Wednesday, July 22, 2015

AT&T Tower Could Be Coming To Killington

Vermont Standard
By Curt Peterson
Standard Correspondent


KILLINGTON — When selectman Chris Bianchi said, “We’re not one of those cute little towns on the Cape, or a quaint New England village like Woodstock,” he was admonishing his fellow select board members to resist trying to sublimate a proposed AT&T cell phone tower in the middle of Killington’s business district.


“We should make it bold! It should stand out!” he said.


The tower will be approximately 100 feet high and display five separated panels 12 feet square that will disguise the antennas, according to Town Manager Seth Webb, and the town can provide design or artwork in digital form that AT&T will apply to the panels. Webb had presented some choices of colors and possible panel decorations, ranging from subdued pastels to schemes that suggest a sylvan motif. Webb said AT&T is expecting a decision by August.


Alice Sciore, a local graphic artist who did a large painting and at least one poster for the town, showed the board members a rough sketch of an alternative design incorporating bird shapes, then alternatively suggested reproducing at least part of her painting on the panels. Webb said he would look into the possibilities with AT&T and try to determine any cost to digitize the painting.


In addition to decorating the antenna covering panels, AT&T has offered to install a replica of the town logo on the top of the structure, the consideration of which inspired Bianchi’s urging the board to “make it bold!”


Jim Haff said that, because the business owner on whose building the tower is built will be getting “a sizeable fee” from AT&T, and the wireless company will benefit from use of the tower, he doesn’t see why the town should bear any cost at all
for decorating the panels or installing the logo.

“Also,” he added, “the proposed agreement states that this 100 foot tall tower has to be lit up 24 hours a day. This may not sit well with condo owners and visitors who may have to look at it all night long.”


Vince Wynn advised the board members that Killington Resort is negotiating with two other cell carriers to install towers on their property as well. “Whatever the town chooses to do with their tower can be a template for the other two. It would be very helpful.”


Vito Rasenas endorsed Bianchi’s sentiment. “I originally supported this proposed tower because it was going to serve as a wayfinder, drawing attention to the business district. Whatever you decide, it should be with that goal in mind.”


Webb read a report from the Killington Volunteer Fire Department regarding a proposed new tanker fire truck. All the trucks are purchased on a 20-year turnover expectation, he said, and the tanker known as “E-4” turned 20 in 2013.


“Last year,” he read, “this truck cost us $10,000 in repairs, and should be replaced.”


Killington sites don’t always have pressurized hydrants, the report said, so tankers that can bring a supply of water to a fire are invaluable. E-4 holds 1,800 gallons of water and can pump it at 1,250 gallons per minute. KVFD went through a bidding process with three vendors, seeking a replacement truck that will hold 3,000 gallons of water and pump 1,000 gpm. Given the limited space in the current KVFD facility, the dimensions of the new truck are very important as well.


Two of the bidders failed or refused to match specifications, and the chief has recommended ordering the new truck from KME in Latham, NY, for $361,011 with five-year
financing. KVFD has purchased trucks and equipment from KME in the past, he said, and the Department feels comfortable with the quality and service they provide.

The town budgeted $490,000 over the next five years for fire equipment replacement, so, even adding 3-4 percent finance costs estimated by Webb, the expenditure would be well within the budget. The board moved and unanimously approved the proposed purchase. Webb said the build time will be 360 days, plus or minus 25 days.


Corey Mack of RGS Engineering gave a slide presentation, the results of their study for the sidewalk extension from Killington Road to the resort. His proposal included three possible routes, one of which the board was able to dismiss out of hand. Mack explained that coordinating with Killington Resort was crucial, as the new pedestrian way will both benefit them and include passage through some of their property.


Consideration was given to pedestrian safety, possible inconvenience to residents of the lighting system that would be on all night, streamside regulations by the Agency of Natural Resources, snow removal, gradations vis a vis the Americans with Disabilities Act, roadway crossings, and, importantly, the number and type of easements or rights-of-way that the town would have to procure from private property owners. Some residents and board members voiced concern about newcomers or people using the walkway after dark getting lost on a winding route. Webb, Mack and the select board assured everyone that signage and other wayfinding assistance would be abundant and clear.


The cost of the RGS study is $30,000, which is split 50/50 between the state and the town. The two routes being considered, Mack
said, would cost approximately $1.4 million and $1.5 million respectively. RGS was hoping to get enough direction tonight to move forward with a final proposal to the Agency of Transportation for a funding grant, but the board felt there were some alternatives to consider, and they want to have time to do some site inspections.

Webb said the Fire Department Facilities Committee members have visited the new Washington, Vermont emergency services facility and were very impressed. The project has similarities to Killington’s challenges and needs, and he hopes to have the committee come before the board to tell of their experience.


undefined

Thursday, July 9, 2015

Bristol voters say "yes" to proposed $3.19 million fire station, land purchase

Green Mountain Outlook 

July 8, 2015

Residents in the Town of Bristol voted  July 7 in support of the $3.19 million bond to build a new fire station and purchase 9.03 acres of land on West Street. A total of 555 residents (including absentee voters) cast ballots with 415 in favor of the project and 140 not.
Residents in the Town of Bristol voted July 7 in support of the $3.19 million bond to build a new fire station and purchase 9.03 acres of land on West Street. A total of 555 residents (including absentee voters) cast ballots with 415 in favor of the project and 140 not.
— Residents in the Town of Bristol voted July 7 in support of the $3.19 million bond to build a new fire station and purchase 9.03 acres of land on West Street. A total of 555 residents (including absentee voters) cast ballots with 415 in favor of the project and 140 not.
The Bristol Fire Chief Brett LaRose, issued the following statement: “It is with great pleasure that I announce that the Fire Station bond vote passed 415 to 140. I want to personally thank each and every one of you for your efforts in making this happen. As you are all aware, this has been quite the journey that was set in motion more than 10 years ago and tonight we finally accomplished our goal. I’m looking forward to the next phase of this project; building a fire station we can all be proud to call our new home.”

Wednesday, July 8, 2015

Board Chair To Killington Residents: ‘This Is Not A Discussion Meeting’

Vermont Standard
7/9/15
By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent


KILLINGTON — If attendees at Killington’s Select Board meeting Tuesday evening didn’t notice that “
Selectboard Member Concerns” had been moved from its customary 10th agenda spot to fourth, Chairman Patty McGrath’s opening salvo certainly called it to their attention.

Noting that she had received input from several citizens indicating they thought they were not given enough time to speak at the meetings, McGrath told the assembled, “The purpose of these meetings is so the three board members can carry on the business of the town. The meetings are open to the public, as required by law, but this is the only time we have to do the work of managing the town. This is not a discussion meeting.”


She went on to say that citizen input was important, that the board welcomed remarks, questions and suggestions, but proposed that when topics were raised, one of the board members would be assigned to meet with the contributor to get the details and carry on the discussion, which might result in the topic being on the next meeting’s agenda.


“We have a limited period to get the work that has to be done completed,” she said, “and we just don’t have the time to carry on
lengthy discussions at meetings on every topic that comes up.”

On a final note McGrath said the board was grateful so many residents wanted to participate, and recognized that, “as a board we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard regarding how we treat our citizens.”


The chairwoman then cited procurement policy as one example of a discussion that might have ensued more efficiently if the board had time to respond rather than having to parry with the public when it was first brought up. Harking back to Pat Linnemayr’s passionate complaint at the June 16 meeting about the lack of local opportunity involved in a beautification project going on around town, McGrath said she had looked into Linnemayr’s concern, and agreed that it appeared some local contractors and professionals were overlooked in the procurement process.


Town Manager Seth Webb pointed out that, while the opportunity to participate in the bidding for the project was not made public, three of the five bids were obtained from Killington vendors. In the end, a Rutland contractor was hired. Webb agreed to post opportunities on the website on a monthly basis, and to put discussion of a possible formal procurement policy on the agenda
for the next meeting.

Both McGrath and Selectman Chris Bianchi pointed out that a formal policy might not turn out to be the best idea.


“And, just to be clear, until we adopt a formal policy, if we do,” Bianchi said, “procurement and any bidding will be in the purview of the town manager.”


The second issue held over from the June 16 meeting was the discussion of West Hill Road and its intersection with Killington Road. Webb had a list of citizen concerns for which he and Road Foreman Chet Hagenbarth had responses: “Some citizens are worried about the future of the slip lane,” Webb said. “For the foreseeable future, the slip lane is staying.”


“Some people have complained about the line striping that delineate the slip lane,” he continued. “The striping was done incorrectly by the state last year, and, as soon as we get some dry weather, the company doing our striping will be correcting it.”


Webb and Hagenbarth answered complaints about West Hill Road being too narrow by citing measurements since 1977, showing the road is actually wider now than it’s been in decades, the paved area extending to the ditch rim.
 

Hagenbarth said a missing speed sign was going to be replaced as soon as possible, and that the weight limit and “No Through Trucks” signs were going to be moved back so drivers had more time to respond to them. He also noted that signs installed before he was Road Foreman were mounted incorrectly.

“They are break-away sign posts, designed to flop onto the hood of a car when hit, and the sign itself is designed to slide over the windshield. Because they were installed with two inches of post sticking up above the sign, they will pierce the windshield instead of sliding over it. We have to fix all of those as well.”


Last, but not least of the June 16 issues was the proposed cooperation contract involving the town, the Chamber of Commerce, aka Killington Pico Area Association and the Killington Resort to fundraise, promote events and do area marketing. Seth Webb announced that the KPAA was withdrawing its proposal due to the controversy it had stirred up.


“The contract had become a distraction. There was a lot of sentiment and misinformation building up, and it was decided to spend our time on events and
marketing rather than spending it on dealing with the controversy,” Webb said. “We’ll just go along with the status quo.”

Vito Rasenas asked Webb to clarify how this would affect Amy Morrison’s present job as events and marketing coordinator for the town. Webb and Vince Ciarella explained that Morrison would continue both to work at the town offices 30 hours a week, and to work for KPAA at the Visitor Center as two separate jobs.


“The contract had been an attempt to make her work more efficient for all of us,” Ciarella said, “as she would have all the resources in one place instead of wasting time moving back and forth between two offices to work on the same event.”


Webb’s Town Manager’s Report included the announcement of the final tax rates for the coming year: $2.20 for residents, $1.97 for nonresidents and commercial property.


“Remember, that the local portion of the rates are for 18 months,” said McGrath, “and only two payments of that portion are due this year.” The town is changing its fiscal/tax year from January to December to match the state and school tax year of July to June, resulting in the onetime, 18-month adjustment.

Comment: In all fairness, while the headline seems somewhat pedantic and unwelcoming to citizen participation, I found the board to be somewhat conciliatory. In fact Chairwoman McGrath stated that the "Citizen Input" time allottment would be expanded to allow for a more thorough hearing of citizens concerns. 
And not only was "Citizen's Input" expanded but during discussion of other agenda items a great amount of input from the audience was allowed.

Vito
  

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

New welcome sign installed

Rutland Herald
7/7/2015 
   KILLINGTON — Visitors along Route 4 are now welcomed to ‍Killington with a new, brightly colored sign.    The sign was unveiled last week at the ‍Killington Welcome Center on Route 4.    The project was a collaboration between ‍Killington Ski Resort, ‍Killington Pico Area Association, and Awesome Graphics, according to a news release.    “This partnership has allowed us to work together to enhance the sense of arrival to ‍Killington,” Howard Smith, president of ‍Killington Pico Area Association, said in the release. 

Comment: Now I'm sure he knows where he is.
Vito 

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Killington's FEMA reimbursement update

In response to the following query by Jim Haff, our town manager Seth Webb has issued an update (which follows) on the status of Killington's reimbursement and its effects on the town's budget, of the recent FEMA decision not to reimburse cities and towns for replacing regular culverts which were destroyed by Irene with newly state mandated box culverts (which cost more).


Seth
I read an article the other day stating FEMA would not pay any of the required upgrades to infrastructure destroyed during Irene imposed on Towns from the State of Vermont. I know we have been waiting for funds from FEMA for some 4 years now so I have a few questions.

1) what is the remaining Bal of FEMA funds due to the Town as of today that we budgeted for this year.
2) Have we received any of the budgeted amount from FEMA this year that we budgeted for this year.
3) This ruling from FEMA  are you aware of.
4) does this ruling have any impact on the Town of Killingtons estimated revenue in our budget. If so what are the Town's administration including select board actions to counter if any negative impact on the current budget.

Seth I will put these questions in as a letter to the editor for next weeks publication with the Mountain times. It would be great if you could get answers to the Mountain times also for next week.
Thanks Jim Haff




June 30, 2015
Dear Editor,
Last weeks’ news about FEMA rejecting the State’s appeal to fund the cost of box culverts for other towns raised questions about our own Town’s outstanding claims to FEMA. I wanted to write to share where the Town of Killington stands with its final Irene claims and what we’ve learned about this recent development mentioned in the news.
The Town has received reimbursement for its Irene recovery projects except for bridges constructed on Stage and Ravine Roads and a portion of work on E. Mountain Road. The final claims for these projects are being submitted to FEMA on the Town’s behalf by the Vermont Department of Emergency Services, who is our link to FEMA.
The reason these final claims have not been submitted is that the State has been helping us make the case that we should receive more reimbursement than FEMA had planned. The State will be submitting our final case to FEMA in July.
To date, FEMA only wanted to pay the Town for the federal share of what it would have cost to build culverts on Stage and Ravine Roads. FEMA did not want to pay for the bridges we were required to build by the federal and state governments.
While our argument for reimbursing the cost of building bridges is certainly valid, it’s not clear on how it will fare with FEMA, so we have also pointed out that even if FEMA doesn't accept our full claim for the cost of reimbursement for the bridges, they should at least increase the amount they have planned to reimburse us for the replacement of the culverts. The reason being a lot of the infrastructure that was required for the bridges would have also been required for the culverts. As of now FEMA has not included that consideration in their initial reimbursement calculation.
Based on this, the 2015-16 Town budget planned for FEMA and the State to pay us $223,778. That revenue projection represents a conservative estimate of the
federal and state shares of the costs for the Town to replace the two culverts that existed before the storm not the bridges.
We expect to get reimbursed for the cost of replacing the culverts. We strongly believe we should be able to recover the full federal and state shares of the cost of building the bridges since the Federal and State governments required we build them. How this all sugars out is not clear yet. What we do know, is that had we not gone this route, and taken the extra time, we definitely would not have gotten full or partial reimbursement for what we spent to build the bridges we were required to build.
On the article from last week, Vermont Department of Emergency Services said they don’t see the recent FEMA decision having a significant bearing on our claim. Joe Flynn, Director Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security for the State of Vermont told us, "while Killington awaits FEMA's final determination of its project applications there are no specific indications that the more global difference between the State and FEMA over the subject of Codes and Standards would conclusively translate negatively on this local project. Further comments as to what FEMA may or may not decide would be purely speculative."
As this issue continues to unfold, the Town will continue to work to maximize our FEMA reimbursement, and keep residents apprised on the progress.
Sincerely,
Seth Webb Town Manager

Friday, June 26, 2015

Killington Selectboard was elected to represent voters no act as supreme ruler (unedited)

Mountain Times
Letters to the Editor
6/25/15
I have a lot of serious concerns about what is happening in Killington.  As a long time resident and gardening professional, I'm alarmed at the decisions that have been made. I'm all for the beautification of Killington, but the decisions made on few new garden areas were not well thought out.  The amount of our money being spent on these limited areas is outrageous. There wasn't an open bidding process. One needs a private invitation to bid on a public project. If only certain people are asked , how does that allow new ideas to be put forth or get the most for our tax dollars. This was an opportunity for the people of Killington to work together on something we will have to live with. When attending a Select board meeting I tried asking questions about when and how these decisions were made.  Disturbingly, I was cut off, being told I was taking too much of their time. It was said they don't need our input, they can do what they want. This is our public property, not their private property. WE live here, WE pay taxes here, WE should have a say as to what happens here. Not only  does this Selectboard want to give our tax dollars away to a private entity, the KPAA, they are throwing it away on these gardens. They are spending thousands upon thousands of our tax dollars on labor, soil, compost and plants, that will struggle to survive  after being damaged by road salt and sand from winter plowing. Even worse is how our rights are being eroded in this town. Citizens input is the only public forum that we have to speak at. If our Selectboard doesn't have time to listen us and answer our questions there, maybe they shouldn't be serving on the board. When one has been voted into office, it doesn't make them a supreme ruler. This is supposed to be a democracy not a dictatorship.  Decisions are being made behind closed doors about the direction of this town.  Where is the transparency? Why do we find out after, when what's done is done. Just because they don't legally  have to include us in these processes, doesn't mean that they shouldn't. It's beyond disturbing. One Selectboard member was overheard criticizing the residents that attend meetings as "BOZOs".   If the people who do take their time to become involved and informed are considered clowns, what exactly do they think of those that don't?  It seems  that they are the ones turning this town into a circus with all the twisting and spinning that goes on.   Think about it, we're the ones paying for this show, through our ever increasing tax  burden!
Susan Maples

Email Chain regarding Killington Road/KPAA Garden Budget

Seth,
 
WOW! That is quite the budget. I have transformed numerous large properties and never required a budget of that size. They included the excavating work, trucking, all the materials used, such as soil, compost, stone, plants and labor.  It’s amazing the difference when it’s one’s own money being spent on private property  vs. tax payers’ money being spent on a public property. Maybe if the tax payers’ of this town had been allowed to participate, there might have been better decisions made. This town and the residents are divided because of these type of situations. It would’ve been good for people to be allowed to come together and  work on this public project. We’ll never know what other talent exists within our own town, and what could have been created. When the same people are afforded all the opportunities it allows them to take advantage of the system.  Whether you didn’t have to form a committee or have input from the people of this town, you should have.  It would have shown respect rather than disregard.  It’s not only disappointing it’s disturbing.
 
Susan Maples        
 
From: Seth Webb
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 4:34 PM
Subject: RE: Garden project
 
Susan,

To answer your questions:

In sourcing the contractor, we spoke/met/consulted/worked with Landworks, Ehmann Landscaping, Rock Landscaping, Mountainside Properties, and Landscape Design and Maintenance.  From those meetings, previous work, and references we determined that Landscape Design and Maintenance (LD&M) was the most cost effective/best qualified to meet our needs.  We then requested LD&M submit a proposal. They did and the proposal included a project description, cost estimates for materials and labor, and maps for planting.  The costs in the proposal were: 
Materials
      8,178.20
Design
         500.00
Labor
      8,550.00

Seth

Seth Webb
Town Manager
Town of Killington
2706 River Road
Killington, VT 05751
802.422.3241 (office)

Town of Killington Logo

           www.killingtontown.com

From: Vito & Susan [mailto:Marla@Vermontel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 9:16 AM
To: Seth Webb
Subject: Garden project

Seth,
Since I was cut off last night from asking any further questions, I would like to know who else was asked to bid, what was included in the bids and what were the bids?
Susan