Saturday, October 01, 2016
Berlin News to Know May 12, 2016
BERLIN NEWS TO
KNOW May 12, 2016
*
This communication
is put together and distributed on a volunteer basis by resident Corinne
Stridsberg simply in an effort to share information and build community, it is
not from the town of Berlin.
Please share this with
your Berlin friends and neighbors. If you're not already
receiving this news directly by email, send an email to request this to corinnestridsberg@gmail.com.
*
For current news
look for "Berlin, Vermont" on facebook for a constant flow
of information. You don't need to be a facebook user to access it, but if
you do use facebook, be sure to "Like" it:
For historical news
look for "Berlin, Vermont Memories" on facebook.
***********************
Note:
Please be sure to consider joining me
for the free historical society potluck / presentation; if you can, call for
tickets to go to see Belsher & Wood, and don’t miss the Local Foods &
Agricultural listing I’ve updated for you.
Below you will find:
TOWN JOB OPENING & MEETINGS
PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT DUE MAY 17, 2016
DON’T
MISS OUT
BELSHER &
WOOD
LOCAL FOODS AND
AGRICULTURAL LISTING
BERLIN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL EVENTS
BES RENOVATION PROJECT
WCSU CALENDAR POSTED
U-32 HIGH SCHOOL EVENTS
U-32 SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER APPOINTED /
GYM FLOOR & BLEACHERS
LOOKING FOR A HOME TO BUY IN BERLIN?
BE TICK SMART
BE TICK SMART
UPCOMING EVENTS
AUGUST VOTE SEEN ON BERLIN
CHARTER CHANGES – INCLUDES LOCAL OPTIONS TAX
COMMENTARY ON BERLIN POND BY VALSANGIACOMO
ACT 60 IS
VERMONT’S TITANIC
PART-TIME
LAWMAKING INADEQUATE
***********************
TOWN
JOB OPENING & MEETINGS
The Town of Berlin is seeking an experienced
equipment operator - highway laborer. Deadline May 13th, 2016. Details at:
*
The Selectboard meets Monday, May 16th
7pm at the Town office.
The Development Review Board meets
Tuesday, May 17th 7pm at the Town office.
***
***
PROPERTY
TAX PAYMENT DUE MAY 17, 2016
The next quarterly payment of Berlin property taxes
is due. To
meet this deadline payment should be brought to the Treasurer at the Town
offices no later than May 17th at
4:30pm or left in the deposit box outside the front door. Payments can
also be postmarked (not an office meter but postmarked by the post office) by
May 17th.
Payments not made will incur a late fee
of 8% penalty and 1% interest. If unable to make the entire payment,
consider a partial payment to help lessen the late fees. Call to discuss
this option with the Treasurer – 223-4405.
The Treasurer’s office is open five days
a week (Monday through Thursday 8am – 4:30pm and on Friday 8am to 3:30pm)
***
***
DON’T MISS OUT
The
Berlin Historical Society invites you to share an evening of
local Berlin history featuring:
Dodge
Farm of Berlin
Join us
for a "photo-walk" of the Berlin farm that was on the Barre-Montpelier
Road for almost two hundred years and was home to six generations of the
Dodge family. Enjoy pictures, stories and writings that will introduce you to
the rich history of this farm and her family.
Wednesday,
May 18th, 2016 Berlin Congregational Church, 1808 Scott Hill Road, Berlin
Corner, Vermont The evening will begin with a Potluck Dinner at 6pm followed by
a presentation on the History of the Dodge Farm of Berlin at 7pm.
Your
response helps us plan for seating.
***
***
BELSHER & WOOD
Prince Edward
Island Musicians Richard Wood & Gordon Belsher will be performing on
Sunday, May 22, 2016 4PM at the Berlin Congregational Church at 1808 Scott Hill
Road, Berlin. Tickets are just $15. Call 229-9504.
Here is a 16
second clip of their music: www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H1UAf7RT9Q
***
***
LOCAL FOODS AND AGRICULTURAL LISTING
Please take a moment to
check out the Berlin, Vermont Local Foods and Agricultural listing that I
recently updated. Would gladly consider
adding others, please send along the appropriate information.
***
***
BERLIN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL EVENTS
May 17th
School building assessment presented, and renovation project discussed 7pm
May 19th
Spring Bands Concert (gr 4/5/6) All are welcome. 6:30pm
June 2nd
PTNA (Parent Teacher Neighbor Assoc) meeting 6:30pm
June 6th
– CHANGE, School Board Meeting 6:15pm (held a week early as graduation is on
13th)
June 9th
Schoolwide Picnic
June 13th
– 6th Grade Graduation 6pm
June 14th
– last day of school, early dismissal
***
***
BES RENOVATION PROJECT
The Berlin Elementary
School is nearly 50 years old and we have begun a needs assessment to plan for
the future of this building. You are invited to attend a
presentation by John Hemmelgarn of Black River Design on TUESDAY, MAY 17 @ 7PM to
hear about the initial assessment of the building and learn more about the
process, including community input, RFPs and bonding. Your voice as
a community member is critical to making sure we solve the existing problems
with the building in a way that creates a safer, more efficient building in a
transparent and responsible way.
We are seeking community
members to participate on a facilities committee. We would meet
approx.. every other week for 2 hours through the summer and
fall. We would love to benefit from the experience and talent of
Berliners in planning for this project. Please contact me if you are
interested.
I hope to see you on
Tuesday, May 17 for this important discussion about one of our most valuable
assets.
Chris Winters
***
***
WCSU CALENDAR POSTED
Looks like the early release
Wednesdays are continuing 2016-2017 school calendar:
http://wcsuonline.org/images/stories/2016.2017%20Calendar%20Final.pdf
***
***
U-32 HIGH SCHOOL EVENTS
May 25th U-32 High School
Concert 7pm
May 26th U-32 Middle
School Concert 7pm
May 27th U-32 Spring Arts
Festival – 5:30-7:30 Art Gallery Walk and hor d’oeuvres followed by Acting II
Showcase at 7:30pm with admission by donation
June 1st U-32 School Board
Meeting 6pm
June 3rd – U-32 Variety
Show 7pm
June 8th – Senior
Community Outreach Project, a chance for seniors to give back to their
communities 10am – 2pm for more information or to suggest a project contact
Student Council at u32scop@gmail.com or 229-0321 x 5991
June 8th – Washington
County Friends in Education Board Meeting 6:30pm
June 10th – CLASS OF 2016
GRADUATION 6:30pm
***
***
U-32 SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER APPOINTED / GYM FLOOR & BLEACHERS
Did you know George Gross was
appointed as the Berlin representative to the U-32 School Board? He attended
his first meeting on May 4th... which you can watch here - if you don't M
know George please note he is introduced right as the recording starts. Also representing Berlin is Jonathan Goddard. (Jonathan & George are sitting next to each other)
This is a great meeting to watch as they are taking the time to explain items what with a new board member at the table. Scott Thompson gave a description of how the teacher negotiations process worked which may not be what you expect.
Turns out the floor of the original gym at U-32 is going to be redone this summer as are the bleachers that are not ADA compliant ... they're going with wood seats which are more expensive but more durable. http://www.orcamedia.net/show/may-4-2016-u32sb
know George please note he is introduced right as the recording starts. Also representing Berlin is Jonathan Goddard. (Jonathan & George are sitting next to each other)
This is a great meeting to watch as they are taking the time to explain items what with a new board member at the table. Scott Thompson gave a description of how the teacher negotiations process worked which may not be what you expect.
Turns out the floor of the original gym at U-32 is going to be redone this summer as are the bleachers that are not ADA compliant ... they're going with wood seats which are more expensive but more durable. http://www.orcamedia.net/show/may-4-2016-u32sb
***
***
LOOKING FOR A HOME TO BUY IN BERLIN?
Enjoy nature, wildlife from your backyard in this sunny 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath, cul-de-sac home in quiet family friendly neighborhood just minutes to Berlin, U-32, CVMC and I-89.
Enjoy nature, wildlife from your backyard in this sunny 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath, cul-de-sac home in quiet family friendly neighborhood just minutes to Berlin, U-32, CVMC and I-89.
Let them know you found the listing
here. http://www.picketfencepreview.com/buy-a-home/view-property/id/305-Point-Ridge-Road----Berlin-Berlin-VT-05641-Washington
There are additional photos on the
CraigsList listing of this home: http://vermont.craigslist.org/reo/5567734121.html
***
***
BE TICK SMART
The Vermont Dept of Health is
providing "Be Tick Smart" information cards - please take a moment to
read. http://healthvermont.gov/prevent/zoonotic/tickborne/documents/tick_id_card_single.pdf
For more information visit:
http://healthvermont.gov/prevent/zoonotic/tickborne/resources.aspx
***
***
UPCOMING EVENTS
Summertime
events are almost upon us. Be sure to
mark your calendars! Let me know what other events there are.
June 3rd
– Central Vermont Runners Kids Track Meet for kindergarten – sixth graders at
the Montpelier High School Track FREE www.cvrunners.org/?event=kids-track-meet
June 10th
– Native Tongue at Gusto’s in Barre
June 18th
& 19th Vermont History Expo at Tunbridge Fairgrounds, Berlin
Historical Society will be among the many towns with displays and Banjo Dan
will perform www.vermonthistory.org/community/vermont-history-expo
June 20th
– Berlin Public Hearing regarding Charter changes
June 25th
– Waterbury Not Quite Independence Day Parade & Festival
June 27th
– Berlin Public Hearing regarding Charter changes
July 9th
– Vermont Governor Primary
July 13th
– Native Tongue at Currier Park in Barre www.wherevent.com/detail/Barre-Partnership-Concerts-in-Currier-Park-Native-Tongue
July 16th
– Do Good Fest will be headlined by Big Head Todd and the Monsters, opened by
Brett Dennen; also local acts Steady Betty and the Dave Keller Band. https://dogoodfest.com
July 16th
– Native Tongue at Higher Ground Showcase Lounge (8pm show, one of four bands)
***
***
Local Options Tax - Here
is where it went
AUGUST VOTE SEEN ON BERLIN CHARTER CHANGES
Pub. 5/4/16 Times Argus by
David Delcore
BERLIN — It won’t expedite
anything, but the committee considering a package of charter changes — including
one that involves a controversial new tax — is angling for an August vote.
The committee, which includes two of the Select Board’s five members, has agreed that it would be better to schedule an up-or-down vote on an evolving collection of charter changes in conjunction with this year’s Aug. 9 primary, rather than waiting for the Nov. 8 general election.
It’s an interesting wrinkle, if only because of the Select Board’s turnout-driven decision to abort plans for a March vote on a local options tax in the runup to Town Meeting Day.
When it became clear the board’s proposal to create a 1 percent tax on sales to generate new revenue for the community could only be considered on the floor of a traditional town meeting, members who were banking on an Australian ballot vote abruptly stripped the question from the warning.
In the board’s view the question was too important to ask on the floor of what has historically been a poorly attended town meeting. Members quickly embraced an alternate strategy that would allow for broader voter participation while delaying implementation of the proposed tax.
The tradeoff involved framing the question as a charter change. Although they require a more protracted process than the one originally envisioned by the board, changes to municipal charters are among a short list of questions that must, by law, be decided by Australian ballot.
The Select Board’s initial discussions focused on a November vote, if only because of the predictably high turnout associated with general elections.
Chairman Ture Nelson said as much at the time.
“I feel that this topic is important enough that as many voters as possible should be given the opportunity to weigh in on it,” said Nelson, who is an advocate of the option tax and now serves on the charter committee that’s poised to recommend an August vote. He briefly flirted with holding both required public hearings, and possibly the election itself, at the Granite City Grange.
Selectman Jeremy Hansen told committee members this week the grange hall, which is located just off Route 12 in Berlin, is booked for both nights — June 20 and June 27 — that have tentatively been targeted for public hearings.
Town Clerk Rosemary Morse, who, like Nelson and Hansen serves on the committee, said she saw no need to move the polls from the municipal office building. While arguably cramped, Morse said, the meeting room at the town offices has served as a suitable polling place for similar elections when nearby Berlin Elementary School isn’t available.
In terms of implementation, there isn’t a distinguishable difference between voting on the charter change in August or November. In either event, voter-approved changes would require legislative approval next year and wouldn’t become effective until July 1, 2017.
Based on Berlin’s voting history, there will likely be a difference in turnout.
More than 1,200 Berlin voters cast ballots in each of the last two presidential elections, while the six-year high for the August primary was 452 in 2010. There was no presidential election that November, but 1,035 Berlin voters turned out for the general election.
Still, faced with the choice between August and November, the committee’s consensus was the earlier the better. Though the charter changes are still a work in progress and have yet to be vetted by Town Attorney Rob Halpert, the committee is confident they’ll be ready in time for an Aug. 9 vote and are proceeding down a path that will require the Select Board to warn two public hearings at its June 6 meeting.
With the grange hall unavailable, Town Administrator Dana Hadley was asked this week to see if the school would be available for public hearings planned for June 20 and June 27, though Hansen seemed skeptical the hearings would attract much of a crowed.
“I don’t know how well attended they will be,” he said, prompting a rapid response from Morse.
“When people get wind of the 1 percent local option tax, it’ll be well attended,” Morse predicted. “That will be the piece that’s going to draw people out, I think.”
That wasn’t necessarily the case before the Select Board scrapped plans for a Town Meeting Day vote in January. Though a vocal contingent from the business community attended public hearings at the time, few residents bothered to weigh in on a concept that, according to the board’s conservative estimates, would raise roughly $420,000 in local revenue.
As was the case earlier this year, Berlin officials are focused exclusively on a 1 percent sales tax and are not seeking authorization to impose a 1 percent tax on rooms, meals and alcohol.
Though various option-tax proposals hadn’t fared well in central Vermont over the past 15 years, Montpelier voters did approve a charter change in March that could pave the way for a 1 percent tax on meals, rooms and alcohol. That same day, Barre voters rejected a charter change that would have given city councilors the authority to impose a full slate of option taxes.
The last time Berlin voters considered a local option tax proposal was in March 2001. That measure failed 121-351. Since then it has occasionally been discussed, but never placed back on the ballot. The question this year hasn’t been whether that will happen, but when? The answer now appears to be August, though the final decision will be made by the Select Board.
Two other local issues — a comprehensive rewrite of the local zoning regulations and an amendment to the town plan — could also be on the ballot in November.
david.delcore@timesargus.com
The committee, which includes two of the Select Board’s five members, has agreed that it would be better to schedule an up-or-down vote on an evolving collection of charter changes in conjunction with this year’s Aug. 9 primary, rather than waiting for the Nov. 8 general election.
It’s an interesting wrinkle, if only because of the Select Board’s turnout-driven decision to abort plans for a March vote on a local options tax in the runup to Town Meeting Day.
When it became clear the board’s proposal to create a 1 percent tax on sales to generate new revenue for the community could only be considered on the floor of a traditional town meeting, members who were banking on an Australian ballot vote abruptly stripped the question from the warning.
In the board’s view the question was too important to ask on the floor of what has historically been a poorly attended town meeting. Members quickly embraced an alternate strategy that would allow for broader voter participation while delaying implementation of the proposed tax.
The tradeoff involved framing the question as a charter change. Although they require a more protracted process than the one originally envisioned by the board, changes to municipal charters are among a short list of questions that must, by law, be decided by Australian ballot.
The Select Board’s initial discussions focused on a November vote, if only because of the predictably high turnout associated with general elections.
Chairman Ture Nelson said as much at the time.
“I feel that this topic is important enough that as many voters as possible should be given the opportunity to weigh in on it,” said Nelson, who is an advocate of the option tax and now serves on the charter committee that’s poised to recommend an August vote. He briefly flirted with holding both required public hearings, and possibly the election itself, at the Granite City Grange.
Selectman Jeremy Hansen told committee members this week the grange hall, which is located just off Route 12 in Berlin, is booked for both nights — June 20 and June 27 — that have tentatively been targeted for public hearings.
Town Clerk Rosemary Morse, who, like Nelson and Hansen serves on the committee, said she saw no need to move the polls from the municipal office building. While arguably cramped, Morse said, the meeting room at the town offices has served as a suitable polling place for similar elections when nearby Berlin Elementary School isn’t available.
In terms of implementation, there isn’t a distinguishable difference between voting on the charter change in August or November. In either event, voter-approved changes would require legislative approval next year and wouldn’t become effective until July 1, 2017.
Based on Berlin’s voting history, there will likely be a difference in turnout.
More than 1,200 Berlin voters cast ballots in each of the last two presidential elections, while the six-year high for the August primary was 452 in 2010. There was no presidential election that November, but 1,035 Berlin voters turned out for the general election.
Still, faced with the choice between August and November, the committee’s consensus was the earlier the better. Though the charter changes are still a work in progress and have yet to be vetted by Town Attorney Rob Halpert, the committee is confident they’ll be ready in time for an Aug. 9 vote and are proceeding down a path that will require the Select Board to warn two public hearings at its June 6 meeting.
With the grange hall unavailable, Town Administrator Dana Hadley was asked this week to see if the school would be available for public hearings planned for June 20 and June 27, though Hansen seemed skeptical the hearings would attract much of a crowed.
“I don’t know how well attended they will be,” he said, prompting a rapid response from Morse.
“When people get wind of the 1 percent local option tax, it’ll be well attended,” Morse predicted. “That will be the piece that’s going to draw people out, I think.”
That wasn’t necessarily the case before the Select Board scrapped plans for a Town Meeting Day vote in January. Though a vocal contingent from the business community attended public hearings at the time, few residents bothered to weigh in on a concept that, according to the board’s conservative estimates, would raise roughly $420,000 in local revenue.
As was the case earlier this year, Berlin officials are focused exclusively on a 1 percent sales tax and are not seeking authorization to impose a 1 percent tax on rooms, meals and alcohol.
Though various option-tax proposals hadn’t fared well in central Vermont over the past 15 years, Montpelier voters did approve a charter change in March that could pave the way for a 1 percent tax on meals, rooms and alcohol. That same day, Barre voters rejected a charter change that would have given city councilors the authority to impose a full slate of option taxes.
The last time Berlin voters considered a local option tax proposal was in March 2001. That measure failed 121-351. Since then it has occasionally been discussed, but never placed back on the ballot. The question this year hasn’t been whether that will happen, but when? The answer now appears to be August, though the final decision will be made by the Select Board.
Two other local issues — a comprehensive rewrite of the local zoning regulations and an amendment to the town plan — could also be on the ballot in November.
david.delcore@timesargus.com
***
***
COMMENTARY ON BERLIN POND BY VALSANGIACOMO
Pub. 5/11/16
Times Argus
Montpelier has
yet again gone too far. That was evident in the Vermont House on April 20, when
Rep. Warren Kitzmiller, D-Montpelier, architect and chief spokesperson for his
city’s continuing efforts to close Berlin Pond to boating, fishing and
swimming, testified before a legislative committee. Sitting in the audience, I
was stunned by his comments, so I obtained a transcript.
This op-ed
seeks to hold Mr. Kitzmiller and Montpelier accountable for those comments.
Mr. Kitzmiller
leveled very serious accusations of corruption by public officials concerning
control of Berlin Pond:
1. “I believe the myth of the Supreme Court’s role (in holding that state law permits recreational uses of Berlin Pond) was an intentional deception on the part of the Department of Environmental Conservation, an attempt to distance themselves from their action, or an attempt to, in a sense, keep their hands clean.”
1. “I believe the myth of the Supreme Court’s role (in holding that state law permits recreational uses of Berlin Pond) was an intentional deception on the part of the Department of Environmental Conservation, an attempt to distance themselves from their action, or an attempt to, in a sense, keep their hands clean.”
2.
“(Montpelier) had … authority (over Berlin Pond) for well over 100 years, but
that has disappeared through a series of regulatory changes, errors, omissions
and frankly, very political decisions at the highest levels of state
government.” In a related comment, Mr. Kitzmiller asserted that “devious minds”
had “conspire(d)” to take control over Berlin Pond away from Montpelier.
3. “How is it
that our administration can, for political purposes only, allow the
recreational desires of a small number of people (to) outweigh the valid health
concerns of about 20,000 people who drink this water?”
4. “(The
Department of Fish & Wildlife) do(es) not care about the need to protect
drinking water and (it has) a lot of weight within ANR. I rather expect that
many of you have been lobbied by Louis Porter, the commissioner of Fish &
Wildlife, speaking to this very point.”
Curiously, Mr. Kitzmiller prefaced his
remarks by expressing the wish that he were testifying under oath and that he
was neither embellishing nor exaggerating a single word. He offered no proof of
“intentional deception” by anyone, no names, did not specify whose “devious
minds” were involved and what “conspiracy” or what “errors or omissions” by a
particular state agency, or of which “administration” had knowingly sacrificed
safe drinking water for Montpelier in the pursuit of some unspecified political
objective or prize. If Mr. Kitzmiller and Montpelier officials cannot document
and prove these accusations, then a retraction and apology are in order.
Recreational access to Berlin Pond is
securely grounded in Vermont law. Title 29, Section 401 of the Vermont Statutes
Annotated states that the citizens of Vermont own Berlin Pond and the land
underneath it, based on the ancient “public trust doctrine,” which traces its
roots to Roman law. Under this doctrine, the state holds public lands and
waters in trust for all Vermonters.
Furthermore, the state has classified Berlin
Pond as an A(2) public water supply, which may be used for fishing,
nonmotorized boating and swimming. Our Legislature long ago directed that public
water sources and watersheds shall allow for human activity provided that such
human activity does not constitute a public health hazard or a significant
public health risk. (Title 10, section 1679(e) VSA)
Berlin Pond has been open for recreational
use for four years and had no problems.
No “errors or omissions” are responsible for
the A(2) classification. The Department of Environmental Conservation has
stated repeatedly that because of abundant wildlife in and around Berlin Pond,
bacterial and viral contamination already exist there, so recreational usage,
such as boating, fishing and swimming, would, at most, cause a negligible
increase in the contaminants. Negligible means so small it may be disregarded,
and that’s at most.
Ironically, Mr. Kitzmiller’s constituents in
Montpelier rely on the same classification system and state agencies that
govern Berlin Pond when they boat, fish and swim in public waters such as Lake
Champlain. And the city of Montpelier relies on those same state agencies when
operating its sewage treatment plant. In connection with that plant, Montpelier
enjoys a permit that allows it to discharge treated sewage into the Winooski
River, which flows into Lake Champlain, a public water source.
Mr. Kitzmiller’s recent statements in the Vermont House reflect perhaps a well-intentioned, but surely misguided effort that has long characterized Montpelier’s goal to control Berlin Pond. Those efforts include false arrests for recreational use, attempted criminal prosecutions and a civil lawsuit seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary damages against innocent individuals who had contacted the state prior to going on Berlin Pond to verify that fishing, boating and swimming were legal activities. At the same time, Montpelier was not complying with state law regarding posting of land they owned surrounding Berlin Pond, had not updated their “no trespassing” signs, and in fact had placed signs in the waters of Berlin Pond without permission that referenced laws that had been repealed 20 years earlier. The prosecutions were dropped and the civil lawsuit ended with a victory for recreational users as provided for by our constitution and Legislature.
Mr. Kitzmiller’s recent statements in the Vermont House reflect perhaps a well-intentioned, but surely misguided effort that has long characterized Montpelier’s goal to control Berlin Pond. Those efforts include false arrests for recreational use, attempted criminal prosecutions and a civil lawsuit seeking hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary damages against innocent individuals who had contacted the state prior to going on Berlin Pond to verify that fishing, boating and swimming were legal activities. At the same time, Montpelier was not complying with state law regarding posting of land they owned surrounding Berlin Pond, had not updated their “no trespassing” signs, and in fact had placed signs in the waters of Berlin Pond without permission that referenced laws that had been repealed 20 years earlier. The prosecutions were dropped and the civil lawsuit ended with a victory for recreational users as provided for by our constitution and Legislature.
Rumor has it that Montpelier is prepared to
yet again to seek legislative remedies to close Berlin Pond and to continue its
delay tactics and efforts to deny a fish and wildlife public access area to
Berlin Pond.
The fight for Berlin Pond has ended. No
legitimate issues remain concerning management or control over Berlin Pond. The
state has comprehensive laws and tough enforcement powers that Montpelier will
never have in order to protect Berlin Pond’s water quality. It is time for
Montpelier to take another path and form alliances with those who have a right
to use Berlin Pond so all can protect the quality of its water to preserve
continued use by all. The myth of Montpelier’s control over Berlin Pond has
rightfully disappeared.
Oreste V. Valsangiacomo is a Barre City
attorney who has represented clients in the Berlin Pond case.
***
***
ACT 60 IS VERMONT’S TITANIC
Pub.
5/2/16 Times Argus by Pete Kelley
The life of the Titanic came to an abrupt,
catastrophic end on its maiden voyage due partly to unrealistic expectations
and lack of foresight. Motivated, smart, hard-working people built and sailed
that ship, but mistakes were made, and much to her surprise and those on board,
the Titanic was not unsinkable after all.
To err is human; it happens every day, and Act 60 is a mistake that’s helping sink Vermont into the dark icy waters of out-of-control spending, unrealistic expectations and a questionable future.
To shed new light on Act 60 and how it affects Vermont, the parallel below replaces education with road repair and maintenance which is not as emotionally charged but still a major priority. Without roads, Vermont would not exist. Here’s the example.
I live on a little dirt road with a few steep hills that dead-ends at a big farm. Sometimes in the winter the road is slippery, and in the spring it gets pretty muddy. The town does a good job keeping it plowed in the winter and graded in the spring. I like the little dirt road and choose to live here.
Recently there has been new development on the road and some of those people want our road paved. Other roads are paved, so why isn’t ours? There is no legitimate governmental purpose to justify why other roads are paved and ours is not. Allowing highway funds to benefit others and not us is prejudice; we should have our road paved too ... all the way to the Vermont Supreme Court ... which sides with them.
Now, not just our road, but all roads in the state need paving, increasing property taxes and financial hardship along the way. And, as any Vermonter knows, the paving doesn’t last. The frost breaks it up, leaving sharp-edged potholes and chunks of pavement in the road. Neighbors point angry fingers loaded with argument and accusations at each other. Plowing is more difficult and costly while grading is impossible (who grades a paved road?) leaving us with overly expensive roads that we can no longer effectively or affordably maintain.
But an unpaved road ... is an unconstitutional road! So let’s get to it, and pave every road in Vermont without concern for cost or consequence. Whether it’s Main Street in downtown Burlington or Broken Bridge Road at the edge of Tiny Town Vermont, everybody has a right to equal roads no matter where they are!
Fortunately this is not the case. The state is quick to exercise good judgment and common sense in regard to roads, and Vermonters accept and live with the fact that every road in the state cannot be paved. But the cost of education, how we arrive at those costs, and the strain it’s putting on us has yet to share in that good judgment and common sense.
Act 60 has set a course for Vermont we clearly cannot navigate, leaving us lost in overly ambitious good intentions with a price tag we can’t afford. For the benefit of us all, it’s time Vermont faced reality and learned to live within its means. A review of Act 60 and the financial effects it has on Vermont may be a good place to start.
Pete Kelley is a member of the Berlin Select Board.
To err is human; it happens every day, and Act 60 is a mistake that’s helping sink Vermont into the dark icy waters of out-of-control spending, unrealistic expectations and a questionable future.
To shed new light on Act 60 and how it affects Vermont, the parallel below replaces education with road repair and maintenance which is not as emotionally charged but still a major priority. Without roads, Vermont would not exist. Here’s the example.
I live on a little dirt road with a few steep hills that dead-ends at a big farm. Sometimes in the winter the road is slippery, and in the spring it gets pretty muddy. The town does a good job keeping it plowed in the winter and graded in the spring. I like the little dirt road and choose to live here.
Recently there has been new development on the road and some of those people want our road paved. Other roads are paved, so why isn’t ours? There is no legitimate governmental purpose to justify why other roads are paved and ours is not. Allowing highway funds to benefit others and not us is prejudice; we should have our road paved too ... all the way to the Vermont Supreme Court ... which sides with them.
Now, not just our road, but all roads in the state need paving, increasing property taxes and financial hardship along the way. And, as any Vermonter knows, the paving doesn’t last. The frost breaks it up, leaving sharp-edged potholes and chunks of pavement in the road. Neighbors point angry fingers loaded with argument and accusations at each other. Plowing is more difficult and costly while grading is impossible (who grades a paved road?) leaving us with overly expensive roads that we can no longer effectively or affordably maintain.
But an unpaved road ... is an unconstitutional road! So let’s get to it, and pave every road in Vermont without concern for cost or consequence. Whether it’s Main Street in downtown Burlington or Broken Bridge Road at the edge of Tiny Town Vermont, everybody has a right to equal roads no matter where they are!
Fortunately this is not the case. The state is quick to exercise good judgment and common sense in regard to roads, and Vermonters accept and live with the fact that every road in the state cannot be paved. But the cost of education, how we arrive at those costs, and the strain it’s putting on us has yet to share in that good judgment and common sense.
Act 60 has set a course for Vermont we clearly cannot navigate, leaving us lost in overly ambitious good intentions with a price tag we can’t afford. For the benefit of us all, it’s time Vermont faced reality and learned to live within its means. A review of Act 60 and the financial effects it has on Vermont may be a good place to start.
Pete Kelley is a member of the Berlin Select Board.
***
***
***
PART-TIME LAWMAKING INADEQUATE
Pub.
5/5/16 Times Argus by Jon Guiffre
After reading Pete Kelley’s commentary on Act
60 (“Vermont’s Titanic,” May 2) I felt compelled to try to redirect the
frustration he raised. Act 60 was enacted almost 20 years ago now, and was in
response the state Supreme court decision in the Brigham vs. State of Vermont
case, where the existing funding system was deemed unconstitutional. It was the
first effort in a long list of subsequent actions and efforts to create an
equalized education for the children of Vermont. The notion and goal are both
valid, but I don’t think anyone would argue that Act 60 and its subsequent acts
are perfect and that they have in fact caused some harm along the way toward
those goals — much like Act 250 — but that’s another discussion.
I would pose the following hypothesis, however, because simply pointing fingers at bad, incomplete, or inadequate legislation isn’t a solution — nor is having an unequal educational situation for our children OK. Less than perfect legislation stems from two root causes, and they are the reason we are dealing with this problem as well as the current, latest and greatest from the Legislature, Act 46.
Firstly, it stems from the notion that is in vogue in government today — “when no one is happy, everyone is happy” or the concept that “legislation is a result of endless compromises to appease different points of view.” Well, that might have worked 100 years ago when our system was not so fractured and polarized, but with diametrically opposed sides of the aisle, compromise only brings horrific legislation that we have to live with. Compromise can work with some issues but for others, there is a right and a wrong and it is up to leadership to point that out and guide the Legislature down that path. Sadly, we have not had effective leadership here for as long as I can remember. And even in Vermont, we have grown more polarized between the two main political parties.
Secondly, it stems from our part-time Legislature. We are angry at legislation that is ill-conceived, poorly designed, or badly executed and yet we only employ the crafters part-time. Having a part-time Legislature is a sure-fire way to enlist a very small cross-section of our population, which leads to lack of perspective and experience. It also asks them to create complex legislation without the appropriate funding or time to do so. The bucolic notion of the farmer doing his part-time public service is inappropriate in our increasingly complex and regulated world. We can moan about the complexity and interwoven nature of our modern world or realize that we need to work with it and adapt. It is wholly unreasonable to expect varsity-level legislation and solutions with a junior-varsity funding for those efforts. So unless we are willing to create the funding and systems to support a Legislature that has adequate time, funding and staff, we have only ourselves to blame for the laws we have to live with.
So, as Pete is comfortable with his muddy road, so must we be comfortable with rising taxes and an increasingly unaffordable education system until we buck up to hire and elect the correct professionals to solve it. My bet is on the notion that a well-funded Legislature is far less costly than the aftermath of an ill-funded one creates for us all.
Act 46 is our most recent example of the result of poorly crafted legislation. It is a band-aid to a hemorrhaging system. If we are truly to get real education reform in Vermont, we need trained education professionals to design a system that addresses our challenges for the 21st and 22nd century. It would then be up to the Legislature to figure out how to pay for it. Incremental changes will never get us there, particularly in light of problem No. 1 noted above. When something is this far gone, tinkering is not the remedy. Leadership is the answer to this problem and let’s hope our next governor exhibits true leadership and not political celestial navigation.
I would pose the following hypothesis, however, because simply pointing fingers at bad, incomplete, or inadequate legislation isn’t a solution — nor is having an unequal educational situation for our children OK. Less than perfect legislation stems from two root causes, and they are the reason we are dealing with this problem as well as the current, latest and greatest from the Legislature, Act 46.
Firstly, it stems from the notion that is in vogue in government today — “when no one is happy, everyone is happy” or the concept that “legislation is a result of endless compromises to appease different points of view.” Well, that might have worked 100 years ago when our system was not so fractured and polarized, but with diametrically opposed sides of the aisle, compromise only brings horrific legislation that we have to live with. Compromise can work with some issues but for others, there is a right and a wrong and it is up to leadership to point that out and guide the Legislature down that path. Sadly, we have not had effective leadership here for as long as I can remember. And even in Vermont, we have grown more polarized between the two main political parties.
Secondly, it stems from our part-time Legislature. We are angry at legislation that is ill-conceived, poorly designed, or badly executed and yet we only employ the crafters part-time. Having a part-time Legislature is a sure-fire way to enlist a very small cross-section of our population, which leads to lack of perspective and experience. It also asks them to create complex legislation without the appropriate funding or time to do so. The bucolic notion of the farmer doing his part-time public service is inappropriate in our increasingly complex and regulated world. We can moan about the complexity and interwoven nature of our modern world or realize that we need to work with it and adapt. It is wholly unreasonable to expect varsity-level legislation and solutions with a junior-varsity funding for those efforts. So unless we are willing to create the funding and systems to support a Legislature that has adequate time, funding and staff, we have only ourselves to blame for the laws we have to live with.
So, as Pete is comfortable with his muddy road, so must we be comfortable with rising taxes and an increasingly unaffordable education system until we buck up to hire and elect the correct professionals to solve it. My bet is on the notion that a well-funded Legislature is far less costly than the aftermath of an ill-funded one creates for us all.
Act 46 is our most recent example of the result of poorly crafted legislation. It is a band-aid to a hemorrhaging system. If we are truly to get real education reform in Vermont, we need trained education professionals to design a system that addresses our challenges for the 21st and 22nd century. It would then be up to the Legislature to figure out how to pay for it. Incremental changes will never get us there, particularly in light of problem No. 1 noted above. When something is this far gone, tinkering is not the remedy. Leadership is the answer to this problem and let’s hope our next governor exhibits true leadership and not political celestial navigation.
Jon Guiffre is owner of Green Professional
Allied Building Contractors LLC. He
lives in Roxbury
***
***
# posted by Corinne's blog of Berlin and area happenings @ 6:52 PM 
