# Vermont Auditor:  Should the State Re-Evaluate Ski Area Leases?



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

http://www.wcax.com/story/27893695/should-vt-collect-more-money-from-ski-resorts

Hoffer thinks that the leases need to be re-examined because most areas make revenue off of more than just ticket sales.  As folks know, these leases typically take a percentage of each lift ticket sold as the lease payment.  

Looks like ticket prices might go up if the state decides to demand more money from ski areas that lease State land.


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Jan 20, 2015)

What the hell is Vermont spending all of this money on??  By all accounts from people who live there it is a heavily taxed state already...


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

jimmywilson69 said:


> What the hell is Vermont spending all of this money on??  By all accounts from people who live there it is a heavily taxed state already...



The problem is that folks want a lot of state services; but there are, demographically, fewer and fewer people who can "pay" into the system while there are more people who are "taking" from the system.  So instead of reevaluating things, the state is just continuing on.....


----------



## River19 (Jan 20, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> The problem is that folks want a lot of state services; but there are, demographically, fewer and fewer people who can "pay" into the system while there are more people who are "taking" from the system.  So instead of reevaluating things, the state is just continuing on.....



When the number of people in the cart outnumber the people pulling the cart.....things get a little wonky.


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 20, 2015)

So this is what happens when your legislature has to bridge a $100 million budget gap in a state with only 626,000 people.  That's roughly $160 needed to be raised for every man, woman, and child who lives in the state.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

River19 said:


> When the number of people in the cart outnumber the people pulling the cart.....things get a little wonky.



Bingo!

I just think it could hurt a fragile ski industry...fragile in so many different ways...


----------



## joshua segal (Jan 20, 2015)

jimmywilson69 said:


> What the hell is Vermont spending all of this money on??  By all accounts from people who live there it is a heavily taxed state already...


Keep in mind that both the Governor and one of their Senators are neither Republican nor Democrat, but Socialist.  The Vermonters voted for this and which would lead me to believe that a majority of them want it.  The out-of-staters are the ones who are complaining!


----------



## drjeff (Jan 20, 2015)

joshua segal said:


> Keep in mind that both the Governor and one of their Senators are neither Republican nor Democrat, but Socialist.  The Vermonters voted for this and which would lead me to believe that a majority of them want it. The out-of-staters are the ones who are complaining!



Yup, my non homesteader taxes on my place in VT, which has it's own plowing and trash services that my association dues pay for, give me no direct political say in how the $$ I pay in state and local taxes in VT gets spent.

VT should be looking for ways to AUGMENT the ski industry, not potentially hurt it, since it such a key economic driver for the state and it's revenue both directly through things like lift tickets and indirectly too via taxes on 2nd homes, etc.  Lot's of people in that cart, and fewer and fewer people pulling it for sure.

Had the Vermont Care glorified single payer medical system gone through, the tax spike would of been large to pay for it, and so many people would of found themselves actively looking for a new healthcare provider as the proposed reimbursement rates to healthcare providers being floated around were down right laughable, to the point where they likely would of been significantly below the overhead that most providers have


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 20, 2015)

joshua segal said:


> Keep in mind that both the Governor and one of their Senators are neither Republican nor Democrat, but Socialist.  The Vermonters voted for this and which would lead me to believe that a majority of them want it.  The out-of-staters are the ones who are complaining!



The governor is a Democrat.


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

joshua segal said:


> Keep in mind that both the Governor and one of their Senators are neither Republican nor Democrat, but Socialist.  The Vermonters voted for this and which would lead me to believe that a majority of them want it.  The out-of-staters are the ones who are complaining!



That last part is not true.  I know plenty of natives that are not happy.  Me being one of them who voted with his feet.  And, FWIW, a majority of those that voted in the last General Election voted AGAINST Shumlin as Governor.  That says something.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Jan 20, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> That last part is not true.  I know plenty of natives that are not happy.  Me being one of them who voted with his feet.  And, FWIW, a majority of those that voted in the last General Election voted AGAINST Shumlin as Governor.  That says something.



To be clear that majority was divided among a couple candidates. This state is walking a fine line with its financial practices.


----------



## joshua segal (Jan 20, 2015)

drjeff said:


> Yup, my non homesteader taxes on my place in VT, which has it's own plowing and trash services that my association dues pay for, give me no direct political say in how the $$ I pay in state and local taxes in VT gets spent.
> 
> ...


I feel your pain.  For 20+ years I paid income tax in MA even though I lived in NH.  Both your example and mine are classic cases of taxation without representation.

To VTKilarney: Thanks for the correction on the governor.

And to "thetrailboss": I'm not naïve enough to believe that no Vermonters are complaining, but at the ballot box, a majority is considered to be a consensus of the voters by our system of government.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

joshua segal said:


> And to "thetrailboss": I'm not naïve enough to believe that no Vermonters are complaining, but at the ballot box, a majority is considered to be a consensus of the voters by our system of government.



The majority DID NOT vote for Shumlin.

And your point was that the only people complaining were non-residents/out of staters.  That's not accurate.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 20, 2015)

I don't have an issue with MA, ME, VT etc., charging income tax to NH residents that work there.  Don't want yo pay those taxes? Don't work there.  I also feel that one should only get to vote where they establish residency.  Property ownership shouldn't equal voting rights.  It is not taxation without representation.   You forfeit representation by not establishing residency.  That's the individuals choice.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 20, 2015)

drjeff said:


> Yup, my non homesteader taxes on my place in VT, which has it's own plowing and trash services that my association dues pay for, give me no direct political say in how the $$ I pay in state and local taxes in VT gets spent.



As someone who owns homes in 2 different states I completely feel your perspective.  But, there are actually some very good reasons for that.  Some middle ground can hopefully be found.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 20, 2015)

jimmywilson69 said:


> *What the hell is Vermont spending all of this money on??*



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism


----------



## joshua segal (Jan 20, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> The majority DID NOT vote for Shumlin.
> 
> And your point was that the only people complaining were non-residents/out of staters.  That's not accurate.


Wow!  I checked the popular vote numbers and you are correct: Shumlin had a small plurality - not a majority.  It just shows how badly the Dems were blitzed in 2014 when a Republican can do that well in a state as blue as VT.

I find it interesting that "deadheadskier" sees taxing property of an out-of-stater as taxation without representation, but that taxing the income of an out-of-stater is not taxation without representation.  No explanation needed "deadheadskier". One of Ralph Waldo Emerson's most quoted lines is taken out of context and reads '... consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2015)

joshua segal said:


> Wow!  I checked the popular vote numbers and you are correct: Shumlin had a small plurality - not a majority.  It just shows how badly the Dems were blitzed in 2014 when a Republican can do that well in a state as blue as VT.
> 
> I find it interesting that "deadheadskier" sees taxing property of an out-of-stater as taxation without representation, but that taxing the income of an out-of-stater is not taxation without representation.  No explanation needed "deadheadskier". One of Ralph Waldo Emerson's most quoted lines is taken out of context and reads '... consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."



Yeah it was very surprising indeed.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 20, 2015)

Joshua, my beliefs are perfectly consistent.  You deserve representation where you are a resident.  I pay sales tax, rooms and meals taxes, gas tax and on and on when I consume those items in VT, MA or anywhere else outside of my home state of NH.  Would anyone argue they deserve representation in those states for paying those taxes?  Of course not.  Why should paying property or income tax be any different?


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 20, 2015)

Communists/socialists are too busy scolding people for not using politically correct language, feeling guilty for being born on this planet, and practicing militant atheism to find time for skiing. Figures.


----------



## joshua segal (Jan 20, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Joshua, my beliefs are perfectly consistent.  You deserve representation where you are a resident.  I pay sales tax, rooms and meals taxes, gas tax and on and on when I consume those items in VT, MA or anywhere else outside of my home state of NH.  Would anyone argue they deserve representation in those states for paying those taxes?  Of course not.  Why should paying property or income tax be any different?


I obviously misunderstood your earlier posting: I read what you said as saying that you thought that paying real estate tax in State X when you live in State Y is taxation without representation; but paying income tax in State X when one lives in State Y is *NOT*.  Peace!  Let's get back to talking skiing.


----------



## Edd (Jan 20, 2015)

bdfreetuna said:


> Communists/socialists are too busy scolding people for not using politically correct language, feeling guilty for being born on this planet, and practicing militant atheism to find time for skiing. Figures.



I like to practice my militant atheism on the chairlift. It's a juggling act but a commie does what he can.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 20, 2015)

bdfreetuna said:


> Communists/socialists are too busy scolding people for not using politically correct language, feeling guilty for being born on this planet, and practicing militant atheism to find time for skiing. Figures.



As a militant atheist capitalist snowboarder with lots of time to ski I can relate.


----------



## Not Sure (Jan 20, 2015)

Edd said:


> I like to practice my militant atheism on the chairlift. It's a juggling act but a commie does what he can.


LOL
Are you still an Atheist when the winds over 35Mph?


----------



## Edd (Jan 20, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> LOL
> Are you still an Atheist when the winds over 35Mph?



No, at that point I choose to cry and pray a lot. Skiing the crummy boilerplate at Loon today I was pretty sure there is no God.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 20, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> As a militant atheist capitalist snowboarder with lots of time to ski I can relate.



Yup. Pick any two... 1) PC Policing 2) Human Guilt 3) Denying God with religious fervor ... and you can still ski. All 3 and you're screwed.

Might as well add one more to the mix. If you're also a Male Feminist, you can only pick two. Chances are the cold weather is too oppressive and ski areas are an extension of the patriarchy anyway.


----------



## Edd (Jan 20, 2015)

bdfreetuna said:


> Yup. Pick any two... 1) PC Policing 2) Human Guilt 3) Denying God with religious fervor ... and you can still ski. All 3 and you're screwed.
> 
> Might as well add one more to the mix. If you're also a Male Feminist, you can only pick two. Chances are the cold weather is too oppressive and ski areas are an extension of the patriarchy anyway.



+1!  This post is so on point. The male feminism on this board makes me want to puke.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 20, 2015)

Liberalism has invaded every aspect of our skiing culture. Tired of seeing signs on ski lift towers saying "No manspreading on the chairlift"

But the foot / ski rests are too damn high! I have to spread otherwise it hurts!


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 20, 2015)

The vast majority of atheists are just as _non_-militant as most religious people.  

 I find that when you do encounter a "militant atheist" it bespeaks of their lack of confidence in their viewpoint (i.e. defense mechanism).


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 20, 2015)

Anyone who takes anything I've said in this thread seriously is a communist.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 20, 2015)

bdfreetuna said:


> *Anyone who takes anything I've said in this thread seriously is a communist*.



But the above post is in "this thread".....hmmmm.


----------



## drjeff (Jan 20, 2015)

bdfreetuna said:


> Liberalism has invaded every aspect of our skiing culture. Tired of seeing signs on ski lift towers saying "No manspreading on the chairlift"
> 
> But the foot / ski rests are too damn high! I have to spread otherwise it hurts!



Post of the year nominee!!


----------



## AmmergauerTele (Jan 21, 2015)

Vermont is an interesting place - I think they are having some regrets on closing the nuke plant down south.  Lots of good paying jobs - gone.  I think power prices going way up.  Some interesting choices…..Made your bed…sleep in it.


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 21, 2015)

Only in Vermont can there be constant debate as to whether Hydro Quebec power is "renewable energy".  As if Vermont's disdain for Hydro Quebec infrastructure is going to convince Hydro Quebec to dismantle it.  And if that did happen, exactly how would Vermont replace all of that cheap electricity?


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 21, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> Only in Vermont can there be constant debate as to whether Hydro Quebec power is "renewable energy".  As if Vermont's disdain for Hydro Quebec infrastructure is going to convince Hydro Quebec to dismantle it.  *And if that did happen, exactly how would Vermont replace all of that cheap electricity?*



Vermont politicians will vote to power the generating stations with unicorn tears.


----------



## drjeff (Jan 21, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Vermont politicians will vote to power the generating stations with unicorn tears.



And that vote will happen just after they vote to purchase a few hundred thousand of those special kind of trees that grow money on them   Only to find out that most of those trees will die before they can find a suitable place to plant them since someone from the environmental movement will more than likely file an injunction over where they'd want to plan them!  :smash:


----------



## from_the_NEK (Jan 21, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Vermont politicians will vote to power the generating stations with unicorn tears.



I was going to say unicorn farts (like natural gas but with no emissions, and the BTU per unit is 10000x greater).


----------



## from_the_NEK (Jan 21, 2015)

drjeff said:


> And that vote will happen just after they vote to purchase a few hundred thousand of those special kind of trees that grow money on them   Only to find out that most of those trees will die before they can find a suitable place to plant them since someone from the environmental movement will more than likely file an injunction over where they'd want to plan them!  :smash:



That pretty much explains how everything gets done in VT (or gets done at 10x the original cost IF at all).


----------



## Smellytele (Jan 21, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> The problem is that folks want a lot of state services; but there are, demographically, fewer and fewer people who can "pay" into the system while there are more people who are "taking" from the system.  So instead of reevaluating things, the state is just continuing on.....



The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money.
Margaret Thatcher


----------



## moresnow (Jan 21, 2015)

drjeff said:


> And that vote will happen just after they vote to purchase a few hundred thousand of those special kind of trees that grow money on them   Only to find out that most of those trees will die before they can find a suitable place to plant them since someone from the environmental movement will more than likely file an injunction over where they'd want to plan them!  :smash:



Invasive species are a serious threat. Imagine if those money trees started spreading uncontrollably.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 21, 2015)

moresnow said:


> Invasive species are a serious threat. Imagine if those money trees started spreading uncontrollably.



Oh it's been imagined.

http://www.johnnymarijuanaseed.com/legendof_jms.htm


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 21, 2015)

So here's an article from VT Digger that offers more detail as to some of the other concerns:

http://vtdigger.org/2015/01/20/ski-area-leases-state-land-badly-outdated-auditor-finds/

While I understand some of the concerns about liability insurance and other issues, the result is still the same in my mind: a contract is a contract.  The State can't, in good faith, now cry about the deals being bad.  

Someone mentioned Vermont Yankee.  Though my memory on this issue is not what it used to be, the fact is that the State had a memorandum of understanding with VY over operations and other issues.  A few years into it the political winds changed and the State reneged on some of the deal.  What happened?  Lawsuit city and VY eventually closing.  While some activists are cheering, the State racked up millions in legal fees and now has lost more millions in taxes...err...revenue.  A pyrrhic victory in my book.


----------



## steamboat1 (Jan 21, 2015)

It's funny that when New England has shortages of energy they get extra energy from the Three Mile Island plant here in NY. Three Mille Island is a nuclear power plant. There are cries here in NY to shut it down also.

Another thing that I find funny is the reason they shut VY down is because they're afraid of what may happen if radiation is leaked into the atmosphere. The funny part is even after VY is shut down that nuclear waste isn't going anywhere. It's going to be stored on site indefinately. There are no nuclear waste repository's in the U.S. The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project was canceled by our present administration.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 21, 2015)

steamboat1 said:


> It's funny that when New England has shortages of energy they get extra energy from the Three Mile Island plant here in NY. Three Mille Island is a nuclear power plant. There are cries here in NY to shut it down also.
> 
> Another thing that I find funny is the reason they shut VY down is because they're afraid of what may happen if radiation is leaked into the atmosphere. The funny part is even after VY is shut down that nuclear waste isn't going anywhere. It's going to be stored on site indefinately. There are no nuclear waste repository's in the U.S. The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project was canceled by our present administration.



Exactly.  The biggest irony is that Vermont will be stuck with all the costs and none of the gains of VY.


----------



## Glenn (Jan 21, 2015)

VT is interesting for sure. 

VY closing will have a really big impact on the local SoVT economy. The local area doesn't have the capacity to replace that number of well paying jobs. I'm sure the impact on businesses around the plant will be felt as well. 

I'm sure rates will go up. I read a number of letters in the local papers up there about how renewables (solar and wind) will solve the power issue. I'm just wondering how this will work on a windless night. 

It can be a little aggravating to look at your tax bill and realize you can't do a darn thing when it comes to voting as a second homeowner.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 21, 2015)

steamboat1 said:


> * There are no nuclear waste repository's in the U.S. The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project was canceled by our present administration.*



Solely for political reasons; and not before tens-of-millions of dollars from American's paychecks were flushed down the toilet.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 21, 2015)

Glenn said:


> I read a number of letters in the local papers up there about how *renewables (solar and wind) will solve the power issue.* I'm just wondering how this will work on a windless night.



Yes, right after they exhaust their supply of unicorn tears and clean burning magical pixie dust!


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Jan 21, 2015)

but the same NIMBYs that don't want nuclear also make the permitting of wind and solar projects very difficult.  So apparently they are okay living like cavemen...


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 21, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Yes, right after they exhaust their supply of unicorn tears and clean burning magical pixie dust!



You guys are thinking way too logically.....


----------



## steamboat1 (Jan 21, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> You guys are thinking way too logically.....


That's because for the most part we don't live in VT. & aren't constantly bombarded with propagander from VT. public radio (VPR). By the way VPR is not supported by government. It's main supporter is the PEW organization.


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 21, 2015)

Here's is the auditor's report:
http://blackpearl.wcax.com/documents/SAOSkiResortLeaseReport.pdf

Keep in mind that in a very liberal state, Vermont's Auditor is a liberal's liberal.  He was formerly the Research Director for the Peace and Justice Center in Burlington.  

While I think there is a lot to be said for standardizing ski area leases, I'm having a very hard time understanding why resources were spent on this study given that one lease is up in 2037 and all of the others aren't up until the 2050's.  

Of all of the business out there, ski areas are pretty darned good at plowing money back into capital improvements, which equates to jobs and increased tourism.  I'd hate to be responsible for upsetting that apple cart.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 21, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> Here's is the auditor's report:
> http://blackpearl.wcax.com/documents/SAOSkiResortLeaseReport.pdf
> 
> Keep in mind that in a very liberal state, Vermont's Auditor is a liberal's liberal.  He was formerly the Research Director for the Peace and Justice Center in Burlington.
> ...



The answer is simple: they want mo money 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 21, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> *Keep in mind that in a very liberal state, Vermont's Auditor is a liberal's liberal.  He was formerly the Research Director for the Peace and Justice Center in Burlington.
> 
> While I think there is a lot to be said for standardizing ski area leases, I'm having a very hard time understanding why resources were spent on this study given that one lease is up in 2037 and all of the others aren't up until the 2050's.  *



If he's truly as liberal as you say, he's obviously after money.  Don't think for a minute that just because these mountains all have legally binding contracts, that Vermont cant break them.  No other entity could break such a set-in-stone binding contract, mind you, or they'd be sued for all they're worth, and quickly lose - but the government can do whatever it wants.   

And if you dont believe that, just ask the folks who were legally secured creditors of Chysler, whose assets the Obama Administration gave to the Unions instead (who were unsecured creditors).  Unprecedented.  But that's what government can do since it's all-powerful.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Jan 22, 2015)

I have the answer for Vt.All liberals....off with their heads.


----------



## joshua segal (Jan 22, 2015)

SIKSKIER said:


> I have the answer for Vt.All liberals....off with their heads.


I hope that is in a Lewis Carroll parody as opposed to ISIS/ISIL.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Jan 22, 2015)

Ya,probably said in bad taste.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 22, 2015)




----------



## MadMadWorld (Jan 22, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> The governor is a Democrat.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone



Democrat...socialist....I don't see much of a difference!


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 22, 2015)

I think they're going to have a hard time trying to rewrite these contracts.....


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 22, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> I think *they're going to have a hard time trying to rewrite these contracts.....*



Legally it shouldn't be possible.   But breaking the contracts must be what the State of Vermont is exploring.

Why else would the State Auditor investigate this in the first place given the next lease up doesn't come due for almost 18 years!    

You're left with only two logical possibilities:

A)  This is typical government inefficiency & a waste of money from Vermonter's paychecks
B)  The State of Vermont is exploring the option of breaking those contracts and making millions

Frankly, if Vermont's State Auditor is a man of such high financial talents, he should _"investigate" _the nearly 1/2 *B*ILLION DOLLARS that Jay Peak has received through EB-5 with thus far no hard financial auditing.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 22, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Legally it shouldn't be possible.   But breaking the contracts must be what the State of Vermont is exploring.
> 
> Why else would the State Auditor investigate this in the first place given the next lease up doesn't come due for almost 18 years!
> 
> ...



Yeah that would make too much sense......


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 25, 2015)

When is a contract not a contract?  When the state of Vermont is a party.  The scheming has begun:
http://thevpo.org/2015/01/25/how-to-get-those-ski-leases-reopened/


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 25, 2015)

If I were a resident I'd write my reps immediately expressing I'm not pleaseed that my tax dollars are going to lawyers looking into this


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 25, 2015)

A state that's growing increasing more and more liberal is "struggling" to come up with money for the budget?    

That's the least shocking thing I've heard this month.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 25, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> When is a contract not a contract?  When the state of Vermont is a party.  The scheming has begun:
> http://thevpo.org/2015/01/25/how-to-get-those-ski-leases-reopened/



I didn't realize that the ski industry was a "lucrative" one.  The employees I know who work in the biz surely don't drive Bimmers to work.  And most resorts are lucky if they break even.

And FWIW I've heard of that blog and how ideological it is.  I won't be visiting it again.  Scary to think that is the mindset of those in Montpelier.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 25, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> If I were a resident I'd write my reps immediately expressing I'm not pleaseed that my tax dollars are going to lawyers looking into this



If they were like mine were they don't care and don't get it....


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 25, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> *I didn't realize that the ski industry was a "lucrative" one.  The employees I know who work in the biz surely don't drive Bimmers to work.  And most resorts are lucky if they break even.*
> 
> And FWIW* I've heard of that blog and how ideological it is.  I won't be visiting it again.  Scary to think that is the mindset of those in Montpelier.*



It's frightening that the "liberal Vermont blogger" (as he calls himself) thinks legally signed contracts should be broken so that the government can grab more cash from private businesses who legally inked those deals with the state.   Not that the Soviet Peoples Republic of Vermont doesnt sound fun or anything of course.

That, and the fact he feels that giving a tax break to Vermont's #1 industry (tourism) is a bad thing.   He cant see the logic that _"tax break on snowmaking & ski infrastructure equipment" _= better ski conditions and better ski resorts = more skiers = more revenue to small towns and lodges, motels, hotels, restaurants, bars, auto repair shops, friggin' everything.  Not shocking though, economics is kryptonite to the liberal mind.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 25, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> It's frightening that the "liberal Vermont blogger" (as he calls himself) thinks legally signed contracts should be broken so that the government can grab more cash from private businesses who legally inked those deals with the state.   Not that the Soviet Peoples Republic of Vermont doesnt sound fun or anything of course.
> 
> That, and the fact he feels that giving a tax break to Vermont's #1 industry (tourism) is a bad thing.   He cant see the logic that _"tax break on snowmaking & ski infrastructure equipment" _= better ski conditions and better ski resorts = more skiers = more revenue to small towns and lodges, motels, hotels, restaurants, bars, auto repair shops, friggin' everything.  Not shocking though, economics is kryptonite to the liberal mind.



He clearly has no clue


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 25, 2015)

The hidden agenda is that the left wing would love to see ski areas close.  They don't like the environmental impact and they view it as a hobby for the few of us left that are paying taxes.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 16, 2015)

Not surprising at all.....

http://vtdigger.org/2015/02/15/ski-resorts-balk-auditors-suggestion-review-leases-state-land/

And if folks want to listen, he did an interview on the Mark Johnson Show on WDEV a couple weeks back.  I was surprised as to the number of callers who approve the idea.  

http://markjohnsonshow.podbean.com/e/2415-auditor-doug-hoffer/

Personally, I think that a deal is a deal and a contract is a contract.  The ski areas and state made business decisions back when they signed the leases--for better or worse.  The fact that now the State is having money troubles (not in small part due to their huge demographic problems) is unfortunate but does not give them license to say "gosh darn, we want out."  They have to wait until the respective leases are up and renegotiate.  That's the only fair way to do it.  I am really disappointed with the attitude of my home state.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 16, 2015)

Good to see Heidi being the voice of reason.  I knew her way back in the day when she worked on the Jim Jeffords campaign team.  

On a side note, she actually bought the first ski bum house I had rented in Stowe when I first moved there in 1995.  

I don't see how this renegotiating goes through.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 16, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Good to see Heidi being the voice of reason.  I knew her way back in the day when she worked on the Jim Jeffords campaign team.
> 
> On a side note, she actually bought the first ski bum house I had rented in Stowe when I first moved there in 1995.
> 
> I don't see how this renegotiating goes through.



Some of the comments are laughable and downright scary.  Hate to tell Hoffer, but Stowe has NEVER been owned by locals....it was always owned and run by NYC interests (the predecessor and successor of AIG).  

As to the action, it is a political stunt that is meant to get people pissed off and to try to get more money for the State.  It has nothing to do with fairness and all to do with this i$$ue.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

You know it's a bad idea when Howard Dean comes out against it.  

This is not how you attract business to your state.  Talk about penny wise pound foolish.  What business would trust state government when they see that a contract is only a one way commitment?


.


----------



## 4aprice (Feb 17, 2015)

Wow.  The comments after the article are down right scary.  Didn't Killington at one time try to become part of New Hampshire?  I can see why.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

4aprice said:


> Wow.  The comments after the article are down right scary.  Didn't Killington at one time try to become part of New Hampshire?  I can see why.


I am sure that there are many environmentalists that would love to see the ski areas closed.  Lease renegotiations is likely seen by them as a means to that end.

The leases were amended 19 times over the years.  This means that the State had 19 opportunities to renegotiate the leases - and yet failed to do so in a way that lives up to the Auditor's standards.  So rather than criticizing the sub-par performance of the state employees that negotiated the leases and amendments, the Auditor insists that they state is the victim even though they were given an extra 19 swings at the plate after their first at bat.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> Personally, I think that *a deal is a deal and a contract is a contract.  The ski areas and state made business decisions back when they signed the leases--for better or worse.  The fact that now the State is having money troubles *(not in small part due to their huge demographic problems) *is unfortunate but does not give them license to say "gosh darn, we want out." *



State of Vermont's entire argument boils down to, _"Guys, our dumb government employees were taken advantage of by private sector financial analysts who....like....know things about math and stuff"._


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> State of Vermont's entire argument boils down to, _"Guys, our dumb government employees were taken advantage of by private sector financial analysts who....like....know things about math and stuff"._



And yet if this were a commercial transaction the State has the leverage because they are the landlord.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 17, 2015)

Seems like the state is stealing business strategies from AQjr.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

from_the_NEK said:


> Seems like the state is stealing business strategies from AQjr.



Oh I bet he would laugh at them when they try to "renegotiate" his lease.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 17, 2015)

What amazes me is the gall of the VT population. They really think everything a business makes belongs to them. 

Otherwise they are "selfish". The business? What about the people of VT demanding others pay their way for everything. Seems like the selfish problem is with the citizens themselves. 

They are the ones who elected these people.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

What's puzzling is that the Auditor chose to put substantial time and effort into studying leases that aren't coming due for decades - and even if they were coming due the amount of potential additional revenues in play is only about $3 million.  As much as I am a fan of counting every penny, this pales in comparison to what the state has squandered on other matters that they can actually fix.  Just look at how much the state has squandered on IT projects as an example.

You have to wonder if there is a bigger agenda at work here - and if ski areas are in the cross hairs of that agenda.  If that is indeed the case, look for a lot of tax exemptions enjoyed by ski areas to evaporate.  Sadly, if pressure is turned up on ski areas it's places like Cochran's and Magic Mountain that will suffer much more than the huge corporate owned areas.  Wouldn't it be ironic if competition was squeezed out of the marketplace so that the big corporations are the sole survivors enjoying even greater market share?


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 17, 2015)

Love how they gloss over the fact that the State of VT is already getting a sweetheart deal at 5% of revenue compared to the 2-3% most ski leases typically generate. 

And it still isn't enough. It is one thing to be government and reneg on a deal, I think it jumps into a whole other realm when they already are getting a great deal as it is.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> Oh I bet he would laugh at them when they try to "renegotiate" his lease.



As he should.



AdironRider said:


> What amazes me is the gall of the VT population. They really think everything a business makes belongs to them.  Otherwise they are "selfish". The business? What about the people of VT demanding others pay their way for everything. Seems like the selfish problem is with the citizens themselves.



It's been getting worse and worse up there.  When I left 12 years ago the insane asylum was making inroads into the government, now they are the government.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> What's puzzling is that the Auditor chose to put substantial time and effort into studying leases that aren't coming due for decades - and even if they were coming due the amount of potential additional revenues in play is only about $3 million.  As much as I am a fan of counting every penny, this pales in comparison to what the state has squandered on other matters that they can actually fix.  Just look at how much the state has squandered on IT projects as an example.
> 
> You have to wonder if there is a bigger agenda at work here - and if ski areas are in the cross hairs of that agenda.  If that is indeed the case, look for a lot of tax exemptions enjoyed by ski areas to evaporate.  Sadly, if pressure is turned up on ski areas it's places like Cochran's and Magic Mountain that will suffer much more than the huge corporate owned areas.  Wouldn't it be ironic if competition was squeezed out of the marketplace so that the big corporations are the sole survivors enjoying even greater market share?



It's called politics.  Instead of dealing with the $100 million elephant in the room (the failed launch of the health website), we dink around with $3 million leases because that will fly under the radar.  If you read the comments you see that Hoffer is now backing off...especially after Dean weighed in.  

Sen. Ashe apparently wants some leverage to try to beat more money out of folks.  He's threatened to revoke tax exemptions for ski area equipment.  

These guys are unreal.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> It's been getting worse and worse up there.  When I left 12 years ago the insane asylum was making inroads into the government, now they are the government.



+ 1.  I don't even feel comfortable visiting my home state.  I don't even recognize things up there.

Those in power are so obsessed with getting every penny that they can that they don't realize that they are driving the average guy out of the state.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> + 1.  I don't even feel comfortable visiting my home state.  I don't even recognize things up there.
> 
> Those in power are so obsessed with getting every penny that they can that *they don't realize that they are driving the average guy out of the state.*



Vermonters are leaving Vermont, but they are being replaced by people moving to Vermont from New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.    In other words, people who already have money can afford Vermont, but people who don't - cannot.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

Reading the comments on the VTDigger article is pretty scary.  Someone said that the percentage of ticket sales that is turned over to the state to the state needs to be increased because there has been inflation since the percentage was set.  Think about that one for a minute.

This is taken directly from the conclusion of the Auditor's report:
But, as the resorts have evolved, that revenue source [ticket sales] has become one of many. The result is that revenues from lease payments have not kept pace with development as measured by the sale of goods and services, property values, and excise taxes. 

I'm no business expert, but aren't the goods sold by ski areas already taxed?  Aren't food and beverage sales already taxed?  Isn't property already taxed?  Aren't there already excise taxes on the fuel used by ski areas and the alcohol sold by ski areas?  

I certainly appreciate that the state is trying to be compensated in excess of these taxes for economic activity taking place on state land, but the idea that there is a free lunch is absurd.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Vermonters are leaving Vermont, but they are being replaced by people moving to Vermont from New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.    In other words, people who already have money can afford Vermont, but people who don't - cannot.



There are two kinds of people moving to Vermont:  those in need of services and public benefits or those with means who don't care.  

There is one kind of person primarily leaving Vermont: young individuals either in the prime of their careers or just starting them.  

They are replacing "givers" to the system with "takers" and they don't understand that basic fact.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

Only four states have seen a bigger decrease in the percentage of 25-34 year olds between 1990 and 2004.  But there must be more to the story than politics.  New Hampshire is one of those four states, right behind Vermont.

Anecdotal, I can tell you that it is insanely difficult to recruit qualified professionals to any part of the state of Vermont other than Chittenden County.

The hippies that moved here en masse in the 1970's did so because they didn't want government telling them how to live their lives.  Those ex-hippies now can't get enough of government intervention in people's lives.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> Only four states have seen a bigger decrease in the percentage of 25-34 year olds between 1990 and 2004.  But there must be more to the story than politics.  New Hampshire is one of those four states, right behind Vermont.



It's a demographic shift due to economics and politics.  A lot of "traditional" industries in NNE are dying.  As a result a lot of those workers are moving.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> It's a demographic shift due to economics and politics.  A lot of "traditional" industries in NNE are dying.  As a result a lot of those workers are moving.


Generally speaking, the northeast states have seen the biggest loss.  I know lots of people that live in the southeast that pay a fraction of the property taxes that we pay in the northeast and also a fraction of the heating and cooling expenses.  And they are quick to remind you of that fact.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 17, 2015)

Well except for Boston.  Boston area population is growing faster than it has in decades.  Not many places better in the country right now for good jobs.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 17, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Well except for Boston.  Boston area population is growing faster than it has in decades.  Not many places better in the country right now for good jobs.



Right.  Folks migrating back to the urban areas.  I will say that when you factor in the ridiculous cost of living that the pay is not THAT great in Boston.


----------



## SnowRock (Feb 17, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> This is taken directly from the conclusion of the Auditor's report:
> But, as the resorts have evolved, that revenue source [ticket sales] has become one of many. The result is that revenues from lease payments have not kept pace with development as measured by the sale of goods and services, property values, and excise taxes.
> 
> I'm no business expert, but aren't the goods sold by ski areas already taxed?  Aren't food and beverage sales already taxed?  Isn't property already taxed?  Aren't there already excise taxes on the fuel used by ski areas and the alcohol sold by ski areas?
> ...



Yeah I took a quick read of the report and thought the same thing..... harps on lease revenue not keeping pace with property values then almost glosses over the tax revenue generated by that same development on private land surrounding the resorts (and the fact that those revenues increase as property value increases).


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 17, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Well except for Boston.  Boston area population is growing faster than it has in decades.  Not many places better in the country right now for good jobs.


Boston and New York City are doing just fine and young people are moving to these cities.  Even so, Massachusetts was one of the overall losers of young people.  Keep in mind that the stats are from 1990-2004.  There were some boom and bust times for Boston during that period.  This could have affected Massachusett's overall rating.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> There are two kinds of people moving to Vermont:  those in need of services and public benefits or those with means who don't care.
> 
> There is one kind of person primarily leaving Vermont: young individuals either in the prime of their careers or just starting them.  They are replacing "givers" to the system with "takers" and they don't understand that basic fact.



Pretty much; and this is a HUGE systemic problem with long-term implications, but in the short-term it's being partially masked by the  well-healed people moving to Vermont.  I believe it's going to get ugly up there.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 17, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> Right.  Folks migrating back to the urban areas.  I will say that when you factor in the ridiculous cost of living that the pay is not THAT great in Boston.



Live along the 495 belt and cost of living isn't that much worse than chittenden county.  Food is far cheaper in MA compared to VT.  Or you could do what I do and live over the border and realize an even greater savings.  

And you're an attorney.  I've got acquaintances who have received offers of $150k+ out of school in top Boston firms.  How common is that in most places around the country?

Never mind the city overtaking Silicon valley as the Biotechnology capital of the country.

People are definitely leaving Northern New England for other destinations, and often that destination is Boston.....not Austin, Atlanta etc


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 17, 2015)

Two large companies decided to settle down in the Boston metro area....Draft Kings and Star Street. If you don't know what these guys do then go check it out. The industry is blowing up and they are hiring like crazy


----------



## SkiRaceParent (Feb 18, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Pretty much; and this is a HUGE systemic problem with long-term implications, but in the short-term it's being partially masked by the  well-healed people moving to Vermont.  I believe it's going to get ugly up there.



There are a lot of other states where I'd be a lot more worried than I am in Vermont about these issues....low population, strong tourism and natural resources and beauty will go a long way to keeping it sustainable. I agree there's an element of communism/socialism which needs to be neutralized in the standing government, but I feel like the tide is shifting (slowly) away from that direction.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 18, 2015)

All those reasons you mention are exactly why you should be worried about VT more. Every family or business that packs up and leaves has a much larger effect on the resources the state has available compared to the same in Jersey or Illinois (which are the two other states that come to my mind that worry me).


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 18, 2015)

SkiRaceParent said:


> There are a lot of other states where I'd be a lot more worried than I am in Vermont about these issues....low population, strong tourism and natural resources and beauty will go a long way to keeping it sustainable. I agree there's an element of communism/socialism which needs to be neutralized in the standing government, but I feel like the tide is shifting (slowly) away from that direction.



Boy I hope that things on the ground are different than what I read and hear in the news from Vermont (VPR, WCAX, WDEV, Cal Rec, VT Digger) because it seems to me that folks forgot that there was a very close election in November and have doubled down on the "we need more money" routine instead of focusing on economic development, cost of living, and reducing property taxes.  I think it will take at least another election before folks get the message that the average Vermonter is not happy with things in Vermont.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 18, 2015)

SkiRaceParent said:


> There are a lot of other states where I'd be a lot more worried than I am in Vermont about these issues....low population, strong tourism and natural resources and beauty will go a long way to keeping it sustainable. I agree there's an element of communism/socialism which needs to be neutralized in the standing government, but I feel like the tide is shifting (slowly) away from that direction.



Vermont has minimal marketable natural resources.  Some granite, marble, and not much else.  The timber industry is not nearly as big as people assume.  And agriculture and tourism are about the lowest paying industries around.

And your comment about the direction state government is heading...  Whaaaaat????


.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 18, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> Bbecause it seems to me that folks forgot that there was a very close election in November and have doubled down on the "we need more money" routine instead of focusing on economic development, cost of living, and reducing property taxes.


The reason the election for governor was close is because the liberals didn't vote for the Democratic candidate because they thought that he was too conservative.  If you compare votes for the Federal House race to the governor race, you can see that a lot of people didn't vote at all for governor.

There may be a silver lining in all of this.  The last election may spur on the Progressives.  When there is both a Progressive and Democratic candidate, the Republican candidate stands a chance.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 18, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> There may be a silver lining in all of this.  The last election may spur on the Progressives.  When there is both a Progressive and Democratic candidate, the Republican candidate stands a chance.



Are there now Republican candidates in Vermont?   

From what I saw, you have far-left candidates (Vermont Democrats) and Democrat-Light (Vermont Republican) candidates.   The people who run as "Republicans" in Vermont, would/could often be Democrats in other US states.  At least that's how I recall it.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 18, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> Are there now Republican candidates in Vermont?
> 
> From what I saw, you have far-left candidates (Vermont Democrats) and Democrat-Light (Vermont Republican) candidates.   The people who run as "Republicans" in Vermont, would/could often be Democrats in other US states.  At least that's how I recall it.


The Vermont Republican party has been struggling with an internal rift.  Within the last year or so the moderate faction of the party has taken control, albeit tenuously.  If the party is to have any relevance in Vermont the moderates are the key to success.  To have any chance of winning a statewide election the Republican candidate must be a moderate.


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 18, 2015)

The auditor responds:
http://vtdigger.org/2015/02/18/doug-hoffer-setting-record-straight-states-land-leases-ski-areas/

He still fails to address why it was worth his office's resources to audit leases that are not coming due for decades.  Unless he advocates breaking contracts how can he justify this waste of resources?


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 18, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> *He still fails to address why it was worth his office's resources to audit leases that are not coming due for decades.*



I added some snark about that.   I'm also a bit worried that Smuggs is clearly in the cross-hairs.  They cannot afford to a squeeze.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 18, 2015)

BenedictGomez said:


> I added some snark about that.   I'm also a bit worried that Smuggs is clearly in the cross-hairs.  They cannot afford to a squeeze.



Disagree.  They can afford it most unless things have changed.  I remember taking a resort management class at UVM.  There was a panel of about a dozen ski area GMs in one of our classes.  It was driven home by several people that Smuggs was the only ski area in the state that ran in the black every year for the past 20 seasons.  Smuggs knows best how to balance their books and maintain profits.  They'd adapt to a squeeze as good as anyone.  Hopefully it never comes to that.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 19, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Disagree.  They can afford it most unless things have changed.  I remember taking a resort management class at UVM.  There was a panel of about a dozen ski area GMs in one of our classes.  It was driven home by several people that Smuggs was the only ski area in the state that ran in the black every year for the past 20 seasons.  Smuggs knows best how to balance their books and maintain profits.  They'd adapt to a squeeze as good as anyone.  Hopefully it never comes to that.



Making money....yes. Balancing the books.....not so much!


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 19, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Disagree.  They can afford it most unless things have changed.  I remember taking a resort management class at UVM.  There was a panel of about a dozen ski area GMs in one of our classes.  It was driven home by several people that Smuggs was the only ski area in the state that ran in the black every year for the past 20 seasons.  Smuggs knows best how to balance their books and maintain profits.  They'd adapt to a squeeze as good as anyone.  Hopefully it never comes to that.



Well that's good to hear.  I always assumed they operated on very slim profits given how bare bones the place runs.  Smuggs reminds me of the old person who offers to buy his great-grandson an ice cream cone, then hands the kid 52¢ because he doesn't realize ice cream cones cost more like $2.75.



MadMadWorld said:


> Making money....yes. Balancing the books.....not so much!



They obviously have terrible financial controls in place (more like lack-thereof), that's for sure.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 19, 2015)

VTKilarney said:


> The auditor responds:
> http://vtdigger.org/2015/02/18/doug-hoffer-setting-record-straight-states-land-leases-ski-areas/
> 
> He still fails to address why it was worth his office's resources to audit leases that are not coming due for decades.  Unless he advocates breaking contracts how can he justify this waste of resources?





BenedictGomez said:


> I added some snark about that.   I'm also a bit worried that Smuggs is clearly in the cross-hairs.  They cannot afford to a squeeze.



I agree.  While I am sure is a good auditor, I have to question why an office that has limited resources to begin with has decided that doing "an audit" of long term leases that are not coming due for renewal in two decades is a pressing issue.  I don't think there is a large constituency clammoring to look at these leases nor should there be any reason to.  It is not like Vermont has all of its issues solved--Vermont now has one of the highest rates of embezzlement by public officials and officials of small businesses.  The cases are now coming out almost weekly.  And yet we are auditing leases that are legal, binding, and nowhere remotely close to being renewed?


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 19, 2015)

MadMadWorld said:


> Making money....yes. Balancing the books.....not so much!




That's right.  They had an accountant robbing them blind didn't they.  So, then they REALLY were doing a good job of still making money through all the ups and downs of a weather dependent business.


----------

