road reconstruction bids were under budget. Could you tell me what the these proposals are going to cost, what the savings were, or if any money will be available for other projects”

-        This is inaccurate.  We haven’t even received the bids yet.

Here is additional background on the West Hill Slip discussion:

-        The recommendation to close the slip was discussed at various Selectboard and Planning commission meetings in 2013, the first one being in DuBois and King January 2013 presentation on sidewalk alternatives for the extension from School House to West Hill.  The recommendation was made to (1) reduce speeds on West Hill Road and improve pedestrian safety (the sidewalk crosswalk would currently lead pedestrians into traffic travelling at high speeds) and (2) reconfigure the area as a green space / commercial district entrance

-        Landworks made the same recommendation in their study to improve the viability of the commercial district

-        As we are repaving W. Hill this year, we felt it was a good time to ask the question – do we want to do this?  We’ve heard from the consultants, but now we want to make sure we hear from the community.    No decisions have been made and we want to evaluate both sides of the question. In addition to the consultants thoughts, will this proposal negatively impact the traffic, or neighbors or other?     

-        Tonight the question will not be decided.  Far from it.  The Selectboard would simply initiate a the long process of hearings and other actions to consider the question.  I attached the document that describes the process. This would be step 1 of at least 13 (see below)

VLCT WORKSHEET Procedure for Laying Out, Altering, Reclassifying or Discontinuing a Public Highway 19 VSA § 701 et. seq.  

Vermont League of Cities and Towns Municipal Assistance Center April 2014 Please note: this document reflects current state law as of the date of publication. It is meant to be used for informational purposes only concerning the statutorily-proscribed process for laying out, altering, reclassifying, or discontinuing a public highway

1.      Selectboard Initiates Process. 19 V.S.A. § 708 or  Petition by Voters or Landowners. 19 V.S.A. § 708  ↓

2.      Set time and date for site visit and give notice (post, publish, and mail) to interested persons. 19 V.S.A. § 709 ↓

3.      Site Visit and Public Hearing. 19 V.S.A. §§ 710, 712 Decisions to be made: whether "the public good, necessity and convenience of the inhabitants of the municipality" require the action; and whether any compensation is necessary ↓

4.      Written Report / Decision by Selectboard Includes: the action being taken (laying out, etc); written description of the highway (refer to the survey plat, if any); identification of affected land holders; manner of notification to interested parties; amount of compensation to be paid (if any); and deadline by which obstacles must be removed. ↓

5.      Survey and Mark boundaries of the right of way it is being laid out or altered. 19 V.S.A. § 710 ↓

6.      Notice to abutting landowners (including copy of survey and notice of rights of appeal and damages)  by certified mail at least 30 days before file survey with clerk. 19 VSA § 33(f) ↓

7.      Materials to Town Clerk for recording in Land Records -- within 60 days of hearing. 19 V.S.A. § 711 Original Petition (if any) Written Report / Decision; and Survey plat (if any) ↓

8.      end Notice of change to AOT.  19 V.S.A. § 305 ↓

9.      Potential appeal of action (or inaction) to Superior Court  ↓

10.   Pay compensation ("damages"). 19 VSA §§ 712, 725, 726. ↓

11.   (If laying out or altering and no appeal)  Road Work. 19 VSA §§ 714, 743  ↓

12.   (If discontinuing and no appeal) Designation as Trail (19 VSA § 775) or Total Discontinuance↓

13.   (If total discontinuance) No public right of access and no municipal obligation to maintain. Individuals continue to have a right of access to their property. 19 VSA 717(c) Title to land reverts to owners of adjoining land. 19 VSA §775

Headache Update

After speaking to one of the select board members yesterday I learned the decision to eliminate the slip lane was in large part based on the fact the bids for reconstruction of Killington and West Hill Roads came in under budget, so they decided to use the money not only to eliminate the slip lane but also eliminate one of the downhill lanes on Killington Road and turn it into a center turn lane.
Now mind you, these are borrowed funds and there are other road maintenance projects that are going begging. This is simply a way to co-opt monies into so called economic development without actually calling it that. People in town objected to the amount of monies being spent the by the EDT so the EDT was officially disbanded and its functions distributed throughout town budget, in items like marketing and strategic investments.
If any of you feel strongly, one way or another, regarding this issue please make it known to the town manager and select board via email. They do actually acknowledge and respond to correspondence.
Seth Webb          sethwebb@town.killington.vt.us
Chris Bianchi     chris@killingtontown.com
Patty McGrath    pjm22@icloud.com
Ken Lee              kenlee@vermontel.net

Another Economic Development Headache

 Apparently the powers that be in Killington town government think its a good idea to close the "slip lane" on West Hill Road and create a major traffic mess at the light where West Hill and Killington Roads intersect. The "slip" lane eases  downhill northerly traffic by allowing easterly traffic to come off Killington Road and intersect Route 4 at the bottom of West Hill Road relieving congestion at the bottom of Killington Road. Can you imagine the traffic snarls that would result? You would not only inconvenience thousands of weekend skiers but also all the residents of the West Hill Road neighborhood as well as everyone living east of it.

People would need to make a sharp right hand turn at West Hill Road slowing downhill traffic behind them. Apparently this is a part of the Strategic Initiative to create a four season resort for the benefit of a few local businesses. This part of the initiative is to "beautify" and create green space along Killington Road as well as "calming" traffic so the drivers will be attracted to the bars and restaurants which if they were going faster they would not notice or consider. (Just what we need more drinking and driving.)
Another result, whether planned or not (I think planned as the main beneficiary of the town's economic development efforts is nearby) is to give more room to the Americade motorcycle invasion that is now under the auspices of the Foundry. I have bitten my tongue regarding this raucous event since its inception as it was one of the few successful initiatives providing off season business (no credit to the town's economic development efforts as it was a private initiative by Sal Salmieri of  Moguls which was co-opted by the town). This event is a disruption in the neighborhood rivaled only by the weekend ski crowds and is a far worse noise polluter as a majority of the motorcycles are Harleys and their ilk which are barely muffled and are especially loud when throttling down downhill.
Isn't it enough to disrupt the neighborhood for one weekend. Now they're planning a permanent pain in neighborhood's behind and making us pay for it besides! I used to look forward to the peaceful bucolic nature of our community during the off season before all this economic, four season development nonsense. Now I cringe at the thought of the town being overrun with motorcycles, jeeps, dogs and all kinds of other assorted disruptions to the off season quietude we once enjoyed in this town. All this just to benefit a few local businesses.

Please, if you are able, come to Tuesday night's select board meeting (Community Conference Room * Town Offices Tuesday, May 6, 2014, 7:30 p.m) to show your displeasure at this pending action (which the select board and town manager seem to be trying to sneak by the voters as it is being presented during mud season when the fewest people are in town).

Vito