Is Killington devolving to the dark ages

Below is an email chain between myself and the town administration regarding email alerts for Select Board meeting. As you will see our town seems to be going back to the dark ages. When the town fathers (and mothers) start hiding behind legal requirements and not continuing the free flow of information one has to wonder if there are not ulterior motives at work. 

From: Vito & Susan [mailto:Marla@Vermontel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 9:19 AM
To: Richard Horner; Chris Bianchi; Ken Lee; Patty McGrath
Subject: Selectboard Meeting Email Alerts

I know we are in transition in the Town Manager’s office and that the suspension of email alerts for Select Board meeting is due to it. I know I and at least one other person has contacted the town office about reinstating these alerts. Additionally I have spoken to many people who are concerned regarding this lack and some are wondering why and not necessarily accepting that its just because of the transition.

Could we please get this taken care of before it becomes a problem?

Vito

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Richard Horner

Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 9:43 AM

To: Vito & Susan ; Chris Bianchi ; Ken Lee ; Patty McGrath

Subject: RE: Selectboard Meeting Email Alerts

Thanks for your concern. The best way to keep current is to check Killingtontown.com. All minutes and agendas and other relevant information are posted on the website in a timely manner.

The new Town Manager will start on April 18. At that time she can decide how to distribute information.

Richard L. Horner

Killington Town Planner

Zoning Administrator

Interim Town Manager

2706 River Road

Dick@town.killington.vt.us

802-422-3242

 On Apr 6, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Vito & Susan <Marla@Vermontel.com> wrote:


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dick,

I’m not sure you understood my request. Before Seth Webb left email alerts with the agenda were always sent out for Select Board meetings and they have since been suspended. I and many others would like them to be reinstated. I truly don’t understand why they were suspended in the first place, it can’t be that much of a burden to type a few lines with a meeting time and date and send out a mass email. Seth must have had a group list who requested these alerts. Or are the rumors that he deleted stuff off his computer true?

In this day and age where digital communication is ubiquitous don’t you think we need to keep up with the times. It is after all the twenty first century. I’m sure it is a lot more efficient to email people than having to post physical notices in public places.

The town website calendar is not always timely or accurate. There have been many times when I’ve looked at it for info on meeting and it wasn’t there.

Vito

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Vito,

Again, thank you for your concern in this matter of email alerts. I do understand it is very a convenient way for many to be reminded of what is transpiring in town and with the board. Unfortunately, this email thread has taken on an unnecessary negative tone. Please keep in mind that the interim period between managers was likely to have a few changes of style in the way things occurred, and Seth went the extra mile with alerts. As Dick replied, the agendas and information was publicly posted as required. The email alert, despite being convenient for many, doesn't meet the legal requirements of a public posting. I have no doubt that our new town Manager will certainly be amenable to either restarting alerts or suggesting new way of keeping up the information flow. In the mean time I ask that you, and all in our community, have patience with this soon ending transition period and allow her the opportunity to serve us all in a positive and welcoming atmosphere.

Best regards,

Patty McGrath

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

Patty,

Thanks for your response.

The solution to this matter was like falling off a log. The town’s software platform, Constant Contact, was used by Seth for email alerts to people on the town’s email list. It is currently being used to email alerts by Amy Morrison for the KPAA. I spoke to her and she told me it was simply a matter of Dick or whoever prepares the agenda to forward it to her and she can simply input that into the software and push a button to generate the email. So I hardly think it’s a mile – it’s more like a  walk in the park.

If I can get this squared away with a phone call anyone in the town office can too. Unless of course the idea is to limit distribution of information, which I hope isn’t the case.

If there was any negative tone to the email chain it is because this simple solution, which I, not even an administrative employee of the town could get done in less than a minute with a phone call while town personnel either didn’t want to or didn’t know how to and couldn’t be bothered to find out.

Vito 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment: So there you have it. Apparently based upon Ms. McGrath's response, "The email alert, despite being convenient for many, doesn't meet the legal requirements of a public posting.", the administration is hiding behind legal requirements so as to eliminate a convenience, as well as limiting distribution of information, to the taxpaying citizens of the town. For the amount of taxes we pay and the amount of tax dollars that are diverted to the KPAA and other so-called economic development expenditures which make it convenient for the businesses in town to make a profit, you would think that this "convenience" would not be a hardship on town personnel. 

I'm sure it is a convenience for the KPAA to use the town's Constant Contact software to keep people apprised of their activities.

As my wife stated to me regarding this, "Just because you don't have to, doesn't mean you shouldn't".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further response:

From: Patty McGrath

Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 5:10 PM

To: Vito & Susan

Subject: Re: Selectboard Meeting Email Alerts

 

Hi Vito,  Appreciate the dialog. I understand you feel it was a simple thing that could be done, I’m not arguing that point. It is the automatic assumption that any small change is viewed as some conspiracy to “limit information or that information was deleted” perpetuating false rumors and a seeming public attempt to disparage town office staff. The reality is, Seth did go the extra mile in the electronic passage of information, Dick’s strong points lie in other areas than computer networking. He has done a fine job in keeping the town running smoothly. With the new manager starting soon it seems like a needless fight to pick. As I said, we are moving forward, and that request will be taken care of.

 

Best,

 

Patty

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Patty,

 

Thanks for your further response.

This isn’t the first or the only request that these alerts be resumed. When there is lack of response or action, as was the case until today, one has to wonder. I tried going through the chain of command multiple times and got nowhere. So you can say what you want but based on results my and others requests were not taken seriously.

Seth was smart enough to see that providing these alerts was one of the building blocks of trust between the town administration and the townspeople. And again I must stress it is a very simple task and reaps increased trust as a reward.

As far as Dick goes, I respect him, in fact if you recall I supported him back when Bernie Rome was trying to deep six him on the premise that Dick didn’t have enough to do. The thing about Dick is he can be dismissive at times. I tried not  belittle him, I didn’t refer to him directly. I know he has plenty of skills as I am witness to his knowledge and abilities at every planning commission meeting, though apparently he is limited in his computer skills.

You are the one who brought up the “negative tone” and I gave you an explanation.

If you recall in my initial email I stated that I did not want this to become a problem. This was an issue that took a minute to take care of.

Anyway, I want to put this to bed and I hope to see an alert before the next SB meeitng.

 

Vito

Vito

Mosher charged with involuntary manslaughter

Rutland Herald

By Kathleen Phalen Tomaselli

STAFF WRITER | April 05,2016

Following a grand jury investigation, Craig Mosher, owner of Mosher Excavation, was charged in Rutland criminal court on Monday with involuntary manslaughter related to a fatal crash last summer.

Mosher, 61, and his attorney, Matthew G. Hart, were in court prior to his arraignment but did not know his charge, Hart said.

When Judge Thomas A. Zonay asked Hart if they had seen the indictment, Hart said no.

Rutland County State’s Attorney Rose Kennedy handed Mosher and Hart the charge at the 1:45 p.m. arraignment.

After reading the charge, Mosher pleaded innocent.

If convicted, Mosher could serve from one to 15 years in jail.

The charge stems from the July 31, 2015, fatal car crash of a Woodbridge, Conn., man who was driving at night on Route 4 and crashed into a tree after hitting one of Mosher’s escaped farm animals.

“They are saying he (Mosher) should have known the bull got out,” Hart said in an interview. “It comes as a complete shock to Mr. Mosher. It was a horrible accident, but that’s exactly what it was, an accident ... I can’t recall when a grand jury was convened in the state or at least in Rutland County.”

At the time of the July crash, Vermont State Police reported, at 10:22 p.m., Jon M. Bellis, 64, and his wife were traveling west when the vehicle Bellis was driving struck a large Scottish Highlander bull that had escaped from its pasture at Mosher’s Excavation.

Bellis died at the scene as a result of the crash, according to police.

Kathryn Barry, 60, Bellis’ wife, also of Woodbridge, was transported to Rutland Regional Medical Center with a wrist injury. She was treated and released.

The bull was killed in the crash, police said.

The Connecticut couple also owns a condominium at Pinnacle Condominium Association in Killington.

Mosher expressed his sadness about what happened in an August interview. “The whole thing breaks my heart,” he said.

In court Monday, Zonay said: “We are here on an indictment before ruling on probable cause. The state’s attorney is withdrawing the indictment.”

But Kennedy informed the court she was not.

The court proceeded to Mosher’s arraignment from the indictment filed in March, with actual charges presented on Monday.

According to Hart, the indictment could have been dismissed by the state’s attorney with the charge then coming from the police information affidavit after the judge found probable cause.

But Kennedy said the charge would come from the indictment.

Signed by the grand jury foreperson, whose name was redacted from the public document, and Judge Mary Miles Teachout, the grand jury charged:

“That on July 31, 2015, Craig Mosher, of Killington ... was a person who acted with criminal negligence by having notice that his Scottish Highlander bull was loose and failed to contain his bull or alert others to this danger and, that his failure to take action caused the death of John Bellis.”

Kennedy said Monday that the law prohibits her from talking about the indictment or why it went to the grand jury.

Hart said the case would proceed like any other felony case.

“We intend to hire an accident reconstructionist,” he said. “The area of the accident is very well lit and even if the bull was in the road, he should have seen the bull.”

Mosher was released on conditions, including that he not have contact with Bellis’ wife and that he must contain all animals on his property.

kathleen.phalentomaselli

@rutlandherald.com

Comment: Craig Mosher is an outstanding individual whose tireless and timely response to open up Rte 4 and rebuild the town in the wake of Irene is legend.  To quote from a Bloomberg report at the time, “Craig is definitely a local hero,” said Roger Rivera, 33, an emergency worker with the state.

Craig Mosher is not irresponsible and certainly not a criminal. He is an upstanding pillar of the community and should not be treated with such impunity as to level felony criminal charges against him.

This incident was simply an accident and nothing more. Even the charge of “involuntary manslaughter” seems a reach. While there may be some liability issues those  should be handled in civil proceeding not a criminal one.

It seems to me that the state is wasting taxpayer money and the court’s time in bringing this indictment. Craig Mosher is no more a criminal than was Mother Teresa.  To put him through the wringer like this is just plain wrong. Maybe someone should look closer at what motivated this prosecutor.

If this proceeds and Mosher is sent to jail it will destroy his business and harm the local economy in the face of desperate efforts by the town and state to increase economic activity. Has anybody weighed the consequences of this prosecution?

Vito

Aviation exec named new Killington manager

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

Staff Writer | March 31,2016

 

KILLINGTON — A former airport executive will take over in Killington beginning April 18.

The Select Board voted unanimously during a special meeting Tuesday to hire Deborah H. Schwartz as Killington’s next town manager, said Dick Horner, who has held the post on an interim basis since former manager Seth Webb stepped down in December.

The town has been searching for a new leader since October, shortly after Webb announced his departure. The town reported collecting 60 applications for the post.

A native of Indiana, Schwartz comes to the town from Arkansas, where she currently runs her own aviation consulting firm, Strategic Aviation Solutions. From 1994 to 2007, Schwartz was executive director at the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport in Little Rock, Ark., a municipally-owned airport in Arkansas, according to her LinkedIn profile. For a year and half between 2013 and 2015, she also served as director of aviation services for MorphoTrustUSA, a supplier of background checks for airport personnel. She began her career as assistant airport manager at the William P. Hobby airport in Houston, Texas.

Schwartz is planning to relocate to Killington, Horner said.

Her salary begins at $92,000, according to Horner, and her contract runs through June 30, 2019 — the end of that fiscal year.

A Killington press release touts her “extensive background in municipal management” and states that Schwartz was “directly involved in multiple successful economic development initiatives through public and civic activities in all the communities in which she has lived and worked.” The release notes her “civic leadership” earned recognition as a Paul Harris Fellow by the Rotary International, an award granted to persons who donate $1,000 to the international service club, according to the Rotary website.

Schwartz has a bachelor’s degree in government from Wheaton College in Massachusetts, according to a news release, and a master’s degree in public management from the University of Houston-Clear Lake in Texas.

Schwartz was not available for comment, but was quoted in the Killington statement saying she was “very excited to be joining forces with the area’s residents and businesses in support of current initiatives, and serving as an agent for continued progress as we work together to move Killington forward.”

lola.duffort@rutlandherald.com

Killington hires town manager

March 30,2016

 

KILLINGTON — A woman with an extensive aviation background is the new town manager.

Deborah Schwartz will replace Seth Webb, who left late last year, according to a statement issued Tuesday by the town.

Schwartz has been airport director of the Worcester, Mass., Regional Airport, executive director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport in Little Rock, Ark., and director of aviation services for a company that does background checks for airport personnel.

She also ran a consulting firm, Strategic Aviation Solutions

Comment: I guess she'll have the town "flying high". Curious to see how her experience running airports translates into running a resort town.
Vito 

Summit Lodge in Killington sells for $1.4M

Rutland Herald

By BRUCE EDWARDS

Correspondent | March 28,2016

 

Albert J. Marro / Staff File Photo New owners of the Summit Lodge in Killington plan to raise their daughter in Vermont along with two Saint Bernards to carry on tradition. This hay sculpture was built in 2013.

 

KILLINGTON — One of the town’s oldest resort hotels has been sold to a Florida couple for $1.4 million.

Emmett and Laura O’Dwyer of Fort Lauderdale purchased the 45-room Summit Lodge on Killington Road earlier this month from Bill Bauer.

“We’ve been looking for about two years now, upstate New York, New Hampshire (and) Vermont for somewhere to relocate,” O’Dwyer said.

He said they were looking “for a nice environment” where they could raise Orlaith, their 2-year-old daughter.

“Killington, Vermont is a great place to raise a child and grow up and a great place for us to be as well,” he said.

O’Dwyer, a native of Ireland, is no stranger to the hospitality industry.

“I’ve run and owned hotels and restaurants and also run and owned a project management company,” he said.

O’Dwyer’s experience includes both owning and running hotels primarily in London but also Ireland.

The Summit Lodge was one of the first hotels built after the Killington Ski Area opened in 1958.

The 16,305-square-foot building sits on 8.36 acres and includes dining and banquet rooms with seating for 180, tennis courts, outdoor swimming pool and parking for 60 cars.

Ray Ault, a commercial Realtor who brokered the sale, said the Summit Lodge has a profitable track record, which is the exception.

According to the prospectus, the property has grossed between $850,000 and $1.1 million a year for the last 10 years.

The local market for hotels and restaurants remains soft, however.

“Overall, the Rutland-Killington market has not been good to hospitality businesses in terms of resales,” said Ault, who owns Ault Commercial Realty. “They’ve been great buys — a low sale price is a great opportunity for buyers — but they are also more cautious when they buy.”

The weak market is evidenced by several properties along Route 4 leading to Killington that remain vacant while others have changed hands at foreclosure auctions, Ault said.

“The Summit is one of the few that is healthy and sells on the basis of both the value of the hard assets and the cash flow value of the business,” he said.

Ault added that the hospitality industry is not favored by many lenders, especially when it comes to a closed restaurant.

O’Dwyer said one of the first items on his to-do list is a technology upgrade, with VTel putting in fiber optic lines which will improve the hotel’s Internet and WiFi connections. Efficiency Vermont has also been involved, helping with making the property more energy efficient.

O’Dwyer also said there will be some routine cosmetic improvements.

Most of the hotel staff will be staying on, including Bill Miller, who was promoted to general manager.

“A lot of the team that’s here has been here such a long time they know the routine,” O’Dwyer said.

He said both the Vermont Economic Development Authority and VSECU helped with financing.

Bauer, who owned the hotel for nearly 40 years, will stay on during the transition into the summer.

A fixture of the Summit Lodge over the years has been the dogs — Bauer’s two Saint Bernards.

O’Dwyer said by the time he’s up here on a full-time basis next winter his plan is to carry on the Summit Lodge tradition with two Saint Bernards of his own.

New ANR sewage regulations anger local officials

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort
STAFF WRITER | March 17,2016

 

Proposed regulations put forward by the state to help stop the flow of raw sewage into waterways could kill the local economy and make water quality worse, local officials are arguing.

The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources is updating its rules to meet the standards of the federal Clean Water Act, and including language that could in certain circumstances prohibit new hookups to combined sewer and storm water treatment systems. Heavy rainfall can overwhelm combined systems, and municipalities will often turn to dumping sewage into nearby waterways to keep it from flooding streets and properties.

But for Rutland City Public Works Commissioner Jeffrey Wennberg, the proposed ANR rules establish “an expectation for compliance that can’t be complied with” and “a punishment that essentially shuts down the entire region.”

Rutland City is one of 16 municipalities in the state that operates such a combined system, although that does not include those towns piping into those systems. In the Rutland area, for example, parts of Killington, Mendon, Rutland Town and Clarendon are connected to the city’s system. Several of those towns are considering or have already signed on to resolutions in opposition to the new rules.

Draft language for the new rules include the following passage:

“If there are documented, recurrent instances of sewage backups or discharges of raw sewage onto the ground surface, the municipality shall, upon receipt of written notification from the Agency, prohibit further connections within the service area of the backup that would increase the frequency or volume of the surcharges/backups.”

While the new rules don’t explicitly say that combined systems must decouple and treat storm water and sewage separately or else end all new inputs into the system, Wennberg argues that’s how he interprets the end result.

“The main thing is, the other sections in the proposed rule imply — they don’t actually say it … It implies that the only way to successfully comply is to separate 100 percent of combined sewers,” he said.

According to his estimates, the cost of such a project in Rutland City would be in the environs of $125 to $150 million dollars.

The city simply can’t raise that much money, Wennberg said.

“The notion that they could prohibit Mrs. Jones on South Street from adding a bathroom to her house because the city of Rutland doesn’t have $150 million to solve their problem is ludicrous. And this is the basis of our concern,” he said.

Aside from the fact that the project is a financial non-starter for the city, it wouldn’t necessarily help water quality either, he argued. Because combined systems subject storm water to much more thorough treatment than systems that treat sewage and storm water separately, water quality is often better served in a combined system, he said.

“The benefits, from the standpoint of protecting water quality, of having all of that storm water run through a very large treatment plant, far, far, far outweigh the environmental harm or risk associated with occasional and relatively brief overflows during heavy rain,” he said.

Also, Wennberg said, the city resents new mandates coming down from the state at the very same time that state aid to mitigate overflow projects is being slashed.

Rutland recently completed a $5.2 million project to separate the sewer and storm water system across 50 acres in its northwest neighborhood.

The city qualified to have 25 percent of the project covered by a state CSO grant program, Wennberg said, but when the agency put CSO grants to Rutland and St. Johnsbury into the budget last year, they were cut by the governor’s office. After pleading with legislators, the city recouped $78,000 — a far cry from the $1.3 million it expected to receive.

“On the one hand, the agency is proposing draconian and completely unworkable costs and prohibitions on communities like Rutland, and on the other hand the governor and the Legislature are refusing to fund even those programs that they’ve had in place since 1993,” Wennberg said. “They’re ripping the money away to support this at the same time as they’re doubling down on the requirements.”

Also, Wennberg noted that a new bill under consideration this session, H.610, essentially cuts the program altogether.

But Julia Butzler, an environmental analyst with the agency’s Department of Environmental Conservation said the state is no way interested in a blanket moratorium on development in municipalities still connected to combined systems.

The agency doesn’t expect municipalities to completely solve the problem before new hookups are considered — but they need to make sure the situation is getting better and not worse.

“We want to work the municipalities as much as possible. That said, we do not feel that we can permit that municipalities are allowed to make the situation… the volume, the frequency, or the duration of (combined sewer overflow) events worse. And that is where that language has come from,” she said, noting that the language could be revised further.

And while separating out systems entirely might be the best option for some towns, she said, it might not for others. She couldn’t say what Rutland would need to do to meet standards.

“We understand that CSOs are a site-specific problem. So every single outfall is going to have its own set of characteristics and challenges and costs associated with it … And so we have tried to craft the rules to allow for a lot of flexibility for the municipality and how they approach CSO abatement,” Butzler said. Other mitigating projects could include expanding the capacity of treatment plants — which Rutland has done — or installing catch basins.

Butzler said she wouldn’t dispute Wennberg’s estimates about the cost of separating out sewage and storm water in the system. Such projects are “outrageously expensive” and a “challenge logistically.”

“However, we are required, we are bound by the Clean Water Act to meet the water quality standards put forth, which requires that these CSOs are abated,” she said.

She said Wennberg’s argument that water quality could significantly be lessened by a separated system was “debatable,” and it ignored the public health aspect.

“The pollutant load in storm water is not as significant as the public health risk factor that the combined sewer creates (when there is an overflow),” she said.

The date for public comment on the new rule closes March 31. More information is available at https://secure.vermont.gov/SOS/rules/display.php?r=364

Chamber of Commerce closes in Manchester

Rutland Herald

By Patrick McArdle

Staff WRITER | March 19,2016

 

Patrick McArdle / Staff file photo The Manchester and the Mountains Regional Chamber of Commerce has shut down its operations in Manchester. The Visitor Center will close at the end of business on Sunday.

MANCHESTER — The Manchester and the Mountains Regional Chamber of Commerce shut down Friday, closing its operations as a chamber and the welcome center in Manchester’s downtown.

In addition to Manchester, the chamber served Arlington, Danby, Dorset, Jamaica, Landgrove, Londonderry, Pawlet, Peru, Rupert, Sandgate, Shaftsbury, Sunderland, Wallingford, Weston and Winhall.

A letter emailed to chamber members on Friday said the decision was made after “painful deliberations” in response to financial pressures the chamber had been under for years.

Berta Maginnis, executive director of the chamber, said Friday the welcome center would be closed after Sunday.

“This is the end of the chamber as you now know the Manchester chamber,” she said.

Maginnis, who said there was one other full-time employee beside herself and a bookkeeper who worked for the chamber, said the decision to shut down was made at various board meetings from the last week.

Town Manager John O’Keefe said the town had been informed about the decision and had been asked to place the issue on its meeting agenda for Tuesday. O’Keefe said there would be discussion at the meeting, which starts at 7 p.m. at Town Hall, about the future of the chamber, its welcome center and events such as the car show, which the chamber had hosted.

In its letter to members, the chamber board of directors said the organization had seen declining membership after the economic downturn in 2009.

The chamber’s income dropped in 2014 as well when the state began Vermont Health Connect and the chamber was no longer a source for health insurance for its members.

Last month, Maginnis said chamber officials and its members spent 14 months looking at ways to make the chamber more relevant to its members and the community.

Working with Hildene, a nonprofit tourist attraction and historic site in town, the chamber board decided to create a partnership between the public, through the residents of the towns it served, and the private businesses that were chamber members.

The new organization, which would have been called the Partnership, was expected to get off to a big start through public funding requested at town meeting. The largest request, $25,000, was made to Manchester, the largest population and business center for the chamber.

However, the vote failed by what Maginnis called the “fatal five votes,’’ 626-631.

The letter to members called Manchester “the single town most crucial to our ability to move forward.” The unsuccessful vote there was a blow because the town meeting vote had been intended to “signal to our private investors that everybody was in ...” the letter added.

While chamber officials had considered the possibility of a reconsideration vote, they ultimately decided it was too late.

“We cannot overcome this loss of momentum and confidence of buy-in by all,” the letter said.

Maginnis said she thought it was a responsible business decision for the chamber to close down.

“When we lost the Partnership vote, what I call the ‘five fatal votes in Manchester,’ that precluded us from going out for some rather important private sector funding. If I had had in hand $60,000 from the town meeting votes, I could have said to a large company, ‘I have $60,000 right here. I need your $10,000. I’ve got $10,000 here’ and built a war chest or real money that would have catapulted our ability to get into economic development in a big way and get into destination marketing,” she said.

Maginnis said the chamber’s leaders were concerned about what would happen to their resources if they pursued a reconsideration vote and lost.

“You can’t in good conscience be billing for dues when you know you’re not going to be there. This way, we can fulfill our financial obligations within the community and leave on a good note,” she said.

Maginnis said there were expectations that some members would continue some events. For instance, she said some of the members who are automobile aficionados would likely keep the car show alive, at least for this year. The car show is scheduled for June 11 and 12.

Maginnis, who said she plans to stay in the Manchester area, said she would remain positive.

“Something good will come from this for the town, for the region. What that is, I don’t know, but I think we have to get behind whatever it is that comes forth. This town is poised, this region is poised. Unfortunately, both sides didn’t meet in the middle on this one and that happens,” she said.

The chamber’s welcome center is on Bonnet Street and is owned by Manchester businessman Bill Drunsic. A call to Drunsic asking about the future use of the site was not returned.

Comment: Well, at least they have democracy in Manchester. Maybe we should have a vote here.
Vito