A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

It’s a sad state of affairs when free speech is curtailed and censorship rules the day. I am referring to last week’s policy change at the Mountain Times wherein local political cartoons will no longer be published. I read the "Local cartoons offend readers who criticize lack of evidence, authorship; policies changed" letter from the publishers. It offers thin gruel for suspension of the local cartoons. While I agree that the cartoons are in questionable taste, they are after all cartoons. As to the argument of lack of authorship its pretty obvious that Jim Haff, whether he drew the cartoons or not, is the person responsible for them. History is replete with artists being commissioned to do work on others behalf.

As to evidence - certain business people in town own significant property and are buying up property and other businesses, expanding their operations not only in Killington but to other towns and even out of state. 

Are these people in need of financial support from the taxpayers? If they have multi-million dollars in assets why do they need the town to do marketing for them? And why do they need to use economic extortion to silence one of the few outlets for dissension to their political aims.

It’s obvious to me that these cartoons have struck a nerve, as they say “A picture is worth a thousand words." The statement that these cartoons are, "a jab at the KPAA and specific businesses without offering facts or explanation” needs further elucidation. There has been plenty of statements, debates and even letters published in the Mountain Times which detail the concerns people have with the town feeding a private organization that is the KPAA. As to specific businesses being targeted the only one I’ve seen in these cartoons is the Green Mountain National Golf Course, a public entity subsidized by the taxpayers. There is no question GMNGC is being paid for with taxpayer dollars. There is not enough space in this newspaper to document the facts regarding GMNGC's dependence on taxpayers.

These businesses and people who are using economic extortion to silence the Mountain Times need to look at themselves and answer why they are so defensive - maybe its because there’s more than a kernel of truth in these cartoons.

If these businesses contend that these cartoons are falsehoods why are they not responding in kind or in writing instead of resorting to economic blackmail by threatening to pull, and in the case of GMNGC pulling, their advertising from the paper. Are they afraid of exposing themselves?

And to boot this is not the first time this extortion has taken place - a certain petition signee was targeted not long ago with the same malevolent tactic because the petition did not fall in line with a certain business's interests. And no, I am not giving  evidence because I don’t want this party suffer further economic damage. The people involved know who they are. Many people in town know the story. It just cannot be stated in detail publicly due to possible further retaliation.

As far as I am concerned this economic extortion is malevolent behavior. The taxpayers should really reconsider if these entities deserve to be subsidized with taxpayer funds if they continue with such brazen malevolence while on the public dole. Never mind they are stifling free speech and engaging in censorship. 

What’s next if we allow these kind of strong arm tactics to be unfettered and threaten our access to communication channels with which we can exercise our freedom of speech?

If this kind of behavior persists and this fascism is not curtailed the townspeople should really consider eliminating  subsidies to the KPAA, elimination of the EDTC, and some sort of sound economic disposition of the GMNGC. There is questionable need for subsidizing these ventures now that Powdr has jumped in and increased Killington Resort’s summer appeal by expanding its offerings. The capital investments by the Resort have increased summer business by a far greater margin than the town’s efforts. 

The taxpayers should not be paying to be silenced!

Vito

Police ID dead Killington woman

Rutland Herald
September 28,2016

KILLINGTON — Police are waiting for the results of an autopsy of a 30-year-old woman who was found dead at a Killington Road residence Monday afternoon.

Vermont State Police said there was no indication of foul play in the death of Ashleigh Rector of Killington, but said “there were indications at the scene of illegal drug use ...”

The cause and manner of death are pending at this time, police said.

Rector’s body was taken to the state chief medical examiner’s office for an autopsy.

State Police and emergency medical services responded just after 1:45 p.m. for a report of an unresponsive adult female.

Rector was pronounced dead at the scene by emergency responders, police said.

Local cartoons offend readers who criticize lack of evidence, authorship; policies changed

Mountain Times

September 28, 2016

By Polly Lynn Mikyla

In last week’s edition, Sept. 21-27, an advertised political cartoon was published that offended many readers. While the cartoon (in addition to all letters and op-eds we publish) does NOT necessarily reflect the opinion of the newspaper or any of its staff members, many readers and businesses were confused about this distinction. For this reason we find it necessary to offer an explanation and update on our policies.
First, policies for submitted content differ from advertising. Submitted content must be authored because we believe that accountability makes for responsible debate. All submissions are printed at the editor’s discretion. Advertisements, on the other hand, are taken for a fee and responsibility of the content resides with the advertiser as along as they do not libel another person or institution.
Second, as a policy we do not censor or discriminate against advertisers or opinion submissions (letters or op-eds) based on their political points of view — for example: ads, letters and op-eds from both Democrats and Republicans have an equal opportunity to appear in the Mountain Times.
That being said, we understand why folks were offended by last week’s political cartoon which ran as a paid advertisement on the opinion pages. The cartoon was a jab at the KPAA and specific businesses without offering facts or explanation, which is the main problem with political cartoons as a genre.
Since publishing last week’s political cartoon paid for by Jim Haff, I have spoken to and researched other local paper’s policies on this matter. Many, including the Addison Independent and Seven Days, have run into similar opposition to local political cartoons in the past and, therefore, rarely include them, opting instead to have articulated debates about local issues through letters to the editor.
Moving forward we will adopt that same policy of not publishing local cartoons and instead encourage our readers to articulate their opposition or support for town policies, local issues and/or comments to the Mountain Times via letters to the editor and/or op-eds.
The opinion page of the Mountain Times will remain an open forum for our community where all viewpoints can be articulated. As has always been, the opinions expressed there do NOT necessarily reflect the opinion of the newspaper or any of its staff members. The only exception to this is when we label an opinion expressly as an “editorial.”

evidencelocal cartoons

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/local-cartoons-offend-readers-criticize/#sthash.IyO3FtES.dpuf

The cartoon you won't see in the Mountain Times or anywhere else for that matter.

Are We Voting For The Town Or The KPAA

Mountain Times 

September 21, 2016

Subject: How Important This Election Is 

Hi all,

First, thank you everyone for you efforts in making 2015 a great year at the KPAA.  I look forward to our continued progress in 2016.  We were able to accomplish so much by working together as the business community, Killington Resort, and the Town. These relationships have allowed us to grow our organization significantly.  

With the Town Meeting/Election Day right around the corner, I wanted to reach out to all KPAA board members and stress the importance that not only you get out to vote, but that you also get your employees and friends.

This is a critical year for the KPAA!!!!!!!!!!! 

Today, our community is better off than it was a year ago. Everyone must understand this election is critical to the life of the KPAA. One Candidate clearly supports our objectives and the other? 

The other candidate has proven to be destructive in the past, and I am sincerely concerned for the future of the KPAA if they were elected. Everyone must understand that things we have worked so hard to develop would go away. We could not be housed at our new Welcome Center without the support of the town with the park and ride nor could we solely employ such a skilled director for our organization.  Without these two assets we could not partner with the Resort in such a productive and collaborative manner. It takes actions from the organization’s members to drive the will of the organization and we all need to realize these possible effects if the wrong candidate is elected. 

I know I don’t want to start over, and re-develop this organization. We all have worked too hard and sacrificed too much to get to this point. As a community, we should make sure we are advocating for a candidate that supports our mission and progress.  Please get out and vote this coming Tuesday, March 1, and remember the candidates who have helped us get to this point and need your vote.

Thank you,
Howard 
[Howard Smith, President of the KPAA]

Comment:

Enjoy this cartoon as it probably will be the last published in the Mountain Times. Apparently this, and other recent political satire cartoons published in the Times, have struck a nerve. Rumor has it that businesses are threatening to pull their advertising from the Times if any further political cartoons of this ilk are published.

I guess free speech is dead in Killington and the town itself is guilty of subsidizing its death at the hands of a few businessmen profiting from the town's subsidies to their political organization, the KPAA. 

The KPAA is a political organization tax exempt under the IRS Section 501(c)(6) guidelines. One of its main  functions is political lobbying. So in effect the town is actually subsidizing the lobbying of itself to further the political business aims of the subsidized entity. 

So while the above cartoon may be in brazenly questionable taste, there is more than a kernel of truth in it.

Vito

Killington Struggles in Switch to Fiscal Year Accounting

Vermont Standard

9/22/16

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

After 10 minutes of reviewing year-to-date figures from July and August 2015 with those from 2016, selectman Chris Bianchi said, “It’s become obvious that the transition from a calendar year to a fiscal financial year basis is a full three-year process.”

The conversion was necessary in order to use the NEMRC (New England Municipal Resource Center) software to manage the town’s finances, as NEMRC’s system is based on a July 1 to June 30 fiscal year, and it required a one-time eighteen-month budget to bring starting and finishing dates in line with NEMRIC’s format. Any year-to-date figures have to be interpolated from an actual January 1 start date to a calculated July 1 start date.

Confusing?

In order to give the select board estimated YTD monthlycomparisons between the two financial periods, town employees have to create custom spreadsheets showing NEMRC figures and estimates from Killington’s prior system.

Bianchi questioned whether the exercise is worth the effort and asked Schwartz how much time employees have to spend on the customization, a question for which she did not have a ready answer.

The July and August figures presented more confusion. Parks and Recreation Department revenues were higher than last years, but other revenue receipts were down. Bianchi explained that the last four tax payments, one of which was received during the July and August period last year, were higher because they included taxes for an extra half year, which would have inflated the tax receipts for that period.

There was also a question about when the town’s significant options taxes are received, which Select Board chair Patty McGrath confirmed is 45 days after the end of the quarter to which they apply. If accounting for options tax receipts were affected by the fiscal period change, it would affect the YTD revenue figures.

Schwartz said total general expenses were 5 percent lower for the two-month period this year than last year.

In her regular report on collection of delinquent taxes Schwartz said there is still about $258,100 due. She sent out 64 certified letters to property owners who owe delinquent taxes over a year old, including those who have been performing according to payment plans but whose agreements have expired and needed recasting. She has signed receipts indicating that 51 of the letters have been received by the addressees.

“Thirteen taxpayers have paid their delinquencies in full,” she said, “amounting to $52,311.”

In addition, six taxpayers have signed or have pending new payment plan agreements to retire their delinquent taxes.

“We are working with individuals to make sure payment of their old taxes doesn’t interfere with payment of current obligations,” Schwartz said. “We don’t want to trade paying off delinquencies just to create new ones.”

McGrath applauded Schwartz’s efforts, saying her success in making tax receipts more predictable makes budgeting for the town a lot easier, which provided a segue into discussion of next year’s town budget.

Using past budget preparation timeline documents, Schwartz created and presented the board with a new one, showing deadlines for department budget submissions and time goals for board review. The selectmen are considering multiple meetings to get the job done.

The Town Manager said she has a goal for the upcoming budget to make it reflect both actual expenses and actual needs in an effort to avoid either deferred investment or moving funds around within the budget during the year to adjust to reality. As an example she cited the town’s commitment to updating its technology equipment and systems. Instead of repeating the “usual” $12,000 line item, she said, which would be more than gobbled up by any upgrade, she would like to get some hard numbers for what is needed and use them when budgeting.

“I’d like to see us discontinue underfunding,” she said.

Items for which town departments will want budget expansions include, she said, GIS Mapping for the Listers, a budget for the Shelburne Memorial Library to host events and to cope with additions to their reroofing costs, and a bigger expense and revenue budget for Parks and Recreation to reflect their growth and successful expanded programs.

The town is beginning to gear up for hosting the 2016 Audi FIS World’s Cup races over Thanksgiving weekend. Amy Morrison, representing Killington Piko Area Association and Killington’s Economic Development Committee, got approval from the selectmen to market 3-by-5-foot banners to local businesses that they can display on their premises during the event. The cost will be $100 each.

Schwartz said the World Cup weekend will bring people from all over the world to Killington, which will create unusual logistical and security challenges. For that reason she has begun what she calls “Tabletop Exercises,” bringing together State Homeland Security and Emergency Management people, the Killington Police Department and other participants and advisors to set up a coordinated security plan for the event. The first meeting will be at the Resort’s Base Lodge on Friday, Sept. 23 from 8 a.m. until 11 a.m.

McGrath said she thinks this is a good idea, remembering how the town’s Emergency Planning helped coordinate services, communications and rescue efforts during and following Tropical Storm Irene in 2011.

Click’d: Vermont towns must embrace telecom infrastructure

Rutland Herald
9/17/16

It’s easy to write off the Castleton Select Board’s objection this week to the proposed installation of a 120-foot utility pole as a classic example of small-town NIMBYism (bit.ly/csb-pole), but the situation is indicative of the larger issue of deficiencies in Vermont’s telecommunications infrastructure and raises the question of just what we’re going to — and willing to — do about it.

Like other rural states, Vermont has struggled to keep pace with communications technology. According to the consumer advocate group Broadband Now, Vermont is ranked 49th in wired broadband connectivity with only 21 percent of the population having access to internet speeds of at least 25 megabits per second, the FCC standard for wired broadband. (Source: broadbandnow.com/Vermont)

If that data doesn’t jive with Gov. Shumlin’s declaration of victory back in early 2013, when he boasted 99 percent broadband connectivity statewide, blame the FCC, which raised the standard for “adequate broadband speed” to 25mbps in January 2015. But this is not simply a matter of federal regulators arbitrarily moving the goal posts. The higher standard is a reflection of the speeds necessary to perform basic internet operations on multiple devices. So while it may be technically true that upwards of 90 percent of Vermonters have access to some manner of broadband, most are seeing speeds far below adequate.

Even here in Rutland, a city of more than 16,000, connectivity is an issue as I discovered recently when I attempted to switch internet providers. Currently, I am a Comcast subscriber paying $80.55 a month for 25mbps internet. My connection is fine, but the price is steep — I am only paying for internet; no TV, no phone — so I decided to explore options.

FairPoint wasn’t much help. The price was right — around $40 a month, including router rental — but the fastest speed available at my location was a meager 3mbps. I called on two separate occasions to verify if this speed was correct. The second customer service representative told me that, while 3mpbs isn’t optimal, it’s fast enough to stream video with only occasional buffering. Sorry, and I know this is very #firstworldproblems, but it’s 2016; I’m not paying for janky internet.

You see, DSL (digital subscriber line), which is the technology FairPoint uses, is a “last-mile” service that connects to the internet using existing phone lines. The benefit of this technology is that it uses telephone infrastructure to cover large geographic areas. The drawback is that speeds get slower as the distance from the provider’s central office increases. In this case, my house, which is only 1.5 miles from FairPoint’s downtown hub, is too far away. (For what it’s worth, my old apartment in downtown Rutland was less than a block from the same office and the speeds were atrocious. #FailPoint.)

My only other option, SoverNet, was too far from the central office to provide any service at all.

So my choices are A) get gouged by Comcast or B) get substandard service from FairPoint. That’t not much of a choice at all.

Back over in western Rutland County, broadband connectivity is similarly spotty and cellular phone coverage is nonexistent in certain areas. Don’t believe me? Try making a call on parts of Lake Bomoseen or almost anywhere along Route 30.

Some people may argue that there is something quaint or charming about being off the grid, about being unplugged and away from all the hustle and bustle of modern life. That’s a nice sentiment, but our desire to keep life simple shouldn’t come at the expense of progress. We’re not hobbits living in the Shire. We can (and should) have both.

Castleton, more than most towns in the county, should see the importance of supporting infrastructure improvements such as the one Mobilitie is proposing. It’s home not only to a university of more than 2,200 undergraduate and graduate students but also it a bustling summer tourist destination in Lake Bomoseen, which welcomes thousands of visitors and seasonal residents. Both populations are from parts of the country where reliable cellular coverage is the norm.

But while the pole will improve coverage and connectivity to a part of the region that is essentially a dead zone, such projects must balance technological necessities and aesthetic concerns. That’s no easy task. I won’t deny that the pole’s placement near Castleton’s historic district is less than ideal. Mobilitie should listen to the Select Board and work with them to find a solution that both sides find agreeable. Conversely, the Select Board needs to be accommodating. To uncompromisingly stand in the way of better infrastructure is shortsighted.

Castleton leaders should look to Killington for inspiration on how to make lemons out of lemonade. A newly installed cell tower on Killington Road has been painted in the town’s branded colors and logo.

It’s still a cell tower, but at least it looks interesting — and far nicer than those ridiculous looking ones disguised in fake tree branches.

In explaining his opposition to the pole during this week’s Select Board meeting Castleton Selectman Bob Spaulding quipped, “I’ll just have you know, my kids probably won’t talk to me the next six months now that I’ve said this.”

Spaulding may have been joking, but his comment touches on an important point that Vermonters should take to heart — one that is too easily lost between older and younger generations. If Vermont is serious about becoming an attractive, competitive destination for 21st-century businesses and the coveted young professional demographic, it must step up its telecom game or be left behind. Granted, this isn’t the silver bullet, but it’s nonetheless an essential component.

I respect and appreciate the desire to preserve the state’s bucolic brand and keep the landscape pristine, but such efforts should not stifle progress. A middle way must be found — one that both honors the rural landscape and allows for intelligent, conscientious growth.

CLICK BACK

What do you think? Tell me about it on Twitter @JimSabataso using the hashtag #clickdpoles.

Man denies embezzling thousands from Killington resort

Rutland Herald

By Kathleen

PHALEN Tomaselli

STAFF WRITER | September 13,2016

 

A Weston man pleaded innocent Monday in Rutland criminal court to two counts of felony embezzlement.

According to Killington Police, while Michael E. Jenkins, 35, was manager of the Woods Resort and Spa on Killington Road, there were 26 unauthorized credit card purchases totaling more than $2,300, and $1,100 from petty cash was missing.

The discrepancies first appeared in February when another employee noticed conflicts in the records and some suspicious banking activity, police said.

In a series of emails to the Woods Resort president, Heidi Bomengen, Jenkins said he would pay back everything. And in May, Jenkins told Officer Donald Howard that he got a new job at Topnotch Resort and Spa in Stowe and would be sending Bomengen $100 each week until the total was paid back.

Bomengen confirmed the discussion with police. She told Howard that she did receive her first $100, but the bank wouldn’t cash the check because it wasn’t made out properly. On June 2, Bomengen told police that she had received three money orders from Jenkins; two were for $1,000 each and one was for $100. Jenkins also sent a personal check for $129, according to police.

Howard spoke with Bomengen on June 15 and that was last she had heard from Jenkins.

According to police, the total owed to Bomengen and the Woods is over $3,000 and the amount paid back is over $2,000.

Jenkins was released on Monday on the condition he not, as part of his employment, handle petty cash or company credit cards without direct supervision.

His next hearing is scheduled for Oct. 17 in Rutland criminal court. 

Lookout Tavern’s Golf Tournament Set for 13th Season

Vermont Standard 

Lookout Tavern owners Phil and Joy Black host a day of golf, fun, great food and community spirit during the 13th annual Lookout for Each Other Golf Tournament on Monday, Sept. 12 at killington Resort’s Golf Course. All of the proceeds from this year’s event will benefit the killington Mountain Bike Club.

The annual event has more than $150,000 since its inception and donated all proceeds to a variety of local needs including families who have lost a parent, cancer victims, area youth organizations, women’s clubs, and more. Last year, the event raised over $14,000 to benefit Vermont Adaptive Ski and Sports, Rutland Meals on Wheels, and the Rutland Community Cupboard.

“Living and working in Vermont is about being a part of the community and that’s what is important to us,” said Phil Black, founder of the tournament. “Coming together to support local charities is a way for everyone to give back to their community and we’re glad that we’ve been able to raise and then donate these funds over the years. We try to reach out to a variety of causes and charities so that as many people and organizations can benefit.”

This year’s goal is to raise the remaining $20,000 needed to complete Phase 1 of the killington Community Trail Initiative. The application by the Town of killington to build a mountain bike trail system on U.S. Forest Service land was approved in November 2014, and construction of the first two miles began this summer. The project envisions 15-plus miles of family-friendly mountain bike trails. The system is a collaborative effort between the U.S. Forest Service, Town of killington, killington Mountain Bike Club, and the Vermont Mountain Bike Association.

Always a sell-out event, players are encouraged to register early, as space is limited. The cost is $100 per person, and includes golf at killington Resort, cart, lunch, prizes, and dinner at the Lookout. Hole sponsorships are available for $125/hole for those who want to contribute as well. To register, stop by the Lookout Tavern on killington Road or call (802) 422-5665.

Library Roof To Cost 22 Percent More Than Expected

Vermont Standard

9/9/16 

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

killington—The Shelburne Memorial Library has long been a jewel in killington’s crown. But over recent years ice dams have rapidly deteriorated the fairly new roof, and when re-shingling was considered design flaws were discovered, the correction of which brought the estimated cost to approximately $200,000.

At Tuesday night’s select board meeting, Library Trustee and Roof Committee member Diane Rosenblum announced more bad news regarding the roof – the only bid for the reroofing project came in at $44,000 more than the original estimate.

“Insulation issues are involved in most of the additional cost,” Rosenblum said. “The original estimate for insulation in December or January was $57,000. In the contract it is $99,000.”

The additional costs amount to 22 percent of the original project cost estimate.

Chet Hagenbarth, who also serves on the Library Roof Committee, said there are two major factors resulting in the insulation cost increase.

“First of all,” he said, “new code requirements mean we have to put in an ignition barrier. This will cost about $15,000.”

“Secondly, when the original estimate was created, 5 ½-inch, R38-rated insulation was acceptable for the project. Now the minimum we can use is 8-inch, R49-rated material. And for our coverage area that’s a cost of $11,000 per additional inch.”

He explained that roofers would not guarantee adequate protection against ice dams in the future unless the thicker, higher-rated insulation is used.

Rosenblum said there had been some question in the past about the quality of the original roof, installed by Rich Moore Construction, but they’ve discovered that Moore installed the roof correctly according to architectural specifications.

“The architect gave us plans for a roof not suited for northern climates,” Rosenblum said. “Rich Moore did not do anything wrong.”

Funding the cost overrun will be a challenge, Rosenblum said, but she feels it is doable.

“We are taking $8,700 out of our operating budget,” she said.

Most of the rest will come from cutting back on parts of the renovations

See LIBRARY ROOF - Page 4A

---

LIBRARY ROOF 

From Page 3A project – items that were originally thought important, but which the Trustees feel they can defer, such as a plumbing upgrade, flooring work, and upgrading the HVAC system.

“These are things we can always do later if we still feel they are pertinent,” Rosenblum said.

Hagenbarth added that heat cost savings provided by the new roof and insulation should be close to $2,000 per year.

Resident Vito Rasenas asked how many bids were received, and if the $244,000 bid was the lowest.

Hagenbarth said there was only one bid received.

“I personally made six or seven calls to contractors I thought should be interested in bidding. We posted the proposal and advertised for bids, but this was the only one we got,” he said.

Select board chair Patty McGrath said in her experience it was always tough to get contractor bids when there’s a lot of building and construction work going on.

The board moved and passed approval for the library to move ahead on the project per the proposal presented by Rosenblum and Hagenbarth.

Vito Rasenas, representing the committee charged with finding a site for a proposed new killington fire house, reported that a location the committee had thought promising, across from Moon Ridge, had lost some of its glamour upon closer inspection.

Chet Hagenbarth explained that a stretch of wetlands on which nothing can be built separates two halves of the parcel, which is 2 ½ acres in total.

“There was a way we could place the proposed building on the land if we turned it sideways,” he said.

“But if we wanted to expand for an additional fire truck or to house an ambulance or a police vehicle, there would be no place on this site where it could be built.”

One attractive feature, they said, was the very reasonable asking price.

Rasenas said, “The site is feasible, but it is not ideal. We aren’t totally against it, but we would like to try to find something better.” He said it is difficult to find a suitable parcel at a reasonable price, but there are a few they want to consider before making a recommendation to the select board. 

Town Manager Deborah Schwartz, continuing her crusade to collect delinquent real estate taxes, reported she has sent out letters to everyone who owes unpaid taxes and interest that are a year or more overdue.

“I advised them that they have to pay in full, or come to us to arrange a payment plan to get them paid off,” Schwartz said.

She has included notices to some taxpayers who have been making payments on a previously agreed plan, because their arrangements with Seth Webb, the former Town Manager, have expired and need to be rewritten.

Schwartz also announced that the $900,000 operating note due in September was paid off on Aug. 17, saving the town about $500 in interest.

A new credit card policy was approved by the board, requiring holders of town credit cards to provide receipts by the 20th of every month for reconciliation so the bills can be paid on time, thus avoiding late-payment penalties, interest and increased interest rates the town has incurred in the past due to incomplete records.

Court hands down amended decision for Killington Village permit

Mountain Times

September 7, 2016

By Karen D. Lorentz
Judge Thomas S. Durkin, the Environmental Court judge who heard the Killington Village Act 250 permit appeals and rendered a June 21 merits decision and judgment order affirming the District #1 Environmental Commission’s permit subject to conditions, ruled on a motion to alter that decision in an Aug. 29 amended judgment order.
At issue in the July 1 Motion to alter was the objection by the Rutland, Two Rivers-Ottauquechee and Southern Windsor County regional planning commissions to the court imposing a condition requiring them to complete a corridor study and their proposed revised wording for conditions 14 and 13 regarding a corridor study and traffic studies in Killington.
Corridor study, condition 14
In his amended judgment order, Judge Durkin granted the regional commissions’ motion and revised the challenged conditions.
He noted that the regional commissions in arguing for an alteration of the judgment order offered a clarification that “while advocating for a corridor study, they did not intend to make any commitment to undertake such a study.” He also acknowledged their point that since they were “not the permit applicant, the court has no authority to impose permit obligations on them.”
In his explanation regarding granting their motion to alter, Judge Durkin acknowledged the court’s error and agreed that the court only has jurisdiction to direct the project applicant to take action. Since SP Land agreed the regional commissions were not subject to permit conditions being imposed on them, the granting of that correction was expected.
At the same time, however, the court recognized SP Land’s contention that Phase I of the village plan cannot be considered as the only possible cause of future “traffic increases along the roads and corridors that lead to the Resort and provide access to nearby towns and highways.” The court was therefore “unwilling to impose upon SPLC the entire burden of conducting a corridor traffic study.” (Judge Durkin notes that traffic corridors go beyond the Killington Road west to Rutland and east to I-89 and also include VT routes 100 and 103 to I-91.)
As part of any future application (for Phase II of the master plan), the judge directs SP Land to “work with the Regional Commissions, and any other entity who materially contributes to the flow of traffic along these corridors, to attempt to complete a corridor traffic study.” He also limits SP Land’s contribution for the cost of any agreed upon corridor study to 20 percent of the total cost, unless an alternate amount is agreed to by the participating parties.
Traffic studies, condition 13
While SP Land did not file a motion to alter the June 21 judgment order, which contained traffic study requirements regarding the Killington Road and its intersection with U.S. Route 4, they did respond to the motion to alter and condition 13 wording, citing very recent (new) case law in support of their position that they should not have to conduct any further traffic studies since they had met the conditions for criterion 5 which addresses traffic impacts.
SP Land noted that they had applied for a permit for Phase I only and that a Vermont Supreme Court decision (Treetop, Feb. 12, 2016) had bearing on and was reflected in the recent July 7 Hannaford/Hinesburg decision by the Environmental Court with those decisions presenting new guidelines that eliminate post-decisional traffic or corridor studies as permit conditions and that the new cases forbid extended police powers over a project once a district commission grants a permit.
However, the judge distinguished between the case law cited and the Act 250 village permit, determining that traffic studies are in order to corroborate that the findings presented at the Act 250 hearings (by traffic study experts) were indeed correct. Thus, he retained the requirement that SP Land collect and document traffic counts along Killington Road and its various intersections prior to occupancy of any of the Phase I developments as well as one year and five years after completion of Phase I.
SP Land had been able to live with the June 21 decision and had not filed a motion to alter it so this traffic study finding is not viewed as a major setback, Selbo said. The limitations on corridor study costs and recognition that potential traffic increases are not necessarily all related to village growth are good news along with the court agreeing that sprinkler systems should not be required in homes at Ramshead Brook as originally conditioned by the District #1 commission and opposed by SP Land in its appeal.
While focusing on the motion regarding traffic under criterion 5, the amended judgment order also contains specific language that the sprinkler systems will not [court’s emphasis] be required for the Ramshead Brook Subdivision residential dwellings. Judge Durkin explains that because the June 21 order did not contain specific reference to the court’s determination that the sprinkler condition be stricken, he was including language making it clear now.
The next step is an administrative one which involves the District #1 environmental commission issuing a permit incorporating the provisions of the amended judgment order along with the conditions that were not appealed in the original Oct. 7, 2013 permit.
Parties have 30 days to appeal the permit to the Vermont Supreme Court.

amended decisioncourt