IROC’s champion hasn’t given up hope

Featured

IROCby Tena Starr

copyright the Chronicle 4-3-13

NEWPORT — Phil White, IROC’s most visible and stubborn defender, wasn’t particularly anxious to talk about the place on Monday morning.  The night before he’d succumbed to what was pretty much inevitable by then.

Following IROC’s last event — the home show on Sunday — he’d dropped off the keys in a deposit box for Community National Bank, its new owner.  If he was sad, he didn’t admit it.  Still, it was clear enough that it was an emotional parting, although Mr. White is not yet ready to write the recreational facility’s obituary.

IROC had until April 1 to come up with over $1-million or face foreclosure.  Mr. White’s last-ditch efforts to get a time extension or somehow raise the money fell short, and IROC closed for good Sunday afternoon.

Mr. White continues to hold out hope that the facility will reopen with a new owner.  In the course of an interview he suggested that foreclosure might just be a necessary phase to get the facility out from under its debilitating debt.

“I don’t like to give up until there is nothing else that can be done,” he said.  “Until the facility is sold as a garage, or knocked down, it’s still available to be bought.  I’m hoping that one or more individuals will buy it.  The bank hasn’t drained the pool yet,” he added hopefully.

Steve Marsh, president and CEO of Community National Bank, said it’s likely to be a while before the bank drains the pool.  The next step for the bank is to go back to court and make matters official, he said.  Then, at some point, the bank will put the facility up for sale.

IROC, which has not made mortgage payments in months, owes over $1-million, Mr. Marsh said, and the last time an appraisal was done the facility was not worth that.  In this case, the bank’s loss, even if it sells the place for less than what’s owed, will be no more than 10 percent because the loan was guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development, which would limit the bank’s losses on what was a risky undertaking.

“When this whole thing started it was a thin deal to start with, but we felt it was in the best interests of the community to have it,” Mr. Marsh said.  “That’s why we financed it when others wouldn’t.  “Our hope is that it will be sold to someone who will continue its current use.”

So far no one has showed up with a checkbook, he said.  “There are no potential buyers that I’m aware of.”

Mr. White, who is a lawyer by profession, got involved with IROC back in 2006 when he was asked to take over as chairman of the board.

He said he was much impressed with the arena and thought it was a valuable community asset.

That arena was originally supposed to be an ice rink.  The fact that it isn’t continues to rankle some, who had hoped, among other things, to see North Country Union High School’s hockey program move from the ice rink in Stanstead, Quebec, to Derby.  These days, North Country students play at Jay Peak.

IROC never did turn into a place for people to skate, and its big central arena has been used primarily for events, such as the Northeast Kingdom History Fair and the North Country Chamber of Commerce Home Show, both held last week.

“I don’t think that what I started doing was much different from what a lot of people do,” Mr. White said about his efforts to help the struggling facility stay afloat.  Lots of people donate time to causes, he said, and there are many people who have done more to save IROC from oblivion than he has.

One day, he’d scheduled an 11 a.m. appointment with the bank to turn over the keys.  An hour and a half before the meeting, Carl and Susan Taylor donated $100,000, he said, and IROC stayed open.

The recreational facility was losing money every year and was about $3-million in debt when Mr. White inherited chairmanship of the board.  “I feel pretty good about half of that getting taken care of,” he said about the debt.

The bank, he said, has been about as patient as it could be.  “Community National Bank has been terrific to work with.  They’ve given us lots of options and as much time as we could conceivably ask for.  I think we tried everything, and we just couldn’t get that debt paid off.”

As chairman of the board, Mr. White began to take a closer look at the facility and its potential uses, as well as possible money makers.

“I started seeing the value of IROC as a fitness center,” he said.  “We really opened it up to low-income folks and started the youth initiative so kids could come for free.  That was inspiring.”

Ten years ago, people were talking about the need for kids to have a place to go, Mr. White said.  “Then there it was.”

One night, at IROC, he found every basketball court filled with teenagers — 40 or 50 of them all playing basketball without benefit of adults organizing a special event.

“They’d just said let’s go hang out at IROC,” Mr. White said.  “That was the vision.  I felt good that more of that was happening.”

But it didn’t pay the bills.

“I think we realized early on that IROC needed to be both an indoor and an outdoor recreation facility,” Mr. White said.  “And also that we needed to get out of debt.”

Towards that end, he organized the Tour de Kingdom, a one- to five-day recreational and cycling event that is just what its name suggests — a tour of the Kingdom.  The first year, 50 locals participated.  The second year, people from out of the area attended, as well, and said the event was even better than The Prouty, a cycling event organized by Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center that raised over $2-million in 2008.

“I figured we didn’t need to raise that kind of money, but special events could be the key to long-term success,” Mr. White said.

Those special events have grown to the point where, this year — and there will be a this year for special events — 25 days of running, biking, swimming and kayaking are planned.  Special events include the Dandelion Run, the Tour de Kingdom, the Kingdom Triathlon, and the Kingdom Swim, which is now a world championship event.

The success of special events and ever increasing participation “had its own motivational force on me,” Mr. White said, explaining why he tried so valiantly to keep IROC open.  “And then there’s this trial lawyer in me that doesn’t like to lose.”

Special events will continue, Mr. White said.   “We’ll find a home, I’m sure.  We can live off the land.  We have four or five hundred people signed up for them, and I don’t think we’ll just tell them to go home.  They’re of incredible value to the community and worth running with or without IROC.”

Special events raised about $200,000 a year, and donations from towns amounted to roughly $3,200 this year, Mr. White said.  “And I think, over time, that would continue to grow.”

Strategy for saving IROC from foreclosure included cutting expenses as well as raising money.  Solar panels decreased the propane bill by $3,000 to $3,500 a year, and payroll was basically halved to about $200,000 a year from a little more than $400,000 in 2006, Mr. White said.  He said that, in 2008, about $700,000 had been pledged to the organization, but those pledges evaporated by December of that year as the economy tanked.

“I think if we had had the time and were out of debt and not facing imminent foreclosure, we estimated it could run.”

IROC benefitted from about $50,000 to $75,000 a year in donations, Mr. White said, and there were more lined up to contribute an ongoing, if not huge, base of contributions.

“So there is a model on which it could be run.  It wasn’t just big donations.  There were hundreds, even thousands, who donated what they could.  It could well be the doors are closed on that as a recreation center for good.  It could also be a phase that was necessary to deal with the debt.  What we estimate is that, without the debt and property taxes, we can run it.”

Mr. White said he has no idea why IROC failed so spectacularly in its first years, or why the facility never became self-sustaining.  Perhaps, it was all just based on hope to start with — hope that the community would support it, and it would somehow work out, he said.

What he saw in terms of the facility’s use, however, inspired him to devote his skill set to ramping up its activities and membership, and to try, against all odds, to keep going.

“What I saw was increasing use of IROC by all aspects of the community,” Mr. White said.  “Seniors complained about kids splashing in the water fountains, and kids complained about seniors walking too slow on the walking track.”

In 2011-2012, about 3,500 adults had signed up for some kind of membership, Mr. White said.  And at least an equal number of young people were using the facility for free.  When all types of memberships and passes were added up, the total indicated that about 20 to 25 percent of the people in the area were using IROC, he said.

“I feel there’s an awful lot of good that’s come out of the facility,’ he said.  “I’d see people losing 50 to 100 pounds, people whose lives were changed.  Kids had a place to play.  A day doesn’t go by when I don’t see something that says, this is why I’m doing it.”

contact Tena Starr at tena@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

Senate passes weakened wind power bill

Featured

Wind towers at Lowell Mountain, as seen from Irish Hill Road.  Photo by Bethany M. Dunbar

Wind towers at Lowell Mountain, as seen from Irish Hill Road. Photo by Bethany M. Dunbar

copyright the Chronicle  3-27-13

by Paul Lefebvre

MONTPELIER — A legislative push to give towns and regional planning commissions more say in the siting of industrial wind towers appears to be dead, following a preliminary vote here Tuesday in the Senate.

The vote came after a marathon, contentious and at times personal debate that started at the fall of the morning gavel and lasted past the noon hour.  The result is expected to hold when the Senate takes up the bill for the third and final time later this week.

Little remains of a bill that started out as a call for a three-year moratorium on wind and morphed into legislation to reform the permitting process by adding Act 250 criteria and by putting wind development on hold for roughly eight months of study.

What’s left in the measure passed by the Senate Tuesday is a $75,000 appropriation for the creation of a Joint Energy Committee that will evaluate recommendations due out next month from the Governor’s siting commission.

Presumably, the role of towns and the regional commissions in the siting process will be revisited when the committee meets.

The vote was seen as a defeat by the two senators representing Essex and Orleans counties, whose ridgelines are prized by wind developers.

“They stripped the meat out of it,” said Senator John Rodgers, a member of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources that created the bill.

“They took the soup and left the broth,” said Senator Bobby Starr, who during the debate defended the bill as a “commonsense, down-to-earth proposal.

“All it’s asking for is for people to be heard,” he said.

After the debate was over and the vote was in, the region’s senior senator put his best spin on the results by saying a half a loaf was better than none.

A straight up and down vote on the bill was avoided when Senator David Zuckerman prevailed with an amendment that stripped out its key provisions.  It took the unusual route of being voted on twice.  Defeated the first time when Lieutenant Governor Phil Scot broke a tie by voting against it, the amendment was rekindled when Bennington Senator Dick Sears asked if he could change his vote.  His request led to a second vote by the full Senate.

During the debate, Senator Sears had spoken out against the bill and the intent to add Act 250 criteria to the siting process.  That would be an intrusion into the present permitting process, he said.  It would have the effect of “opening up a can of worms that doesn’t need to be open.”

And with his support the Zuckerman amendment passed by two votes, 16 to 14.

In a brief interview outside the Senate Chamber, Senator Zuckerman said he offered the amendment in the belief the bill was sending a “false hope message” to towns.  He said the veto power the bill gave them and the regional commissions could be taken away after eight months had passed and the legislation had sunset.

On the floor he said the bill was duplicating the work of the Governor’s siting commission, and raised the specter of global warming.

“We have a climate crisis on our hands,” he warned.

Stripped of what many believed to be its essential components, the amended bill passed easily.  If the outcome disappointed Senator Joe Benning, the legislator who a year ago spearheaded the call for a three-year moratorium, he didn’t show it during a brief interview after the vote.

He said that with a stronger vote to back it up, the bill would stand a better chance of getting a fair hearing before the House.

“It’s keeping the discussion alive and that is the most important thing of what this last month has been about,” he said.

If words could draw blood, the Senate floor might have become slippery.  Senator Dick McCormack could have been speaking about the debate when he called the issues surrounding the bill “a clash of non-negotiables.”

At different points along the way, the debate pitted one core value against another:  the public good versus local control; global warming versus protecting the environment; rural Vermont versus urban; and the urgency to develop renewable energy versus planning and evaluation.

Senators from the Northeast Kingdom led the way in charging that the most rural corner of the state was being picked on.

Early in the debate Senator Rodgers said Chittenden County didn’t want the Northeast Kingdom to stop the development of renewable energy.  With two wind farms already in place and a landfill taking a large share of the state’s waste, he argued it was time for some other region to step up to the plate.

“A nice landfill in Burlington could conserve diesel fuel and cut down on carbon emissions,” he said at one point.

The freshman Glover senator applauded the bill for giving small towns a voice and financial aid so they might be able “to compete with the deep pockets of developers.”

Senator Starr continued along that line when he characterized big wind as a runaway development that had pushed its way through his district like a bulldozer.

His constituents were complaining, he said, that they “are not being given a chance to be heard.”

Senator Diane Snelling of Chittenden County introduced the bill as a planning mechanism.  She said she “took to heart the concerns over global warming,” and defended the bill as being “very pro renewable energy.”  All the bill was asking for, she said, was a better way to site renewables.

One of the uncertainties arising from the debate was how much weight neighboring towns would have in the permitting process.  Senator Snelling said there was nothing in the bill that would allow a neighboring town to kill a project.

But others suspected the bill would give towns a veto power.  Senator McCormack was among the senators who argued that local control should not override the public good.

“It’s a question of state sovereignty,” he said, pointing out that local control is a power granted to towns by the state.

While Senator Snelling argued that the bill was “a workable proposal to get the best siting for energy,” others argued there was no need for it.

Senator Jeanette White of Windham argued that the bill was redundant and unnecessary.  She noted there were no projects waiting in the wings, and said she was uncomfortable with the bill because she believed it discriminated against wind.

Senator Benning became an advocate for changing the permitting process after he climbed Lowell Mountain and viewed how construction had transformed the mountaintop in preparation for the placement of 21 turbines.  When he came off the mountain, he decided, “We had a problem that wasn’t being addressed by our government.”

As part of his presentation Tuesday, he passed out a parcel of photographs that documented the destruction on Lowell Mountain.  And proceeded to argue that wind developers had gone to the Northeast Kingdom because of its rural isolation and lack of population.

He compared Newark’s town plan with a set of ordinances drawn up by the city of Burlington and pointed out their striking similarities.  Each, he said, wanted to preserve their landscape, natural beauty, and views.

Burlington and the surrounding communities within a ten-mile radius account for one-third of the state’s population.  But Newark, he said, had a population of 581.

Small towns like Newark, he implied, need protection because wind developers go where they won’t get a push back.  Or where resistance is least and likely less affordable.

Senator Mark MacDonald of Orange County said the Kingdom was like the leopard that wanted to change its spots.  He said among supporters of the bill were people from the Northeast Kingdom who had brought “cell towers to mountaintops, and Act 250 be damned.”

No great harm would come, he promised, if the bill were defeated.

Each side in the debate claimed to champion action to slow global warming.  Senator Richard Westman of Lamoille called it “the most important issue facing us.”

He supported the bill because he said it was making lawmakers struggle with the consequences of what has already been done.  And although he was not real happy with the bill, he called the debate surrounding it vital.

For Senator McCormack, the choice hinged on global warming.  The planet was in danger, he said, and push had come to shove.

“The very idea I would vote against a bill to regulate a troubling development — something I never thought I would do,” he said.

“I’m going to vote against this bill and break my heart.”

A final vote by the Senate could come as early as Thursday morning.

contact Paul Lefebvre at paul@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

News analysis: A detailed look at the promise of new jobs

Featured

Bill Stenger addresses the Jay Town Meeting about changes at Jay Peak.  Photo by Bethany M. Dunbar

Bill Stenger addresses the Jay Town Meeting about changes at Jay Peak. Photo by Bethany M. Dunbar

copyright the Chronicle 3-20-13

by Tena Starr

The Northeast Kingdom has long been Vermont’s Cinderella stepchild — pretty and poor.  It’s the region with the consistently highest unemployment rates, lower than average wages, arguably best scenery, and a culture all its own that it’s fiercely clung to.

For decades, it’s cried out for development, and jobs.  And it seems likely it’s about to finally get them.

As everyone knows by now, Bill Stenger, Jay Peak Resort’s CEO, plans to invest millions in the region, from Jay Peak to Burke Mountain, with Newport in between.  And a Walmart is supposedly coming to the area.

Mr. Stenger has said his investments will create 10,000 jobs, of which between 1,500 and 2,000 will be in Orleans County.   And the Walmart that some have so yearned for would supposedly provide about 300 more in Vermont.

But what effect will all that development really have on working people in the Northeast Kingdom?

Jobs are one certain way to measure economic success, and in theory the more jobs the better.   At the moment, the Northeast Kingdom economy seems to be holding its own, although it has undergone much change in recent decades, primarily in a gradual shift away from agriculture and forestry.

According to the Vermont Labor Department, the Newport area’s unemployment rate was 8.2 percent in January, down from 9.5 percent in January of 2012.  However, that drop in the jobless rate was largely due to a reduction in the size of the workforce rather than the number of people without jobs.

“The unemployment rate didn’t come down because more people were working; over 2,000 jobless workers simply left the labor force,” says a report issued by the Public Assets Institute on Monday.  The report is talking about the state as a whole.

“People drop out of the labor force when they get discouraged,” said Paul Cillo, president and executive director of the Public Assets Institute, which looks at financial data and jobs in Vermont with an eye toward developing policy.

“What we’re seeing is slow, steady growth in the Vermont economy,” Mr. Cillo said.   “But we haven’t seen that it’s doing much for Vermont workers.”

Mr. Cillo’s organization concerns itself not only with jobs, but also with wages — another economic measure.  He said that while a tight job market theoretically drives up wages, in practice there has been no evidence of that for some years.

According to the state’s latest livable wage report, which was issued in January, a living wage in Vermont is $12.48 an hour.  That figure, however, is considered to be half what it would take to run a childless household.  In other words, the assumption is that $12.48 per hour is a livable wage if there is another person in the home also making at least that amount.

“The Vermont Livable Wage is defined in statute as the hourly wage required for a full-time worker to pay for one-half of the basic needs budget for a two-person household with no children and employer-assisted health insurance, averaged for both urban and rural areas,” says the report, which is prepared by the Vermont Legislative Joint Fiscal Office.

“The livable wage is different from the wage for a single person because it accounts for the economies achieved by multiple-person households,” the report says.  “This figure does not, however, include all potential household expenses because it is for families without children.”

The livable wage for a rural single person is $15.74, according to the report.  For a single parent with one child, it’s $23.41; for a single parent with two children, it’s $28.03.  For a household of two adults with two children and one wage earner, it’s $30.12; and for a home with two adult workers and two children, it’s $18.72.

The urban livable wage differs by a few cents.

The most recent figures available from the U.S. Department of Labor, from the fourth quarter of 2011, show an average weekly wage in Orleans County of $668 ($16.70 an hour for a 40-hour week) and $809 ($20.23 an hour) for Vermont as a whole.

Mr. Cillo said the Public Assets Institute has been considering what other factors would be indicators of the economy, particularly in the Northeast Kingdom.

The Northeast Kingdom economy is slightly different from that of other parts of the state, he said.  In general, Vermont has transitioned from farming to more of an income-based economy.  That matters, he said, because when you’re on a farm big expenses like childcare tend to not be an issue, since the family is at home.

“It’s a different way of life, and I think the Northeast Kingdom tends to have more people still living that kind of lifestyle,” Mr. Cillo said.  “As soon as people leave the farm they have child care costs, clothing — those things cost money.  I think that makes it hard to use statistics to understand the economy of the Northeast Kingdom.  We have all these numbers, but they don’t really tell the story.”

It’s encouraging that agriculture is experiencing something of a revival in the Northeast Kingdom with young entrepreneurial farmers finding ways to prosper, Mr. Cillo said.

Steve Patterson, executive director of the Northeastern Vermont Development Association (NVDA), is also encouraged, both by successful agricultural models, the revival of Hardwick around local food and agricultural ventures, and by Mr. Stenger’s development plans for Orleans and Caledonia counties.  That development will occur rapidly but not all at once, he said.

The 10,000 jobs figure that’s been tossed around is perhaps misleading, Mr. Patterson said.  That does not necessarily mean there will be 10,000 new, permanent jobs, he said.   Some, such as construction, will be temporary, that being the nature of construction work.  Others will be created indirectly.  For instance, he said he gets at least one phone call a week from someone who would like to supply Jay Peak with something or other.

“The big issue is the indirect impact this will have,” Mr. Patterson said.  “It’s sort of like Hardwick, success breeds success.”

“Newport is just exploding with opportunity,” he said.  “The spinoff from Burke hopefully will generate more interest in the St. J area as well.”

Mr. Patterson said that he and members of the group that is trying to evaluate and meet labor force needs are working on salary schedules for the jobs that Mr. Stenger’s development will provide.

Penne Ciaraldi, who works for Community College of Vermont and is a member of the workforce group, said that, generally, wages for those employed by the developments look to be decent, although a full profile hasn’t been worked up.

“Construction will be a big one,” she said about future demand for jobs.

By some estimates, about 5,000 construction jobs will be created.

According to the Vermont Labor Department, the average wage of a construction manager in 2011 (the latest figures available) was $39.25.   A construction laborer’s average wage was $14.51; a carpenter’s, $20.08.   Plumbers averaged $20.54, and electricians $19.28.

On the other end of the scale, Walmart’s wages are nothing to write home about.  Walmart itself says its average national wage for a full-time employee is $12.40.

However, that does not account for its part-time employees.  CNN says a typical Walmart employee is paid $22,000 a year, just below the federal poverty line for a family of four.

Glassdoor, an online site that looks at wages and working conditions, says an average Walmart sales associate earns $8.84 an hour and a cashier earns $8.45.

The hourly wage for a Vermont worker averaged out to $16.36, according to the state’s labor department.  The mean was $20.71.

Not surprisingly, the highest wages are in the medical professions, with anesthesiologists having an average hourly rate of $117 and surgeons $104.   The rate for physicians was $79; for psychiatrists, $65; and for general practitioners, $75.58.

The average Vermont wage for food preparation and serving related occupations was $11.99; for waiters and waitresses, $12.58; for maids and housekeeping cleaners, $10.83; amusement and recreation attendants, $9.88; cashiers, $10; retail salespersons $12.42; office and administrative support occupations $16.03; dishwashers, $9.60; hotel, motel and resort desk clerks $11.77; secretaries and administrative assistants (except legal, medical and executive) $14.44.

According to Mr. Stenger’s figures, 260 employees will be needed for the new Marina Hotel in Newport.  Of those, 60 are needed for retail; 50 for administration; 75 for food and beverage service; 25 for operations; and 50 for hotel operations.  Hiring would start in October of 2015.

At Burke Mountain, two hotels are scheduled to open in November of 2014.  They would employ 25 people in administration and sales; 75 in food and beverage services; 100 in operations; and 25 in maintenance.  Two more hotels, set to open the following year, would employ the same number of people in approximately the same professions.

Back at Jay, the Stateside Hotel is expected to employ 225 people and open in December of 2013.  A new medical facility at Jay would hire four administrators, five registered nurses, and three doctors.

At AnC Bio in Newport, 250 people are expected to be hired.  — 34 percent in manufacturing, 33 percent in research, and 33 percent described as “masters +.”  The facility’s “clean room” is planning to hire another 250 employees, 20 percent in administration, and the remaining 80 percent in jobs requiring higher education.

Menck Windows in Newport plans to hire ten people in administration, five in management, and 125 in manufacturing.

While there is some concern that the Northeast Kingdom might end up with an economy that relies heavily on service jobs, which tend to be low paying, Mr. Cillo said that not all service jobs are dead ends.

“Some service jobs are fine,” he said.  “You just don’t want to have a disproportionate number of them.”

contact Tena Starr at tena@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

Welcome to the era of Big Sugar

Featured

SONY DSC

Adam Parke stands at the collection point that pumps sap from steep hills to the east and west of the Hinman Road in Glover. Photos by Chris Braithwaite

by Chris Braithwaite

 copyright 3-13-2013

BARTON — When Adam Parke and Todd Scelza “sweetened the pans” and drew off their first 165 gallons of maple syrup Monday night, it was the culmination of ten months’ work and an investment of a quarter of a million dollars.

It was also a demonstration of what has happened to one of this area’s oldest and most traditional enterprises.  Welcome to the era of Big Sugar.

Starting from scratch in May last year, Mr. Scelza and Mr. Parke have installed 11,700 taps over hundreds of acres of forest they’ve leased in Glover from Nick Ecker-Racz.

If all goes well, they’re looking forward to expanding to 15,000, perhaps 20,000 taps in future seasons.

That won’t make them the biggest operators in the business.  Mark Colburn in West Glover has 21,000 taps this year.  And when Mr. Parke and Mr. Scelza needed some very large tanks to handle their sap, they got them used from a sugarmaker in Franklin County.  With about 100,000 taps, the seller found that his 4,500-gallon sap tanks were just too small.

All of the time and money the partners have put into their operation since last May is culminating this week in a productive machine with a great many moving parts.

Most of the taps yield their sap to a collection point that sits in a low, swampy area just off the old Hinman Road.  The sap is drawn to two big tanks by a vacuum pump that reaches deep into the forest to the east and west through two-inch dry lines.  The sap actually flows through a parallel set of wet lines, connected at strategic points to the dry line.

Mr. Ecker-Racz collects that sap in a tank on a trailer behind his tractor and hauls it south on the Hinman Road, across a ford over a small creek, and a short distance west on the Shadow Lake Road to a big insulated shipping container that houses a shiny new reverse osmosis (RO) machine.  Another big tank receives the sap, along with sap pumped directly from taps in another section of the operation, on the south side of Shadow Lake Road.

A smaller tank sits beside the sap tank in the barn the partners have built, collecting a gush of concentrated sap from the RO machine.

That concentrate gets pumped up into a tank in the back of a veteran dump truck and hauled through Glover and Barton to Mr. Parke’s farm, high at the end of May Pond Road.

There it is boiled down into syrup in a six-by-16-foot evaporator fired by two oil burners.

The whole exercise is a fascinating mix of old and new.  In Mr. Parke’s sugarhouse the back pan is 30 years old.  He bought it from the defunct American Maple Company in Newport, and it was patched up under the supervision of Bucky Shelton at the new sugaring supply business in Orleans, Lapierre USA.

But the front pans are gleaming new stainless steel.  There are three of them taking up the space of the traditional front pan, and a fourth to serve as a spare.  The point, the sugarmakers explained, is that one pan can be lifted out of place and replaced while it is being cleaned.  Frequent cleaning comes with the RO-enriched concentrate that arrives from Glover.  It drops a lot of niter as it boils, and that can’t be allowed to coat the bottom of the pan.

“With RO sap, you’re kind of right on the edge of disaster all the time,” said Tim Perkins, who directs UVM’s Proctor Maple Research Center in Underhill.

He’s seeing a steady growth in the maple industry.  Exact numbers are hard to come by, Mr. Perkins said, but his estimate is that “the maple industry has been growing quite rapidly over the last five years, on the order of 4 to 5 percent a year.”

New technology has been key to the industry’s growth, Mr. Perkins said.

“Anybody of a reasonably decent size is going to have a very efficient operation with a modern tubing system, vacuum lines, RO, and very efficient evaporators.”

A vacuum system like the one Mr. Parke and Mr. Scelza laid out with the help of a consultant from New York State can double the yield per tap.

The ratio of taps to syrup, Mr. Perkins said, “used to be a quart per tap in a good year on buckets.  Now, tapping forest trees, you can get half a gallon per tap year after year, if you’re doing everything right.”

“If you don’t have vacuum,” Mr. Shelton said flatly, “it’s like having a ski area without snow making.”

To handle all that sap most large sugarmakers have turned to reverse osmosis.

David Marvin of Butternut Mountain Farm in Morrisville recalled starting out 40 years ago with 4,000 taps.  “That was a pretty big deal,” he said.  His operation currently has 16,000 taps.

“The real key has been reverse osmosis,” Mr. Marvin said.  Without it, sugarmakers were burning between four and four and a half gallons of oil to make a gallon of syrup.  With RO, Mr. Marvin said, it takes two quarts of oil to make a gallon of syrup.

Without RO, Mr. Marvin said, “we wouldn’t have this expansion in the industry.  The consumer wouldn’t be able to afford the energy we’d have to use to make the product.”

Though most large-scale sugarmakers burn oil, Mr. Perkins at the research center noted that the technology of wood-fired rigs continues to advance.  While wood-fired rigs have long relied on a supply of forced air at the bottom of the fire pit, the new models add a flow of air over the top of the fire to burn gasses that would otherwise go up the stack.

SONY DSC

Bucky Shelton stands beside the Hurricane at Lapierre USA in Orleans. The rig applies new technology to the time-honored practice of burning wood. Photos by Chris Braithwaite

Mr. Shelton has one such rig on display at the Lapierre store in Orleans.  It’s a three-tiered beauty in stainless steel called the Hurricane, and it carries a price tag of $36,212.  Its top unit, called a piggyback, concentrates the sap on its way down to the evaporator.

For Mr. Parke and Mr. Scelza, finding a very large, untapped hardwood forest rich in maple was key to their enterprise.  Mr. Ecker-Racz bought his land at the end of the Perron Hill Road in 1968 and moved onto it in 1970.  Since then the trained forester has cultivated it much the way others might care for a garden.

He’s culled for firewood, harvested the softwood several times, but left the best hardwood standing for saw logs — or for sugaring.

He scorns the idea of clearcutting, or even selectively cutting everything over a certain size.  Though they are rare these days, he said, “you will find a few old-time Vermonters who understand the genetics of wood.  It’s just like a dairy herd.  You don’t milk your culls and beef your best cows.”

Mr. Parke is clearly delighted to have found such a stand of maples.  “Nick is an exceptional forester,” he said of Mr. Ecker-Racz.

Mr. Parke and Mr. Scelza demonstrated a lot of ingenuity in getting set up for sugaring.  The barn on the Shadow Lake Road is a reconstruction of one Mr. Parke tore down in Orwell.  Years ago Mr. Parke picked up a couple of shipping containers and buried them at his farm as root cellars.  He dug them up and used one to house the RO machine, the other for the pumps and generator at the collection point in the swamp, where there is no power.

That military surplus generator proved too small for the job, so while he waits for a new one Mr. Parke is using a borrowed generator powered by his tractor.  As one neighbor noted, that requires 2 a.m. runs on his ATV to keep the tractor fueled.

When Mr. Ecker-Racz first broke out the Hinman Road with his tractor at the end of February, its front end fell off as it dropped into the open ford.

But he had it fixed in time to deliver the first loads of sap.  And on Tuesday morning with the RO machine sending a gush of concentrated sap into the tank, the two partners were clearly delighted to see their enterprise finally in production.

contact Chris Braithwaite at chris@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

Newport Center man’s body found in Lake Memphremagog

Featured

Photo by Richard Creaser

Photo by Richard Creaser

by Richard Creaser

copyright the Chronicle 3-4-2013

NEWPORT CENTER — A missing Newport Center man’s body was found Monday afternoon by State Police divers in Lake Memphremagog.  Vermont State Police Lieutenant Kirk Cooper said he was 53-year-old Jacques LeBlanc.

According to the State Police, Mr. LeBlanc broke through the ice at approximately 7:30 p.m. on Saturday, March 2.  Mr. LeBlanc was in the process of moving an ice shanty while using a tractor when he broke through.  While the exact cause of the accident has not yet been determined the presence of a nearly one-third of a mile long pressure crack appears to have been a contributing factor.

Lieutenant Kirk Cooper of the Vermont State Police.  Photo by Richard Creaser

Lieutenant Kirk Cooper of the Vermont State Police. Photo by Richard Creaser

The State Police estimate the depth of the water at the accident site as between 25 feet and 30 feet.  Prior to the entry of divers the State Police had operated a remote operated vehicle in the hopes of finding the victim, Sergeant Sean Selby reported.

The State Police dive team is contending with difficult conditions caused by a combination of low light and heavy sedimentation in the water, Lieutenant Cooper reported.  The divers are tethered to ropes to help guide them back to the opening that rescuers have cut through the ice, Sergeant Selby said.

“The safety of the dive team is a top priority,” Sergeant Selby said.

Newport Center volunteer firefighter Pat Corkins said that pressure cracks along the lake have been the cause of several other breakthroughs both this season as well as in the past.  Mr. Corkins was one of the Newport Center Fire Department members assisting at the site on Monday morning.

“When the ice is buckling like that you can bet there’s thin ice or open water around it,” Mr. Corkins said.  “You need to stay as far away from those cracks as you can, at least a hundred feet or more.  But you can’t always see where the cracks are especially in the dark or during whiteout conditions like you have today.”

Lake ice conditions can vary greatly from one location to the next, Lieutenant Cooper said.  That can make navigating the lake with a vehicle treacherous even for experienced ice fishermen, he said.

“The safest thing to do is to not drive on the ice at all,” Lieutenant Cooper said.  “You don’t really know the depth of the ice until you drill through it.”

Contact Richard Creaser at nek_scribbler@hotmail.com

 

Share

S.30 – an act relating to siting of electric generation plants

This wording is as of 2-28-2013.

- 131 -
NOTICE CALENDAR
Second Reading
Favorable with Recommendation of Amendment
S. 30.
An act relating to siting of electric generation plants.
Reported favorably with recommendation of amendment by Senator
Snelling for the Committee on Natural Resources and Energy.
The Committee recommends that the bill be amended by striking out all
after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
* * * Findings * * *
Sec. 1. FINDINGS
The General Assembly finds that:
(1) Climate change from the emission of greenhouse gases such as
carbon dioxide (CO
2
) is one of the most serious issues facing Vermont today.
In this State, the change in climate already has resulted in significant damage
from increased heavy rain events and flooding and in fundamental alterations
to average annual temperatures and the length and characteristics of the
seasons. As climate change accelerates, the hazards to human health and
safety and the environment in Vermont will rise, including an increased
frequency of violent storm events, heat waves, and one- to two-month
droughts; threats to the productivity of cold-weather crops and dairy cows and
to cold-water fish and wildlife species; reduced seasons for skiing,
snowmobiling, and sugaring; and increasing risks to infrastructure such as
roads and bridges near streams and rivers.
(2) Vermont currently encourages the in-state siting of renewable
electric generation projects in order to contribute to reductions in global
climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Yet significant
controversy exists over whether in-state development of renewable energy
actually reduces Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions, since these projects
typically sell renewable energy credits to utilities in other states, and those
credits are netted against the greenhouse gas emissions of those states.
(3) Vermont’s electric energy consumption does not contribute
significantly to the State’s carbon footprint. In 2010, CO
2
and equivalent
emissions from Vermont energy consumption totaled approximately eight
million metric tons (MMTCO
2
). Of this total, transportation fuel use
accounted for approximately 3.5, nonelectric fuel use by homes and businesses
for approximately 2.5 and, in contrast, electric energy use for approximately
0.04 MMTCO
2
.
- 132 -
(4) The in-state siting of renewable electric generation projects carries
the potential for significant adverse impacts. For example, in Vermont,
developers site industrial wind generation projects and wind meteorological
stations on ridgelines, which often contain sensitive habitat and important
natural areas. Vermont’s ridgelines also define and enhance the State’s natural
and scenic beauty. Vermont has invested substantial time and effort to develop
regulatory policy and programs to protect its ridgelines.
(5) Ridgeline wind generation plants have potential impacts on natural
resources, scenic beauty, and quality of life, including effects on endangered
and threatened species, wildlife habitat, and aesthetics and impacts from
blasting and turbine noise. Residents near installed wind generation plants
have raised concerns about health impacts, including sleep loss. Significant
controversy has arisen over whether the Public Service Board review process
adequately protects the public and the environment from the negative impacts
caused by these and other electric generation projects.
(6) Vermont has a long history of supporting community-based land use
planning. Under 24 V.S.A. chapter 117, Vermont’s 11 regional planning
commissions and its municipal planning commissions are enabled and
encouraged to adopt plans to guide development, including energy and utility
facilities. These plans are adopted through a public hearing and comment
process after substantial effort by the regions and the municipalities, often with
extensive involvement of citizens in the affected communities. Yet under
current law, the Public Service Board when reviewing an electric generation
project may set aside the results of this planning process for any reason the
Board considers to affect the general good of the State, even if the project is
not needed for reliability of the electric system.
(7) No statewide analysis and planning is performed to address the
environmental, land use, and health impacts of siting wind generation projects
in Vermont. Instead, the Public Service Board examines the impacts on a
case-by-case basis only.
(8) The current case-by-case system of regulating electric generation
projects must be revised to ensure the best possible siting of these projects. To
achieve this goal, the siting of electric generation projects must be directed by
community-based land use planning. Each electric generation project must
comply with the same environmental and land use criteria as other
development projects unless the generation project is for the purpose of system
reliability. A statewide assessment must be made and a process must be
developed that integrates and strengthens the role of community-based land
use planning and supports effective review and optimal siting of all electric
generation projects. This assessment also must evaluate whether encouraging
- 133 -
in-state siting of renewable electric generation is the most appropriate means at
Vermont’s disposal to reduce its carbon footprint.
* * * Assessment; Report * * *
Sec. 2. ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING; ASSESSMENT; REPORT
(a) Charge. On or before November 15, 2013, the Department of Public
Service, in consultation with and assisted by the Agencies of Commerce and
Community Development and of Natural Resources, the Natural Resources
Board, and the state’s regional planning commissions, shall conduct and
complete the assessment and submit the report to the General Assembly
required by this section.
(b) Definitions. In this section:
(1) “ACCD” means the Agency of Commerce and Community
Development.
(2) “ANR” means the Agency of Natural Resources.
(3) “Board” means the Natural Resources Board.
(4) “Department” means the Department of Public Service.
(5) “Electric generation plant” means a plant that produces electricity
and has a plant capacity that exceeds 500 kilowatts.
(6) “Plant” and “plant capacity” shall have the same meaning as in
30 V.S.A. § 8002, except that they shall not be limited to renewable energy.
(7) “Regional planning commission” shall have the meaning as in
24 V.S.A. § 4303.
(8) “Wind generation plant” means an electric generation plant that
captures the energy of the wind and converts it into electricity. The term
includes all associated facilities and infrastructure such as wind turbines,
towers, guy wires, power lines, roads, and substations.
(9) “Wind meteorological station” means any tower, and associated guy
wires and attached instrumentation, constructed to collect and record wind
speed, wind direction, and atmospheric conditions.
(c) Governor’s Siting Policy Commission. In performing its tasks under
this section, the Department shall use the information and data collected by the
Governor’s Energy Siting Policy Commission (the Siting Policy Commission)
created by Executive Order No. 10-12 dated October 2, 2012 (the Executive
Order) and shall consider the recommendations of that Commission.
(d) Assessment. The Department, assisted by ACCD, ANR, the Board, and
the regional planning commissions, shall assess each of the following:
- 134 -
(1) the appropriateness and economic efficiency of investing or
encouraging investment in renewable electric generation plants to reduce
Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions in comparison to other measures to
reduce those emissions such as transportation fuel efficiency and thermal
energy efficiency;
(2) the current policy and practice of selling renewable energy credits
from renewable electric generation plants in Vermont to utilities in other
jurisdictions and the effect of this policy and practice on reducing Vermont’s
greenhouse gas emissions;
(3) methods to integrate state energy planning and local and regional
land use planning as they apply to electric generation plants;
(4) methods to strengthen the role of local and regional plans in the
siting review process for electric generation plants and to assure that the siting
review process reflects the outcome of the local and regional planning
processes;
(5) methods to fund intervenors in the siting review process for electric
generation projects; and
(6) with respect to wind generation plants and wind meteorological
stations:
(A) health impacts of plants and stations located in and outside
Vermont;
(B) sound and infrasound emitted from plants and stations located in
and outside Vermont as they affect public health and quality of life;
(C) setback requirements on such plants and stations adopted by
other jurisdictions in and outside the United States;
(D) the impacts on the environment, natural resources, and quality of
life of the plants and stations in Vermont in existence or under construction as
of the effective date of this section; and
(E) the economic and environmental costs and benefits of such plants
and stations, including the value of any ecosystem services affected by them.
(e) Report; proposed legislation. On or before November 15, 2013, the
Department, assisted by ACCD, ANR, the Board, and the regional planning
commissions, shall submit a report to the House and Senate Committees on
Natural Resources and Energy and the Electric Generation Oversight
Committee created under subsection (g) of this section that contains each of
the following:
(1) The results of each assessment to be conducted under subsection (d)
of this section.
- 135 -
(2) Recommendations and proposed legislation to:
(A) establish a comprehensive planning process for the siting of
electric generation plants that integrates state energy and local and regional
land use planning;
(B) ensure that the outcome of this integrated planning process
directs the siting review process for electric generation plants and that local
and regional land use plans have a determinative role in this siting review
process;
(C) establish a method to fund intervenors participating in the siting
review process for electric generation plants;
(D) maximize the reductions in Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions
supported by revenues raised from Vermont taxpayers and ratepayers;
(E) establish standards applicable to all wind generation plants and
wind meteorological stations to address their impacts on the public health,
environment, land use, and quality of life, including standards to protect
natural areas and wildlife habitat and to establish noise limits and setback
requirements applicable to such plants and stations; and
(F) establish a procedure to measure a property owner’s loss of value,
if any, due to proximity to a wind generation plant and to propose a method to
compensate the property owner for the loss in value, including a determination
of who shall pay for such loss.
(f) Public notice and participation.
(1) The Department shall give widespread public notice of the
assessment and report required by this section and shall maintain on its website
a prominent page concerning this process that provides notice of all public
meetings held and posts relevant information and documents.
(2) In performing the assessment and developing the report required by
this section, the Department shall provide an opportunity for local legislative
bodies, local planning commissions, affected businesses and organizations, and
members of the public to submit relevant factual information, analysis, and
comment. This opportunity shall include meetings conducted by the DPS at
locations that are geographically distributed around the State to receive such
information, analysis, and comment.
(g) Oversight committee. There is created the Electric Generation
Oversight Committee (the Committee). The purpose of the Committee shall be
to perform legislative oversight of the conduct of the assessment and report
required by this section and to discuss potential legislation on planning for and
siting of electric generation plants.
- 136 -
(1) Membership. The Committee shall be composed of six members
who shall be appointed within 30 days of this section’s effective date. Three of
the members shall be members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources
and Energy appointed by the Committee on Committees of the Senate. Three
of the members shall be members of the House Committee on Natural
Resources and Energy appointed by the Speaker of the House.
(2) Meetings. During adjournment of the General Assembly, the
Committee shall be authorized to conduct up to three meetings. at which
meetings the Committee may:
(A) direct the Department, ACCD, ANR, the Board, and one or more
regional planning commissions to appear and provide progress reports on the
assessment and report required by this section and discuss proposals of draft
legislation on planning for and siting of electric generation plants; and
(B) direct members of the Siting Policy Commission to appear and
provide information and testimony related to the Commission’s report and
recommendations issued pursuant to the Executive Order and to the siting of
electric generation plants in Vermont. This authority shall continue for the
duration of the Committee’s term whether or not the Siting Policy Commission
ceases to exist prior to the end of the Committee’s term.
(3) Reimbursement. For attendance at authorized meetings during
adjournment of the General Assembly, members of the Committee shall be
entitled to compensation and reimbursement for expenses as provided in 2
V.S.A. § 406.
(4) For the purpose of its tasks under this subsection, the Committee
shall have the administrative and legal assistance of the Office of Legislative
Council.
(5) Term of committee. The Committee shall cease to exist on February
1, 2014.
Sec. 3. APPROPRIATION
For fiscal year 2014, the sum of $75,000.00 is appropriated to the
Department of Public Service from the General Fund for the purpose of Sec. 2
of this act (electric generation siting; assessment; report).
* * * Regional Planning for Electric Generation Plants * * *
Sec. 4. 24 V.S.A. § 4348a is amended to read:
§ 4348a. ELEMENTS OF A REGIONAL PLAN
(a) A regional plan shall be consistent with the goals established in section
4302 of this title and shall include but need not be limited to the following:
- 137 -
* * *
(3) An energy element, which:
(A) may include an analysis of energy resources, needs, scarcities,
costs, and problems within the region, a statement of policy on the
conservation of energy and the development of renewable energy resources,
and a statement of policy on patterns and densities of land use and control
devices likely to result in conservation of energy; and
(B) shall include the electric energy siting plan under section 4348c
of this title;
* * *
Sec. 5. 24 V.S.A. § 4348c is added to read:
§ 4348c. ELECTRIC ENERGY SITING PLAN
(a) In this section:
(1) “Electric generation plant” means a plant that produces electricity
and has a plant capacity that exceeds 500 kilowatts.
(2) “Plant” and “plant capacity” shall have the same meaning as in
30 V.S.A. § 8002, except that they shall not be limited to renewable energy.
(b) Each regional planning commission shall adopt a plan concerning the
siting of electric generation plants within the region. This plan shall be
adopted as part of or an amendment to the regional plan.
(c) The plan shall state the region’s specific policies on the siting of electric
generation plants and identify the appropriate locations within the region, if
any, for the siting of electric generation plants.
(d) In developing the siting plan, the regional planning commission shall
apply the resource maps developed by the Secretary of Natural Resources
under 10 V.S.A. § 127, protect the resources under 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a), and
consider the energy policy set forth in 30 V.S.A. §§ 202a and 8001 and the
state energy plans adopted under 30 V.S.A. §§ 202 and 202b.
(e) Notwithstanding section 4350 of this title, the plan for a municipality
shall not be considered incompatible with the regional plan for the reason that
the municipal plan prohibits the siting of an electric generation plant that the
regional plan would allow within the municipality.
Sec. 6. IMPLEMENTATION
On or before December 15, 2014, each regional planning commission shall
adopt a renewable electric energy siting plan under Sec. 5 of this act, 24 V.S.A.
§ 4348c.
- 138 -
* * * Municipal Officers; Ethics Disclosure * * *
Sec. 7. 24 V.S.A. § 873 is added to read:
§ 873. DISCLOSURE; FINANCIAL INTEREST; WIND GENERATION
PLANTS
A member of a municipality’s legislative body or other municipal officer
shall not participate in any meeting or proceeding or take any official action
concerning a wind generation plant proposed to be located within the
municipality the member or officer may have in the construction or operation
of the plant, including the retention of the member or officer by the plant
developer an agreement under which the plant developer will compensate the
member or officer for potential impacts to land of the member or officer.
(1) In this section, a financial interest of a member or officer shall
include a financial interest in the construction or operation of the plant of any
natural person to which the member or officer is related within the fourth
degree of consanguinity or affinity or of any corporation of which an officer,
director, trustee, or agent is related to the member or officer within such
degree.
(2) This section shall not require disclosure of a financial interest shared
generally by the residents of the municipality such as the municipality’s receipt
of property taxes or other payments from the plant.
Sec. 8. 24 V.S.A. § 4461 is amended to read:
§ 4461. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES
(a) Meetings; rules of procedure and ethics. An appropriate municipal
panel shall elect its own officers and adopt rules of procedure, subject to this
section and other applicable state statutes, and shall adopt rules of ethics with
respect to conflicts of interest.
(1) Meetings of any appropriate municipal panel shall be held at the call
of the chairperson and at such times as the panel may determine. The officers
of the panel may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses and
the production of material germane to any issue under review. All meetings of
the panel, except for deliberative and executive sessions, shall be open to the
public. The panel shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of
each member upon each question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating
this, and shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions, all of
which shall be filed immediately in the office of the clerk of the municipality
as a public record. For the conduct of any hearing and the taking of any action,
a quorum shall be not less than a majority of the members of the panel, and any
action of the panel shall be taken by the concurrence of a majority of the panel.
- 139 -
(2) The provisions of section 873 of this title (disclosure; financial
interest; wind generation plant) shall apply to each member of an appropriate
municipal panel.
* * *
* * * Electric Generation Siting Jurisdiction; Public Service Board * * *
Sec. 9. 30 V.S.A. § 248 is amended to read:
§ 248. NEW GAS AND ELECTRIC PURCHASES, INVESTMENTS, AND
FACILITIES; CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC GOOD
(a)(1) No company, as defined in section 201 of this title, may:
(A) In any way purchase electric capacity or energy from outside
the state State:
(i) for a period exceeding five years, that represents more than
three percent of its historic peak demand, unless the purchase is from a plant as
defined in subdivision 8002(14) of this title that produces electricity from
renewable energy as defined under subdivision 8002(17); or
(ii) for a period exceeding ten years, that represents more than ten
percent of its historic peak demand, if the purchase is from a plant as defined
in subdivision 8002(14) of this title that produces electricity from renewable
energy as defined under subdivision 8002(17); or
(B) invest in an electric generation or transmission facility located
outside this state State unless the public service board Public Service Board
first finds that the same will promote the general good of the state State and
issues a certificate to that effect.
(2) Except for the replacement of existing facilities with equivalent
facilities in the usual course of business, and except for electric generation
facilities that are operated solely for on-site electricity consumption by the
owner of those facilities:
(A) no company, as defined in section 201 of this title, and no person,
as defined in 10 V.S.A. § 6001(14), may begin site preparation for or
construction of an electric generation facility or electric transmission facility
within the state State which is designed for immediate or eventual operation at
any voltage; and
(B) no such company may exercise the right of eminent domain in
connection with site preparation for or construction of any such transmission or
generation facility, unless the public service board Public Service Board first
finds that the same will promote the general good of the state State and issues a
certificate to that effect.
- 140 -
* * *
(b) Before the public service board Public Service Board issues a certificate
of public good as required under subsection (a) of this section, it shall find that
the purchase, investment, or construction:
(1)(A) with respect to an in-state electric generation facility exceeding
500 kilowatts, will be in conformance with the duly adopted plans under 24
V.S.A. chapter 117 for the municipality and region in which the facility is
located, and due consideration has been given to the land conservation
measures contained in the plan of any other affected municipality.
Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, the Board shall not issue a
certificate under this section for such an in-state facility without finding that
this subdivision (1)(A) is met. However, this subdivision (1)(A) shall not
apply to an electric generation facility the principal effect of which, if
approved, would be to remediate a constraint in the electric transmission or
distribution system;
(B) with respect to an any other in-state facility subject to this
section, will not unduly interfere with the orderly development of the region
with due consideration having been given to the recommendations of the
municipal and regional planning commissions, the recommendations of the
municipal legislative bodies, and the land conservation measures contained in
the plan of any affected municipality. However, with respect to a natural gas
transmission line subject to board review, the line shall be in conformance with
any applicable provisions concerning such lines contained in the duly adopted
regional plan; and, in addition, upon application of any party, the board Board
shall condition any certificate of public good for a natural gas transmission line
issued under this section so as to prohibit service connections that would not be
in conformance with the adopted municipal plan in any municipality in which
the line is located;
* * *
(5) with respect to an in-state facility, will not have an undue adverse
effect on esthetics, historic sites, air and water purity, the natural environment,
the use of natural resources, and the public health and safety, with and:
(A) with respect to an in-state electric generation facility exceeding
500 kilowatts, will comply with the criteria of 10 V.S.A. § 6086(a)(1)–(9)(L).
Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, the Board shall not issue a
certificate under this section for such an in-state facility without finding that
this subdivision (5)(A) is met. However, this subdivision (5)(A) shall not
apply to an electric generation facility the principal effect of which, if
approved, would be to remediate a constraint in the electric transmission or
distribution system;
- 141 -
(B) with respect to any other in-state facility subject to this section,
due consideration having has been given to the criteria specified in 10 V.S.A.
§§ 1424a(d) and 6086(a)(1) through (8) and (9)(K) and greenhouse gas
impacts.
* * *
(q) When reviewing a facility under this section pursuant to the criteria of
10 V.S.A. § 6086(a), the Public Service Board shall consider the relevant
precedents of the former Environmental Board and of the Environmental
Division of the Superior Court and shall apply the relevant precedents of the
Vermont Supreme Court.
Sec. 10. RETROACTIVE APPLICATION
Notwithstanding 1 V.S.A. §§ 213 and 214, Sec. 9 (new gas and electric
purchases, investments, and facilities; certificate of public good) of this act
shall apply to applications that are filed on and after March 1, 2013 and are
pending as of this section’s effective date.
* * * State Lands * * *
Sec. 11. 10 V.S.A. chapter 88 is added to read:
CHAPTER 88. PROHIBITION; COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION;
CERTAIN PUBLIC LANDS
§ 2801. POLICY
Vermont’s state parks, state forests, natural areas, wilderness areas, wildlife
management areas, and wildlife refuges are intended to remain in a natural or
wild state forever and shall be protected and managed accordingly.
§ 2802. PROHIBITION
(a) Construction for any commercial purpose, including the generation of
electric power, shall not be permitted within any state park or forest,
wilderness area designated by law, or natural area designated under section
2607 of this title.
(b) This section shall not prohibit:
(1) the construction of a concession or other structure for the use of
visitors to state parks or forests;
(2) a modification or improvement to a dam in existence as of the
effective date of this section, if the modification or improvement is:
(A) to ensure public safety; or
- 142 -
(B) to allow the dam’s use for the generation of electricity, and the
construction of any power lines and facilities necessary for such use;
(3) the construction of telecommunications facilities, as defined in
30 V.S.A. § 248a(b) (certificate of public good; communications facilities), in
accordance with all other applicable state law;
(4) a temporary structure or road for forestry purposes as may be
permitted on a state land;
(5) tapping of maple trees and associated activities on state forestland
authorized under a license pursuant to section 2606b of this title; or
(6) construction on state land that is permitted under a lease or license
that was in existence on this act’s effective date and, in the case of a ski area,
the renewal of such a lease or license or its modification to allow expansion of
the ski area.
Sec. 12. REPEAL
10 V.S.A. § 2606(c) (state forests; parks; leases for mining or quarrying) is
repealed.

Share

GMP agrees to pay Chronicle publisher

Featured

by Paul Lefebvre

Phil White, left, and Chris Braithwaite in Vermont Superior Court.  Photo by Paul Lefebvre

Phil White, left, and Chris Braithwaite in Vermont Superior Court. Photo by Paul Lefebvre

copyright the Chronicle 2-27-2013

Two months after it was filed, Chronicle publisher Chris Braithwaite has prevailed in his suit against the utility and wind developer Green Mountain Power (GMP).

In an announcement Tuesday, Mr. Braithwaite said GMP has agreed to pay the legal fees that he incurred fighting a criminal charge of unlawful trespass brought against him while covering a wind protest as a reporter on Lowell Mountain in December 2011.

GMP will pay Mr. Braithwaite $22,500, the amount requested by his attorney, Philip White of Newport.

Mr. Braithwaite called the settlement “a fair resolution of this matter,” in a press release Tuesday.

In his statement, Mr. Braithwaite also said he had learned that David Coriell, the GMP agent at the mountain, was acting in good faith when he instructed police to arrest him for trespass.

Information discovered by Mr. White indicated that Mr. Coriell had failed to carry out GMP’s instructions that reporters covering the protests should not be arrested.

When Mr. White brought that evidence to light, Judge Howard VanBenthuysen threw the charge out and later dismissed with prejudice, which barred the state’s attorney from refilling it.

Once the criminal case was dismissed, Mr. Braithwaite sued the utility company.

GMP spokeswoman Dorothy Schnure said Tuesday that the company settled despite its belief it would prevail in court on the basis of the facts and law.

“We realized the settlement would be in the best interests of our customers,” she said, adding that GMP could have spent up to $100,000 in litigation.

“That would not have benefited our customers.”

Mr. White praised Mr. Braithwaite in a written statement Tuesday.

“I’m glad Chris stood up for the press, and for his ability to cover this story,” he wrote.  “I’m also glad that GMP had the wisdom and the foresight to settle this civil case promptly.”

contact Paul Lefebvre at paul@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

Newport City mayor changes his mind on methadone dispensary location

Featured

methadone fountain

Maureen Fountain, whose husband was killed in a car accident by an addict, gave a heartfelt speech about the need for the treatment programs. Photo by Joseph Gresser

by Joseph Gresser

copyright the Chronicle 2-20-2013

NEWPORT — An issue that aldermen thought they had settled more than seven years ago returned Monday night and reawakened many of the old passions.  Some neighbors of the Bay Area Addiction Research and Treatment (BAART) clinic on Union Street strongly opposed allowing methadone to be dispensed at the site, and Aldermen John Wilson and Robert Baraw seemed dubious, at best, about the proposal.

Others, including Mayor Paul Monette and former Newport Police Chief Paul Duquette, strongly supported the plan to centralize BAART’s services.  The most moving statement was given by Maureen Fountain, who told how her husband and two other men were killed in a car accident when a heroin addict fell asleep at the wheel and crashed into their car.  Ms. Fountain said her experience makes her favor the BAART plan.

Alan Aiken of BAART told the city council that recent work on Coventry Street has made that street unsafe for patients who walk to the present treatment site.  BAART dispenses methadone from a van parked at the city’s recycling center just off Coventry Street, and Mr. Aiken said that patients who walk to get treatment are at risk of being struck by fast-moving traffic.

He suggested that it would make more sense to begin providing methadone to clients at the organization’s clinic on Union Street.  During the course of the discussion, Mr. Aiken pointed out that he had come to the council to let them know of his plans, not to ask permission.

When it opened, he noted, the clinic was granted a permit by the planning commission to operate as a clinic.  Alderman Denis Chenette, who served for many years on that commission, agreed with Mr. Aiken’s interpretation of the rules.

Some of those who questioned the move pointed to a recent, unsuccessful, attempt by an unknown gunman to rob the Union Street clinic of its methadone supply.  One woman, who declined to give her name to the press, said she has kept her doors locked for the seven years the clinic has been open and has been especially vigilant since the robbery attempt on January 23.

When the aldermen gave permission for BAART to set up in Newport seven and a half years ago, neighbors of the Union Street clinic vehemently objected to having methadone dispensed there.  As a compromise, BAART agreed to set up a mobile clinic early each morning at the Coventry Street site.

Mr. Aiken argued that the current situation has no advantages.  All BAART patients have to come to Union Street at least once a month for counseling and evaluation, he said, and there have been no complaints by neighbors since the clinic opened its doors.

He said that when construction on Coventry Street prevented access to the recycling center, methadone treatment was moved temporarily to Union Street without any complaints from neighbors.

The mobile dispensary, he said, was originally conceived as a unit that could travel around Orleans County treating addicts in several towns, but it was quickly discovered that people in treatment tend to have jobs and are not able to leave work in the middle of the day to get a dose of methadone.

When the clinic opened, Mr. Aiken said, most of the people it treated were heroin addicts.  Today 90 to 95 percent are seeking help for addiction to prescription drugs, he said.

In supporting the idea of moving the dispensary to Union Street Mr. Duquette picked up on Mr. Aiken’s description of the clinic’s clientele.

“These people are not lepers, they don’t have a second head coming out of their backs,” he said.  “You’d be surprised.”

He said combining all the services in one place is just common sense.

Mr. Wilson said he is upset that Mr. Aiken is seeking to change a situation that he thought has worked well over the past seven and a half years.  If there is now a problem with pedestrian safety, BAART should have come to the council looking for better lighting on the road, or a new sidewalk.

If neither of those solutions could be arranged, he asked, why had BAART not looked for a new home away from a residential area?

Craig Monfette, who said he operates a day care center not far from the clinic, agreed.  He said there are four day care centers and two schools in the neighborhood.  He reminded council members and Mr. Aiken of the outcry from the neighborhood when dispensing on Union Street was first proposed.

“We got everyone out,” he said.  “We can do it again.”

He said he and his neighbors were disturbed by the robbery attempt and said that a determined person could overcome any precautions the clinic might put in place.

“These are our security concerns.” Mr. Monfette said.  “They haven’t changed.  They never will.”

Phil Laramee, a neighbor, seconded Mr. Monfette’s concerns.  He said it was lucky that the receptionist at BAART was able to “BS” the gunman into believing there were no drugs at the clinic.

Cathy Dubois said Mr. Laramee was incorrect about what happened at the clinic.  She said she was the person who faced the gunman.

“I didn’t BS him,” she said.  “I told the truth, that I didn’t have access to any methadone.”

Ms. Dubois said that new security measures that will be part of an already planned renovation of the clinic would have kept the robber from leaving the clinic, had he even been able to get in.

These would include a panic button, she said, that would summon police “in a heartbeat.”

Others pointed out that there have been robberies at North Country Hospital, and the Cumberland Farms store has been held up seven times, without calls for restricting mini-marts in residential neighborhoods.

Mayor Monette said he changed his mind about moving the clinic a month and a half ago.  For the seven years of its existence, he said, “I was dead set against” dispensing on Union Street.

Recent visits to the van and to the clinic led him to believe that it would be more efficient to have the whole program in one place “like a pharmacy.”

Treading carefully to avoid identifying any of the program’s participants, Mr. Monette said, “they are people gainfully employed working in the community and paying taxes.”

Ms. Fountain told a hushed room that her support for the clinic came directly from her own experiences.  She said the man who killed her husband had taken a large amount of heroin the day before the accident.

He went to a clinic in Burlington, she said, and was given a dose of methadone, but was allowed to drive away in violation of proper practice.

She said she was encouraged to have a face-to-face meeting with the man by the Department of Corrections and despite her trepidations, did so.  She was told not to expect much response from the man, Ms. Fountain said, but the two spoke for four hours.

She said she maintained a relationship with the man over the years, but after nine and a half years, she said, “I blew up.”

“I told him, ‘You killed three men, destroyed three families,’ and that he needed to get help,” Ms. Fountain said.  “Miracle of miracles, he did.”

Ms. Fountain said the man has been in treatment for a year and a half.  She said she could tell that it had been successful.  “He was a different person.”

She said the man has been released on probation.  Should he get in trouble, she said, the police would call her immediately.  So far, she said, there have been no calls.

“You have to stand up and look at it as a public health issue,” Ms. Fountain said.  “They need your support.  They’re challenged every single day.”

Ms. Fountain said that after her husband’s death she promised herself that she would take every opportunity to keep this from ever happening again.

“I’m not talking as a medical person,” Ms. Fountain said, “I’m speaking as a widow.”

contact Joseph Gresser at joseph@bartonchronicle.com

 

 

Share

Advocates say Reach Up works and should not be cut

Featured

SONY DSC

Kate Kanelstein, in the second row at left, testified against imposing a three-year cutoff in the Reach Up program Monday at a Vermont Interactive Television hearing on the state budget. Beside her is Cindy Perron of Barton, who testified on health care. In the foreground at right, George Frisbee, commander of the Jay Peak Post of the American Legion, testifies against a proposed tax on break open tickets. Beside him is Harvey Robitaille, past commander of Legion Post 21 in Newport. Legion members attended the hearings at sites across the state to argue that the tax would cripple the charitable programs the Legion supports in Vermont. Photo by Chris Braithwaite

by Chris Braithwaite

copyright the Chronicle 2-13-13

NEWPORT — Kate Kanelstein of the Vermont Workers Center was a bit apologetic when she sat in front of the camera during a statewide budget hearing Monday afternoon.

She had planned to bring several women who face the loss of their Reach Up benefits under the cutoff proposed by Governor Peter Shumlin.

But none of them could make it, she told the members of the House and Senate Appropriations committees who convened the hearing.

The women had encountered problems with child care, car troubles, sick family members, and one of them was in labor, Ms. Kanelstein said.

She used her few minutes on Vermont Interactive Television to read a statement from Reach Up participant Jess Ray of West Charleston.

But the explanations she offered the committee might serve as a quick summary of the problems that keep Reach Up participants, typically single mothers, out of the labor force.

Ms. Ray, for example, wrote that she is a mother of two, living with a boyfriend.  “Combined, we get $770 each month.  Our rent is $550 so after paying bills I usually end up with like $20 for everything else.  I love to sew and want to be a seamstress, but I would do pretty much anything if I could get a job.”

Ms. Ray went on the say that the arrival of her first child ended her career at a Barton nursing home five years ago.  “I went on Reach Up for the first time because I didn’t get any maternity leave with my job.”

They left Reach Up when her boyfriend got a job, but returned in less than a year because the company went bankrupt, she wrote.

“Then we got off again when I got a job at Thibault’s Market in Orleans but our car wasn’t inspectable and we didn’t have the money for the repairs so after about three months I couldn’t get there and lost that job, too.  As you can see we live on the edge and it’s really hard to get stable….  Living in West Charleston without transportation makes it incredibly difficult.”

“I also want to understand what you are basing these budget decisions on,” Ms. Ray told the legislators.  “Do you look at the real life situations of people in our communities?  I think that is where we should start.”

The decision in question is whether the Legislature should follow the Governor’s wishes and, on October 1, cut off all families who have been in the Reach Up program for three years.

According to Chris Curtis, a staff attorney with Vermont Legal Aid, 1,188 families would lose their benefits in October, of a total of about 6,400 families on the program.

Of that total, as of September last year, 315 families with 775 family members are in the Newport district of the Department of Children and Families, which oversees Reach Up.  Their benefits that month totaled $147,764, or about $470 a family.

The average Reach Up participant wouldn’t be affected by a three-year cutoff.  According to a state report, “the average amount of time that an individual in Reach Up receives case management services is approximately 24 months.”

But people who know the program in Newport are worried about the impact a cutoff would have.

“My biggest fear is the children,” said Mary Hamel, who runs a job site for Reach Up participants as associate director of employment and training for NECKA.

“Reach up is for families,” Ms. Hamel said.  “Cutting them off is taking away their rent money — the roof over a child’s head.  That concerns me.”

It concerns Mr. Curtis too.  People forced out of Reach Up may end up in the state’s emergency shelter program, he said, and that is already “an exploding part of state government.  What happens if you add another 1,200 families, just as the winter season arrives?”

Other branches of state government, including the Department of Corrections, may face a “ripple effect” from the Reach Up cuts, Mr. Curtis fears.  “Are we really saving any money here?”

His estimate is that the cuts will save Reach Up about $6-million.  “That’s huge to the families,” he said, “but to the General Fund it’s a relatively small amount.”

Mr. Curtis argues that the statistics show Reach Up works for most of the people who are forced to use it.  “The state of Vermont has invested a lot of resources into making this bridge out of poverty,” he argued.  “Why would we blow up that bridge?”

Since she set up a Reach Up work site for NECKA in 2008, Ms. Hamel said, “we have seen many success stories.”

NECKA provides jobs for 15 to 30 Reach Up participants, Ms. Hamel said.  Some work at the Parent Child Center in Newport, as a receptionist or a maintenance worker.  Others work at the cash register or keeping track of the inventory at NEKCA’s thrift store in Newport.

Reach Up has other partners who provide jobs in schools, municipalities and with nonprofit organizations.

The jobs go to Reach Up participants who can’t find work.  They pay nothing (outside of Reach Up benefit payments) but aim to help the participants learn job skills.

Younger Reach Up participants fulfill their job requirement by going to school.

The Governor’s proposal would permit families to take advantage of the full five years of benefits supported by federal block grants.  But there would be interruptions.  After three years, participants would be on their own for a year.  Then they could sign up for another year, be left on their own for a year, and come back to the program for a fifth and final year.

Efforts to reach Paul Dragon, director of the Reach Up program, were unsuccessful.  In his budget address to the Legislature, Governor Shumlin said “there is no better social program than a good paying job.  We will not allow vulnerable Vermonters, such as those who are disabled, to fall through the cracks, but we will ask those who can work to get the training and support they need and get a job.”

If the cutoff becomes law, Ms. Hamel said, “it will cause more homelessness, more hunger, more stress.

“I just don’t think it’s a great idea.  Maybe it’s a good idea to have a conversation about it, but I think it’s a bad thing to take the Governor’s plan seriously.”

contact Chris Braithwaite at chris@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share

Legislators tour through Jay and Newport

Featured

Bill Stenger, president of Jay Peak Resort, testifies before the combined forces of the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee and the Transportation Committee Tuesday at North Country Career Center in Newport.  Photo by Joseph Gresser

Bill Stenger, president of Jay Peak Resort, testifies before the combined forces of the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee and the Transportation Committee Tuesday at North Country Career Center in Newport. Photo by Joseph Gresser

by Joseph Gresser

copyright the Chronicle 2-6-13

NEWPORT — A passel of state representatives on a bus tour of the Northeast Kingdom heard firsthand about the issues that will have to be addressed to help the area adjust to $500-million-worth of planned development.  One problem the area won’t have to address is an influx of 10,000 new jobs.

Bill Stenger, co-owner of Jay Peak Resort and one of the main forces behind the new investment, told the legislators that although there will be 10,000 jobs created in response to the investment, the total of direct jobs in Orleans County will be between 1,500 and 2,000.

The rest of the 10,000 figure will be a consequence of the economic activity created by the new business, and will ripple through the state and out into New England, Mr. Stenger explained.

He was the first witness to testify before a combined meeting of the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee and the Transportation Committee, supplemented by one or two members of the House Education Committee.

The legislators arrived for lunch at the North Country Career Center after taking a tour of Jay Peak and hearing the plans for economic development in the Northeast Kingdom proposed by Mr. Stenger and his partners.  They were accompanied on their journey by a group of high-ranking officials from the state agencies of Commerce and Community Development, and Transportation.

When they got to the Career Center the delegation found a crowd of around 90 people, including educators, local officials, business owners and interested citizens had already assembled.

Representative Bill Botzow of Pownal, chairman of the commerce committee, opened the meeting and gave Representative Mike Marcotte of Coventry, his vice-chairman, an opportunity to say a few words.

“I want to thank the legislators for coming up here.  We’re really proud of what we have here,” Representative Marcotte said.

He said of the work that must be done in connection with planned development, “they’re great challenges to have, but they’re challenges we have to meet.”

Mr. Stenger, who was the first witness, told the representatives that it was the “quality and character of the community” that inspired his plans.  Capital, he said, was the key to development, and the federal EB-5 visa program, which allows foreigners to get residency status in the U.S. in exchange for a job-creating investment, has provided an ideal source of capital.

He said the program has allowed Jay Peak to realize good ideas without the necessity of having a mortgage.

When the program got to the point where it needed to be renewed by Congress, Mr. Stenger said, he sat down with Senator Patrick Leahy, who was one of those behind the law, and Governor Peter Shumlin to think of what might be done if the law was extended.

They decided that it would make sense to bring in good new businesses and give them the opportunity to grow in the Northeast Kingdom.

When the bill reauthorizing the program was signed in September it opened a three-year window, Mr. Stenger said.

In those three years two new business, AnC Bio and Menck Windows, will have to be up and running.  Other ideas, such as a hotel and convention center in Newport and a redeveloped block in the city, will have to be substantially complete, he said.

He said that he and his partners have been working closely with educators around the area to make sure that people have the skills needed when it comes time to hire workers.

The issues that will need to be addressed as the current plans come to fruition include transportation, health care, housing, and education and training.

“All those elements are represented in this room,” Mr. Stenger said of those seated behind him.

“Keep our eye on us, because it’s been a long time since this part of Vermont has been a leader.  We’re going to do great work,” he concluded.

Before leaving the witness table Mr. Stenger, smiling broadly, said he was glad that whoever put together a list of projects for the Agency of Transportation included rebuilding Route 242, the road that serves Jay Peak.  “It made my day.”

Mr. Stenger was followed by superintendents Robert Kern of the North Country Supervisory Union, Chris Masson of the Essex North Supervisory Union, and Stephen Urgenson of the Orleans Central Supervisory Union.

Mr. Kern said that many of the schools in the area are old and need work if they are to accommodate an increased population of students.  He asked the legislators to consider providing help for school renovation, noting that Morgan has repeatedly voted down bonds because its voters feel they cannot pay for renovations on their own.

He also suggested that the state needs to provide demographic information to allow schools to make informed decisions about needs they will have to meet quickly.

Mr. Kern said he has no way of knowing how many new workers will be arriving or how many children they will bring with them.

Mr. Masson pleaded for consideration of spreading the development into the Canaan area.  The number of jobs in the community has dropped precipitously since Ethan Allen moved much of its production to its Orleans plant, he said.

Mr. Urgenson asked for a better communications infrastructure in the Northeast Kingdom.  Faster communications and better cell phone coverage will result in greater creativity, he argued.

Representing higher education, Penne Ciaraldi of Community College of Vermont, Ann Nygard of Lyndon State College, and Cindy Robillard of the Department of Labor outlined their efforts to create a partnership to develop job training programs in the Northeast Kingdom.

Ms. Nygard said educators have to build a “cradle to career pathway” for students.

Eileen Illuzzi, interim director of the Career Center, told how her school has worked to anticipate career opportunities.  She said the career center established its hospitality program three years earlier after a visit to Jay Peak.

“Hospitality is not a career choice, we need to make it a destination career,” she said.

She said the career center is “all about options.”  Even students who decide not to complete a two-year career program may have gained something.

Ms. Illuzzi told the story of a student who hoped to go to medical school.  When she fainted at the sight of blood during a visit to an operating room, it gave her a chance to reconsider her path, Ms. Illuzzi said.

The Menck Window company, a German firm, may want to consider working with the career center to create an apprenticeship program, Ms. Illuzzi said, something that accords with their national style.

Patricia Sears of the Newport City Renaissance Corporation gave a ringing endorsement of the city.

“This is Newport’s time, this is Vermont’s time, this is our time,” she declared.

She talked about opportunities that can be created by a planned foreign trade zone, which if approved by the federal government would greatly expand the possibilities of international trade in the area.

“We’re all on the path to awesome,” Ms. Sears announced.

Doug Morton of the Northeastern Vermont Development Association said his organization has conducted a number of studies of transportation needs in Orleans and Caledonia counties.  The studies could use revision, he acknowledged, but the basic information is still sound.

After the scheduled testimony, Mr. Botzow asked if any individuals wished to offer their opinions.  Nick Ecker-Racz of Glover stepped forward to tell the legislators that he thinks that an improved public transportation system ought to be part of their thinking.  He also warned against programs that involved excess regulation.

Finally Mr. Ecker-Racz cautioned the representatives that increased wealth in the community will inevitably result in an influx of drugs, including cocaine and heroin.  Programs should be put in place beginning in elementary school to guard against the problem.

Eleanor Leger of Charleston said she thinks that good local businesses will thrive in the new environment.  She expressed excitement about the proposed free trade zone, which she said could aid her business, Eden Ice Cider, which gets many of its bottling supplies from South America.

Reed Ogden of Barton warned against too eager acceptance of a Walmart scheduled for construction in Derby.  Studies, he said, show that every Walmart employee costs taxpayers $1,000 in support services due to the company’s low wages and benefits.  He acknowledged that the data behind that study was eight years old.

Mr. Ogden pointed to a community-sponsored for-profit store established in Saranac Lake, New York, as an example of an alternative way for people to buy the goods they need at a price they can afford.

Finally, Newport Mayor Paul Monette told the legislators that his city welcomes all the development.  He said that transportation was the only problem he could see.

He said that a bottleneck at the bottom of Main Street could be eliminated by building a roundabout.  Or a new bridge, which he suggested might have to go through the spot where Representative Marcotte’s store now stands, could serve as a bypass for traffic.

In concluding the meeting Mr. Botzow offered a kind of benediction.

“I think the future is bright,” he said.  “I hope in five, ten or 20 years we look back and say ‘we did it right.’”

contact Joseph Gresser at joseph@bartonchronicle.com

For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.

Share