Manchester sees gains in local option taxes (Killington sees net decrease)

Rutland Herald

By Patrick McArdle
STAFF WRITER | May 29,2015

 

MANCHESTER — The local option tax has provided more good news for Manchester, where returns are up about 9 percent from the same quarter in 2014.

Town Manager John O’Keefe said the town recently received the results of the local option tax collection for the first quarter of 2015.

For the rooms, meals and alcohol tax, the town collected about $76,500, an increase of about $6,400 or 9.1 percent over the same quarter in 2014, when about $70,100 was collected.

For the sales tax, the town collected about $175,100, an increase of about $14,300, or 8.9 percent over the same quarter in 2014, when about $161,000 was collected.

The local option tax is a 1 percent tax that communities known as “sending towns” or “gold towns” can impose on retail sales, lodging, or meals and alcohol sold in restaurants.

Aside from the option tax, Vermont municipalities don’t have the authority to impose any tax except property taxes.

Manchester, the first town to impose the tax, uses all three of the taxes. They are collected by the state and, after the state subtracts its fee, returned to the town in payments made every three months.

Other towns have seen gains this quarter, including Stratton and Middlebury, which both collect all three taxes.

Stratton collected about $216,100 in the first quarter of 2015, almost $1,500 or 0.7 percent more than the $214,600 collected in 2014.

Middlebury collected about $203,920 for the first quarter of 2015, almost $15,000 or 7.9 percent more than the $189,050 collected in 2014.

Killington saw a slight decrease in sales tax but its highest ever returns for the rooms, meals and alcohol taxes, according to Town Manager Seth Webb.

Killington collected about $265,400 in retail sales tax for the first quarter of 2015, down about $9,000 or 3.4 percent from the $274,560 collected in 2014.

But Killington collected about $218,220 in rooms, meals and alcohol taxes for the first quarter of 2015, about $2,200 or about 1 percent more than the $216,000 collected in 2014.

Webb pointed out that overall, local option taxes were down less than $7,000 from 2014 which had been Killington’s best year ever.

Webb said he also believed the improvement to the rooms, meals and alcohol taxes was a good sign for Killington’s tourist economy.

Other towns showed mixed results with some, like Brattleboro and Wilmington seeing some improvement while others, like Winhall and Stowe, seeing a small decline, according to figures from the state Department of Taxes.

O’Keefe said the news was good for Manchester. The first quarter of 2015 was the highest quarter since 2006 and the highest since Vermont became part of the Streamlined Sales Tax Agreement.

The SSTA, under which clothing is not taxed, hurt Manchester’s returns on the local option taxes because the town is home to a large number of retail outlet stores that sell clothing.

“There’s definitely a buzz,” O’Keefe said. “We’re even seeing more businesses coming to town. I think investors and entrepreneurs feel that there’s still room left in the Manchester economy.”

Another hopeful sign in Manchester is that several hotels are in various stages of planning or construction which is also likely to boost the town’s local option tax numbers.

While different towns use their local option tax money in different ways, Manchester has always used it to keep the municipal tax rate as low as possible.

O’Keefe said after the recent economic downturn, during which the town put money directly into keeping the tax rate low, the Select Board is planning to decrease its use of local option tax money to build up the reserves.

New unfairness (State portion of property tax to go up in Killington)

Opinion

Rutland Herald

May 27,2015

 

Now that the dust is beginning to settle on the new education reform bill, legislators may begin to have second thoughts about what they have done. Panicked by taxpayer unhappiness with high property taxes, they passed a bill that will raise property taxes. Taxpayers are going to notice.

Not only that, they introduced a new element of inequity that hearkens back to the days before Act 60 created a guarantee that equal tax rates would yield equal per-pupil revenues in all towns. Now some towns will be burdened with a significantly higher tax rate to gain the same per-pupil revenues as other towns.

The rush for a solution at the end of the legislative session created a mess of a bill. That is in contrast to the painstaking and thorough quest for a solution back in 1997 when Act 60 established the foundation for the present system, guaranteeing equity in education finance among the towns. Gov. Peter Shumlin has frequently touted the present system as “elegant” and as “the best in the nation.” Now he is poised to sign a bill that will erode the fairness he has so frequently praised.

As lawmakers wrote Act 60, they labored over computer printouts showing how various versions of the law would affect all the individual towns in Vermont. They were working to end a system that allowed Stowe to raise abundant revenues for schools at extremely low tax rates while Waterbury next door had to levy high tax rates to raise even much lower revenues. As they pored over computer printouts, lawmakers saw that a small number of towns would have to pay higher tax rates than previously — Stowe, Killington, Dorset and other property-rich towns — but that all towns would get an equal yield of revenue for taxes levied.

This year we learn that last-minute changes in the law have introduced inequality that will punish some towns for the benefit of others. In a commentary on the opposite page, Jack Hoffman shows that, according to figures from the Agency of Education, the homestead tax rate Barre City residents would have to pay would be 26 percent higher than in Brattleboro for the same spending per pupil.

Did lawmakers know that? Do they know what the new system will do to Burlington or Rutland or Peacham or Readsboro? It is unlikely.

The entire reform movement has been motivated by purposes legislators and the Shumlin administration have sought to disguise. They have the idea that some small schools in Vermont are inefficient, wasteful and lacking in educational richness. So instead of focusing on those schools and working in cooperative fashion to remedy individual situations, they have subjected the entire state to an array of penalties that will drive up taxes for many towns and put punishing burdens on schools that don’t deserve them.

Education Secretary Rebecca Holcombe has spoken the language of cooperation but has served the purposes of the governor, which are obscure. The coercive regime of penalties and higher taxes is the opposite of cooperation, and her willingness to further Shumlin’s plan shows the danger inherent in making the education secretary a political appointee.

Lawmakers have only themselves to blame. How many of them went before their town meetings this March and told townspeople: “We are working to create incentives and penalties so you will be forced to abolish the school board that is sitting right here, or at least to sap its authority”? If they had, they might have heard instructive words from voters that would have persuaded them to abandon their plans. Instead, most probably voiced lame platitudes to hide their intentions.

But school boards and voters will eventually notice what the Legislature has done. Maybe someone will be motivated to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the new inequities legislators have introduced.

In the meantime, Republicans who are not wedded too firmly to the idea that Montpelier ought to force cost controls on local school districts are in a good position to challenge this flawed and damaging example of political overreach.

 

 

Small steps taken in firehouse search

Rutland Herald

By Emily Cutts
Staff writer | May 26,2015

 

KILLINGTON — Plans for a new firehouse are slowly advancing, and at least one committee member is ready for an uphill battle.

The Fire Department Facilities Review Committee met with the Select Board in executive session Tuesday evening to present their recommendations for a possible location for a new fire station.

The committee visited a total of 12 sites and narrowed the number down to six before presenting their recommendations to the board, said Seth Webb, town manager.

“We’re working with the town and things are moving ahead slowly, but they’re moving ahead,” said Fire Chief Gary Roth.

Webb said the Select Board is taking advice from the committee and considering their next steps. Further discussion on the issue is expected on upcoming board agendas.

“We’ve got to work through this issue and get to a resolution,” Webb said.

The committee plans to hold several open houses during the summer and fall at the current fire station to educate voters on their findings.

The committee met six times between December 2014 and April. The six-member committee was formed in November 2014 with the purpose of providing the town and board with recommendations on how to proceed with the renovation or reconstruction of the fire department facilities.

“When I was first on the committee I was skeptical, but when I saw the fire house I said, ‘Oh boy. I’m behind it,’” said Vito Rasenas, committee member. “It’s a tough row to hoe even though its an essential town service. It’s going to be an uphill battle, no illusions about what is going on here.”

The 1970s building on Killington Road fails to meet a number of fire code and safety regulations. Issues range from plumbing and electrical problems to the size of building, said Roth.

“It’s run down, dilapidated and falling apart,” said Rasenas.

In February, the committee unanimously decided that the current facility is not only inadequate but that renovations would not be cost effective. They recommended that a new building be built on an “alternative site.” In the committee’s April status report to the board, a committee member said “It would take a lot of money to renovate the old facility, and when we got through, we’d have the same problems; there isn’t enough space inside, and there isn’t enough space outside. We need a new site.”

According to the report, renovations to bring the current building up to code would cost over $2.5 million dollars, without addressing the department’s needs.

“I think that their comments and their findings were very realistic and I think there is a good understanding of how the department operates and what our needs are,” Roth said.

According to draft minutes from the committee’s May 6 meeting, five sites were visited and rated in 22 categories.

They looked at sites on the south side of Route 4 between Thundering Brook Road and Moon Ridge Road, the north side of Route 4 near the Park and Ride, and a property on Killington Road near Charity’s Restaurant.

“We have what we are recommending but don’t want to let the cat out of the bag,” Rasenas said.

Killington Fire Department Wants New Firehouse

Vermont Standard, 5/21/15
By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

KILLINGTON — The Killington Fire Department Facility Committee has concluded that the organization badly needs a newer, larger firehouse, and soon.

Committee chairman Steve Finneron presented a detailed report to the select board and about a dozen residents who attended the May 19 meeting. The committee is made up of two fire department members and three non-fire department residents.

“Our first step was to evaluate the present facility on River Road,” Finneron said. “Fire Chief Gary Roth took the entire committee for an inspection tour. The building will just about house one fire truck, and isn’t even big enough to hold meetings.”

According to Finneron, the committee obtained three estimates for renovating the structure to satisfy current and future needs of the department.

“They all came up with figures that were pretty close,” he said. “The building is so out-of-date they estimated it would cost $2.5 million just to bring it up to building and fire codes.”

Besides shortcomings of the firehouse itself, there is a parking problem. When firemen gather at the site to leave for a fire, many of them have to park their vehicles on a neighbor’s private property.

“The present owner is very nice about giving them permission, but he may not own the property forever, and the next owner might not be as accommodating. Then we’d be in trouble,” Finneron said.

“We quickly realized that trying to renovate the existing site would not be at all cost-effective,” Finneron continued. “So we started looking at all available and seemingly appropriate land parcels within two miles of the current firehouse.” He explained that the distance from concentrations of residential property in town and the firehouse, affects the fire insurance rating for the homeowners.

Board Chairwoman Patty McGrath concurred.

“It affects the rates for commercial buildings as well,” she said, “and a change in insurance costs can be a hardship for residents as well as businesses.”

Finneron said the committee winnowed two dozen parcels down to a half-dozen that “would work,” and they are ready to make their report and recommendations regarding each of these possibilities, but would like to do so in executive session.

“If the location of the particular site or sites we’ve chosen becomes public information, the price will certainly go up immediately,” committee member Andy Salamon said from the audience.

Once a site is determined and purchased, design of the new facility will be the next issue.

“After Memorial Day the committee is visiting some newer projects built by fire departments in towns with similar needs. We should have a rough idea for a new facility that we can present to the Board in June,” Finneron said.

McGrath admonished the committee to think far ahead – “Thirty years out, as well as you can.”

Finneron pointed out that the parcels they favor all have enough land for significant expansion as future development presents the demand.

“Another challenge will be to convince the taxpayers to approve the final project,” said Finneron. “We hope to have an open house at the current facility so the townspeople can come and see what we’re up against, ask questions, and talk to the committee and the fire department about ideas for the new firehouse.”

At the end of the meeting the select board and the committee went into executive session to discuss the specific sites that are being considered.

The town’s Green Mountain International Golf Course is always a lightning rod for controversy. Town Manager Seth Webb reported that revenue at the club during April was approximately $18 thousand, while expenses that month were $235 thousand. Vito Rasenas and Patty McGrath asked for some clarification of the figures as Webb had reported them, and suggested changes in future reports format, to which he agreed.

Webb explained that the club opened in the beginning of May.

“Many of the members renew and pay for their memberships after the course opens,” he said. “This is why there was less April revenue this year than last.”

We also purchased stock and products for the kitchen and a large order of pesticides in April, which explains the higher expenses than last year,” he added.

There were questions about Green Mountain’s annual borrowing from the town’s general fund, money that is used to get the course and clubhouse ready for play on opening day.

“The club always pays this money back during the season,” Webb said. “We’ve been doing it this way for twenty years. I would like to suggest that we make it more transparent so the public is aware that it works, and to formalize the borrowing arrangement so it is in the public record.”

Rasenas suggested that Green Mountain should pay interest on the money it borrows from the town, which, after discussion, seemed to be a futile exercise that would cause more effort and paperwork than it was worth.

“In fact,” selectman Chris Bianchi said, “some people have suggested we just include the golf course operations in the general fund rather than have separate accounts at all.”

This caused a murmur of disbelief in the crowd, and Rasenas asked Bianchi to name the people who said such a thing.

“I’m not going to name anyone, but I’ve been on this board for quite a few years,” he said, “and I can tell you it’s come up several times during my tenure.”

On a brighter note, golfers said the course was in very good condition for how early in the season it is.

“I lived in Danbury, Connecticut for forty years,” Andy Salamon said. “The courses down there are in such terrible shape this year the golfers are going all over the place to find better conditions. I think you should market memberships down there!”

 Comment: I'd be happy to calculate the interest on the town's loan to the golf course. If the powers that be think that its more effort than its worth we should be reducing salaries. By my calculation, the amount of interest that would be due the town for the loan of $325,000 for five months at today's prime rate of 3.25% would be $4735.98. That took less than five minutes. I'll gladly calculate the interest for half that and save the town $2,369.72. 
The five month period and the $325,000 amount are taken from the 2015 projected golf course cash flow statement which can be found on the town's website.
Vito 

Ordinance introduced as possible solution to gun issue

Rutland Herald

By Emily Cutts
staff writer | May 16,2015

 

KILLINGTON — The Select Board and residents began their discussion about gun noise issues in the area with a possible solution.

At their May 5 meeting, the board and area residents heard the police chief’s recommendation about how to deal with the issue.

“I think a limited ordinance, not overbearing, something that says we expect people to be responsible with their guns, is important,” said Patty McGrath, chairwoman.

Police Chief Whit Montgomery presented the possible ordinance and state statutes related to the issue.

Montgomery introduced the idea of a restricted firearm discharge area within the town. Many of the areas he listed were close to hiking trails or areas frequented by families and children.

The following areas were recommended as restricted areas:

U.S. Route 4 and River Road running north to the intersection with Route 100 North; Killington Road and Schoolhouse Road to their end at Killington Elementary School; Dean Hill Road and Roaring Brook Road running north to the intersection with High Ridge Extension Road; Route 100 North and Barrows Towne Road running west to its end; and Killington Road and West Park Road running west to their end.

The restricted areas continue 200 yards off both sides of the listed roads.

“Some of the concern was keeping it away from the areas of River Road where there is human activity, where we have been encouraging recreational activity,” McGrath said at the meeting. “Nobody intends to do something stupid but we all unfortunately make choices that we’re maybe unaware of somebody else’s choices.”

According to the chief’s notes on the possible ordinance, it would not apply to residents firing guns for “destroying of animals” that pose an immediate danger to people or property or are seriously injured or diseased. It would not apply to hunting.

Montgomery introduced a possible fee schedule for noncompliance with the ordinance.

The noise issue was first brought to the board at the April 21 meeting. According to draft minutes from the meeting, residents noted an increase in the activity recently and that it was “unbearable and dangerous.”

“There has been a tremendous amount of calls this year,” Montgomery said. He added that in the 16 years he’s been with Killington Police, he has never received this many complaints before.

Dylan Partridge spoke at the May 5 meeting about his gun use. He said coming from Connecticut, he was happy that he was able to use his gun and didn’t know that he was upsetting his neighbors until a state trooper dropped by.

“I wish she would have come talk to me,” Partridge said at the meeting. He recommended an open line of communication to notify neighbors in the area to keep everyone “comfortable” and so that no one felt threatened.

“We support your right, but at the same time we support the right of everybody to be able to enjoy and use those roads,” McGrath said.

All of the chief’s notes are available on the town’s website. A further meeting to discuss the recommendations has not been set yet.

emily.cutts @rutlandherald.com

New site for Killington fire department recommended

Mountain Times, 5/14/15

Fire Department Facilities Review Committee issues status report
to the Selectboard

KILLINGTON — The Killington Fire and Rescue Department facilities no longer meet state criteria or the needs of the volunteer fire department. In order for the town of Killington to decide the best course of action for the future of these facilities, the Killington Selectboard decided to appoint a group of citizens to serve on a Fire Department Facilities Review Committee to help guide that choice. On Nov. 11, 2014, the Killington Selectboard appointed the following five citizens: Stephen Finneron, Otto Iannantuoni, Vito Rasenas, Andrew Salamon, and Andrea Weymouth.

The Committee was tasked with making a recommendation to the town on how to proceed with the renovation or reconstruction of the Fire Department facilities. The Committee is considering the short- and long-term needs of the fire department, has reviewed the study done by architects Dore and Whittier (hired by the town to review the fire department facilities), consulted outside experts, and fostered citizen participation in the review/recommendation process, which will continue throughout the process.

Furthermore, the Selectboard asked  Town Manager Seth Webb and fire department personnel to attend the committee meetings and to participate in this process.

The committee has met six times between December and April to tour the current fire station, review the facilities assessment and building feasibility study by Dore and Whittier, interview fire department and town officials about operations and requirements, analyze cost estimates and financing options, and review alternative building sites.

In February, the committee issued an initial status report to the Selectboard stating: “The current site is inadequate to meet the current needs and future needs of the Killington fire station and renovating the existing structure is not cost effective. Our (the committee’s) recommendation is to build a new structure on an alternate site.”

The committee also noted at its April meeting that the current fire station does not meet state building codes and has to be repaired or rebuilt. The committee believes that since it would cost over $2.5 million just to bring the building to code (without addressing many of the fire department’s needs) and the facility would still partially be on someone else’s land, if renovation was pursued. Therefore, it doesn’t make sense to invest in the current site, the committee concluded.

One member summed up the issue: “It would take a lot of money to renovate the old facility, and when we got through, we’d have the same problems. There isn’t enough space inside, and there isn’t enough space outside. We need a new site.”

As a result of these findings, the committee recommended that the town allocate funds to assess potential sites. “This assessment is required before further committee work can continue,” the committee stated.

To assist with the assessment and next steps, the committee is visiting potential new sites in May, and will visit other fire stations in Vermont to learn about cost effective building strategies. The committee will issue another report to the Selectboard on these findings.

The committee will also host a series of Open House Days at the Fire Station on Killington Rd. later this summer and fall, inviting voters to visit the station and see firsthand why the town needs to invest in a new facility.

On April 28 the Committee ratified this status report to the Selectboard. A copy of all the committee’s meeting minutes are posted at killingtontown.com under Boards & Commissions/Selectboard/Fire Department Facilities Review Committee.

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/new-site-for-killington-fire-department-recommended/#sthash.q4eb1kLo.dpuf

Killington moves forward with gunfire ordinance

Mountain Times, 5/14/15

 

Selectboard meeting fosters community conversation on useful but not burdensome restrictions

By Cristina Kumka and Polly Lynn

Killington will take steps toward adopting a new ordinance that restricts gunfire along certain town roads. The details, however, are still being ironed out after the town Select Board and the police chief received input from citizens at the Select Board meeting, May 5. About 18 residents attended the Tuesday meeting.

Chief Whit Montgomery, in response to numerous calls from residents about noisy, rapid gunfire along River Road, proposed a plan for “restricted firearms discharge areas.”

Under state law, towns cannot restrict the possession of guns nor one’s ability to hunt, fish or trap but towns and cities can regulate or prohibit gun use within the borders of their specific town.

“With those two directions by the state, it allowed me to come up with an idea that would be best for our town,” Montgomery said.

“The different parts of the town that I am recommending we have restrictions on… are River Road, Schoolhouse Road, West Park Road, Barrows Town Road and Roaring Brook Road,” he said, explaining that these areas are in close proximity to schools, recreational areas and golf courses. There was subsequent discussion on whether or not all of River Road needed to be restricted. The 4.8 miles on the other side of Thundering Brook Road may be excluded as they are a significant distance from town library and recreation fields and trails.

Montgomery said the prohibited area would extend 200 yards from the roads. He proposed fines ranging from $50 per ticket for a first offense to $200 per ticket for a fourth offense and all subsequent violations.

Defense of your life, property or animals, butchering farm animals, as well as hunting, would be exempt from the restrictions, he said.

“It’s mainly target shooting we are trying to eliminate from certain areas,” Select Board Chairwoman Patty McGrath summarized.

“What we are trying to discourage is someone, generally in their backyard with close neighbors, popping off and doing this. There is a balance. You have a right to have a gun but you have to be a good neighbor… respectful,” McGrath said.

McGrath wanted to hear from more “gun owners and people who hear the noise” prior to approving any new proposal for a town ordinance on gun fire restrictions.

Cristina Kumka is a correspondent for The Mountain Times, Cristina_kumka@yahoo.com.

Killington Police Chief Proposes Firearm Ordinance, Fines

Vermont Standard
By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

KILLINGTON—About two dozen residents listened intently as Killington Police Chief Whit Montgomery read the statute that authorizes Vermont towns to enact firearm discharge ordinances, followed by his recommendation for select board consideration. The statute allows a town to regulate discharging of firearms, but not their ownership or their uses that are covered by state hunting and firearm regulations, or their use at regulated firing ranges.

“As I said at the last select board meeting, I recommend prohibiting the use of firearms in specific areas,” Montgomery said, “rather than banning them across the entire town.”

He went on to list the areas he has identified as reasonable “no firearms use” zones: River Road (in entirety), Schoolhouse Road, West Park Road, Barrows Town Road and Roaring Brook Road.

“I also propose significant fines for violating the ordinance,” he said. “Fifty dollars for the first offense, $75 for the second, $100 for the third, and $200 for the fourth and any subsequent violations.”

He added that the regulated areas would be posted.

Select board chair Patty McGrath questioned including all of River Road, as some of it is very sparsely inhabited. Montgomery pointed out that the areas he has listed are suggestions at this point, and he expects them to be adjusted before any ordinance is adopted.

“For those who want to shoot in town, I would encourage them to set up a rod-and-gun club to designate a firing range away from residential areas and regulated for safety,” Montgomery said.

Dillon Partridge, who said he recently moved to Killington from Connecticut and chose his River Road property specifically so he could use his firearms without hindrance, asked Montgomery how far one would have to be from the road to fire a gun legally under the proposed ordinance. “Two hundred yards is the suggested distance,” the chief said.

Partridge explained that he has 34 acres, the rear of which consists of a very high, steep ledge into which he safely discharges his firearms.

“When I first moved here I made some of my neighbors very angry with my shooting,” he said. “They called Chief Montgomery to complain and he relayed the message. I felt really bad, as I had no idea how it was affecting them.”

He said if he has a few guests come from Connecticut to do some shooting, he will tell his neighbors ahead of time to minimize the negative impact.

A few residents offered remarks supporting gun use in town, others offered suggestions for compromise, registered concern about safety on trails and roads, and in the woods, all in a context of give-and-take and respectful listening.

“We don’t want to limit anyone’s right to own or use their firearms,” McGrath said. “We’re trying to find a balance that is acceptable to gun owners, residents who wish peace and quiet, and people who want to enjoy outdoor activities.”

Selectman Chris Bianchi said he thought the obvious need and market for a safe and resident-friendly firing range presents a business opportunity for someone with a little imagination.

Vito Rasenas, who was manning the TV camera, spoke up about demographic concerns.

“In the past decade we’ve lost 20 percent of our year-round population,” he said, then, pointing to Partridge, “We’ve been trying to attract people, and here’s a young couple who have moved here because of Vermont’s liberal gun regulations and their passion for shooting. It seems like a sport growing in popularity. We don’t want to pass regulations that are going to chase away people like them who want to live here.”

The board authorized Town Manager Seth Webb and Chief Montgomery to proceed with their gun regulation research and development of an ordinance for consideration. McGrath solicited input from gun owners and residents who are bothered by firearm noise and safety concerns.

Last week, several River Road residents complained about frequent gunfire sessions at a property on River Road.

Comment: Just to be clear, while quoted comment attributed to me is generally accurate it is not a quote, more of a paraphrase. It also incorporates other people's comments.
What I did say is the town needs to tread lightly with any proposed ordinances because there are a significant number of gun owners among residents and taxpayers in town who would be affected. This especially in light of the fact we are trying to grow our population and attract more visitors.
It's not to say I am against regulations protecting public safety and limiting gunfire noise. The reason this issue came up is from excessive gunfire in a neighborhood - hundreds of rounds apparently, from automatic or semi-automatic weapons. The neighbors are somewhat intimidated by these people and are fearful of retribution for complaining about the incessant gunfire, and rightly so.
This is really a case of one bad apple spoiling it for the rest.
The issue needs to be addressed and I am fully behind Whit Montgomery's suggestion of "Restricted Firearms Discharge Areas " which would limit gunfire in areas where public safety might be affected, i.e. heavily trafficked area near schools, golf course, hiking trails and recreation areas.
Vito