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.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
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
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
Thursday, May 8, 2014
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."
"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."
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
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.
"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.
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
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
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
Monday, May 5, 2014
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)