All posts by BP

No New Vista utopian city/state development for Vermont

local/regional, ,

The Valley News reports  some good news for the upper valley towns that Utah resident David R. Hall had targeted to build his Mormon inspired utopian city/state in. The mega-wealthy Hall is giving up his quest and will begin selling off almost two thousand acres he had scooped up in Sharon, Tunbridge, Strafford, and Royalton. If it had been completed, the city/state he envisioned would have encompassed 5,000acres and housed up to 20,000 people. Hall’s home-town Utah newspaper the Deseret News had correctly said the plan was received in Vermont “like a dead cow falling from the sky”

DCFFTSDavid Hall decided to sell the land after the National Trust for Historic Preservation placed the towns of Royalton, Sharon, Strafford and Tunbridge on its “watch status,” a special designation that accompanies its annual list of the “11 Most Endangered Historic Places,” he said this morning.

“The recent designation of the area as a watch by national historic was a genius move by those who oppose my purchases,” Hall said via email. “I admit that I am worn down by the drama and have decided to give in and get out of Vermont.”

Hall’s plan was first made public by Nicole Antal, a local librarian, who blogged about it on DailyUV.com when she noticed parcels of land in her town were being bought by a Utah resident. Local opposition efforts quickly followed to stop the “NewVista” project.

From the beginning Hall was remarkably off-putting with local residents. He eventually hired Montpelier public relations lobbyist Kevin Ellis. But though you can spin all you want, you can never make a second first impression.

There’s probably nothing like a single mega-wealthy person (or business) gathering up multiple parcels of land to cause a general sense of unease with small town residents. In the 2016 elections state politicians scrambled a bit to address the issue on record. And since no one in Vermont had ever dealt with a project on the scale or manner that Hall was proposing,  there was a question brewing about how well the state’s Act 250 development regulation law would apply to such a project. Eventually the Vermont House passed a non-binding resolution calling for closer scrutiny of Hall’s city/state project.

While most residents  in the four upper valley towns may breathe a sigh of relief (excluding a real estate agent or two perhaps), it’s worth wondering what might have happened if Hall had more personal P.R. skills or had been savvy enough to hire a connected Montpelier lobbyist like Ellis from the start. Happily though, Hall’s New Vista (rechristened  Windsorange LLC as of Aug. 2017 in a rebranding effort) seems to be about to come to a soft landing — and perhaps it’ll land in some other state.

Graff: ‘Local’ angry old man = Trump

local/regional

After Garrett Graff’s 2016 kerfuffle over not meeting residency requirements brought to a crashing end his plans on running for Vermont lieutenant governor, I’d have thought he’d be more aware of what local means. Born in Vermont but residing outside the state for the immediate-past 10 years, Graff left his job at politico.com and had moved back to the state in 2016 with plans to run for the second-highest elected office in the state. Sadly for him, a candidate for lieutenant governor has to have lived in Vermont for the four years before the election “without interruption of residency”- a requirement he did not meet.

Now I happen to notice he tweeted the following this Sunday in response to one of Donald Trump’s earlier tweets about immigration law and order: Local angry old man continues to lack third-grade understanding of US Constitution, or even basic creed engraved on US Statue of Liberty….

bye local

If Vermont approval polls are correct it is likely that a majority of residents would agree with Graff’s quip and his point about Trump’s understanding of the US Constitution.  But I’m not sure that — if asked to — I could find any Vermont resident who would consider Donald Trump a local angry old man. Vermont is just not where he’s coming from.

Governor Scott: Who else governs this way ?

local/regional, ,

As if he planned it all along Governor Phil Scott is getting his veto showdown and possible government shutdown.

In May a budget bill was passed in the Senate with tri-partisan unanimous support. Since that time the legislature has offered up a number of responsible alternatives and possibilities for compromise with the Governor. All of them were rejected.

And on July 1st – if no budget agreement is made – we face a government shutdown. Funding for state colleges, state police, state parks, Medicaid programs, food stamps, Department of Motor Vehicle services and more would be in jeopardy, and closures are definitely a possibility. Vermont State treasurer Beth Pierce has warned repeatedly that this upheaval would damage the state’s cherished credit rating.

scott for gov2018

And now as if on cue, Scott’s re-election campaign has jumped in with both feet and sent around an email to his followers charging: “A small number of extremist Democrat and Progressive party leaders, and their political allies, are trying to scare Vermonters about a government shutdown,” the mailer said. “Don’t believe them.”

Scott’s campaign spokesperson, Brittney Wilson, said “legislative leaders are trying to startle Vermonters with a government shutdown, which is very unlikely and being used as a scare tactic.”

Here’s a question Vermonters might want to ponder as Governor Scott prints out his “VETO” bumper stickers for re-election: Who else governs this way? And do we want it here in Vermont?

Maybe it is time or even past time  for the popular notion that we have a special  “Vermont way” of “doing” politics be laid to rest. Thanks Phil, for bringing brinkmanship and a taste of conflict induced dysfunction  to Vermont government.

Growing tensions with Canada: Welcome to Trump’s World

International, , ,

Did you ever think you might see a headline like this one from Newsweek?  DHS Announces ‘Strengthened Northern Border Strategy’ Amid Growing Tensions Between U.S. and Canada

US CAN splitzPresident Trump isn’t exactly saber rattling, but after imposing tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum and autos he does seem to be “rattling” the DHS’ Northern Border Strategy in a threatening manner.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced a “strengthened” Northern Border Strategy that it claims will help “combat terrorism” and “help facilitate travel and trade” at its border with Canada. 

In a press release published on Tuesday, the DHS said its new strategy “establishes a clear vision and concrete actions that will improve DHS’s efforts to safeguard our northern border against terrorist and criminal threats, facilitate the safe and efficient flow of lawful cross-border trade and travel and strengthen cross-border critical infrastructure protection and community resilience.” 

All this is taking place less than a week after President Trump citing “national security threats” announced the imposition of tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum and autos entering the US.

Canadian Prime minister Justin Trudeau called the tariffs insulting and in response  imposed tariffs on the US. Trudeau said: “I have made it very clear to the president that it is not something we relish doing, but it is something that we absolutely will do,” Trudeau said. “As Canadians, we are polite, we’re reasonable, but also we will not be pushed around.”

Vtdigger.com says Vermont officials are “fretting” over the tariff issue because: According to the U.S Trade Representative, exports to Canada are a major factor in the Vermont economy. Vermont exported $1.2 billion in goods to Canada in 2016 — more than a third of the total international exports.

canada_trade_us

Of course the U.S. isn’t massing troops and tanks along our 90 mile border with Canada. But the tariffs and “tension” resulting from Trump’s bullying engineered on Twitter could very well damage Vermont’s economy.  What’s next Donald, a northern border wall? I wish it was obvious that was a joke but in Trump World …

Think!Vermont still in its little box: “The problem with Vermont’s bright idea”

Business, local/regional, ,

Jeff Yang, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, has an interesting look in a CNN commentary at the state’s pay people to move to Vermont & work remotely program.*  The program, designed to entice people to Vermont and increase the workforce, was described by Governor Scott as an example of thinking “outside the box.” In his CNN piece, Yang describes what a real “outside-the-box” Vermont  program might look like. Hint: it’s much more than what we’re doing now – layers of glossy websites, and flash & bang headlines.

outothebox

From  CNN: What’s ironic is how inside the box its “outside-the-box” thinking really is. Because while Vermont could be taking this moment to bring new diversity to a state that’s the second-whitest in the United States, it’s instead investing in initiatives that could easily end up maintaining the state’s culturally monolithic status. If Vermont had aimed this policy at explicitly encouraging new Americans to migrate to the state (the policy does not), it would be redressing a significant shortfall in the state’s demographics.

[…]  The fact is, as Vermont, and America as a whole, ages and sees its workforce decline, immigration is unquestionably a critical part of the solution. But Vermont is paying American workers to move to its small towns and rolling hills, even as millions of people are willing to do just about anything to move to the United States. Some are desperately fleeing horrific conditions in their native countries.

The difficulties of taking on such a task, Yang, says are great but not impossible. And although, he says correctly, Vermont is a welcoming state, he notes the mostly unsuccessful efforts to relocate Syrian refugees to his city by the former Mayor of Rutland in 2016. As a candidate that same year, Governor Scott called for a pause in the effort over what he called his “concerns” about security vetting of those new immigrants. Under criticism for his less than convincing argument, he softened his tone but remained committed to aggressive vetting of those particular immigrants.

Yang suggests that funds could instead be directed to encourage companies to hire immigrants and set up partnerships with universities to assist newcomers to build the state population, workforce, and economy.

If Vermont really wants to boost its economy – while attracting young professionals and technology entrepreneurship to the state – here’s a radical idea: It should use the funds it has set aside to line the pockets of mobile American workers and put them instead toward becoming a better destination for immigrants from Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East.

Now a program like that would put Think!Vermont way outside the comfortable little box it now lives in.

*Where were the media people who make up the snazzy names like Stay to stay, Think!Vermont etc. when Scott launched the get-paid-to-move-to-Vermont-work-remotely program? Maybe they ran out of budget to pay out-of-state pr-hype firms …

FLASH, BANG: “Move to VT get $10,000” Small print: poof gone!

Business, local/regional, ,

And “the payout is immense” screamed one story. Hmmm ten grand to relocate to Vermont? Sounds almost too good to be true! Well you don’t have to look too far to see that the promoted media campaign is running a few miles ahead of the actual plan. The fine print should cause anyone taking this bait seriously to hold off packing their bags.

The media grabbed it and ran with it: Vermont, the stories said, will reimburse out-of-staters $10,000 to move here provided they work remotely for a company not located here. The goal, the state says, is to encourage tech workers and young families to move to the state. In turn the theory is this will help grow our work force, boost our tax base, and we Vermonters will all live happily ever after. According to the Burlington Free Press, the program – which was passed unanimously in the legislature – originated when  Sen. Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden,  wondered what it would take to get more workers like her son-in-law, who works remotely  while living  in Vermont, to move here.

like that Flash

The man charged with running the offer and managing the payouts, Governor Scott’s  secretary for the Agency of Commerce and Community Development Michael Schirling explains: “[It’s] very important to note from the outset that we have to design a program that we have not yet begun to contemplate the details of,”  Schirling said. “And there will be parameters around, you know, which of the allowable areas can be reimbursed for what amount over the two-year reimbursement period that’s allowed by the law.”

Basically it’s not that a remote worker who moves to Vermont gets a guaranteed $10,000 — which Schirling notes some of the recent buzz around the plan seemed to imply — but how they decide who gets how much is still being figured out.

In addition to not having worked out vital details of the plan, Sec. Schirling appeared unaware the roll-out was going to happen so soon and how the word about it spread. He told VtDigger.com he wasn’t sure what company among the ones they use for to promotion was behind the media blitz representing the valuable state brand. “I don’t know if it’s special PR. We have a company that we use, among many, that does some of our economic development marketing and helps with placement,” he said.

The State of Vermont and the Scott administration is pushing the brand and move-to-VT in particular hard.But even a good brand can begin to look foolish or desperate for attention. Especially if the details are not ready and the reward smaller than advertised. It’s just flash & bang, and then poof it’s gone.

No cell service? No, thanks to Vermont’s telecom providers

Business, , , ,

Vanu CoverageCo’s utility pole-mounted cell phone relay devices were, it was hoped, part of the solution to the state’s rural coverage problem. But the company is now in financial trouble and  struggling to pay its own “phone bill.” They are in effect facing a shutoff notice from Consolidated Communications (formerly FairPoint Communications) for an outstanding bill of $100,000 for connecting the pole-mounted microcell devices to their landline network.

phonesoutIt’s worth recalling that over the last decade or more Vanu CoverageCo (along with several other telecoms including the problematic company VTel and FairPoint – now Consolidated Communications) were recipients of a cornucopia of federal and state grants (our tax dollars) to encourage these businesses supply cell service to receptionless areas. Over the years, millions in funds and federal grants (our tax dollars at work) were approved and distributed through the Vermont  Telecommunications Authority. [The VTA, now “mothballed,” was a Vermont state hybrid agency established in 2007during the Douglas Administration. Created by legislation, the concept reportedly originated with Gov. Douglas’ Administration Secretary Mike Smith, who – surprise, surprise! – later became Vice President for Vermont affairs at FairPoint.]

And now Consolidated Communication’s threatened action – which might shut down CoverageCo service – could have a life-and-death impact: loss of emergency 911 capacities for a portion of the state. In legislative hearings on the issue state Senator Randy Brock (R- Franklin County) raised the alarm over CoverageCo’s possible demise: If we let this die on the vine, it’s hundreds or thousands of Vermonters without 911 cell service .Just wait until a couple of people die because there’s no coverage.”

And it is no small irony that Consolidated Communications (FairPoint’s successor) is the one forcing this issue on the state. The company was awarded the E-911 contract from the state in 2014: the contract offered to pay $1.8 million for the set-up, followed by a total of roughly $9.5 million for 60 months of operations and maintenance. FairPoint struggled for years with consistently poor customer service issues and at one point was heavily fined by Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire. FairPoint, struggling and on the verge of going down the tubes, prevailed on the state of Vermont. FairPoint executives successfully lobbied the state into a deal on the fines. “Benevolently” Vermont regulators agreed to waive $7 million in assessed unpaid penalties – providing that the same amount be redirected by FairPoint for statewide broadband build-out. It is not clear if any accounting was ever undertaken to guarantee this million dollar build-out would – or ever did – actually happen.

Not sure how  FairPoint may have thanked the state for the $7 million favor, but now re-born as Consolidated Communications, the company thinks nothing of squeezing CoverageCo  over $100,000 – an action that may cause parts of the state to not only lose cell service but potentially lifesaving emergency 911 service. Well, thanks a lot, Consolidated. Get ready to “Console” the survivors.

Phil Scott vetoes structural mechanism for preventing working families from becoming the working poor

Business, local/regional, ,

One of the bills Governor Scott vetoed was H.196 an act relating to paid family leave. The bill was designed to: enable Vermont workers to take up to 12 weeks of paid parental and family leave, with a cap on six weeks of family leave per year. Supporters of the bill say that paid family leave will reduce stress for families and attract young people to Vermont who want to start families.ttvphilscott1

Research recently completed at Florida Atlantic University and Cleveland State University quantifies what had been suspected for years, namely that families without paid sick leave or family leave time are more likely to have incomes below the poverty line, experience food insecurity and require expensive state funded welfare services.

The studies published in two academic, peer-reviewed journals, Social Work in Health Care and the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, utilized data collected from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey to assess the effect of no paid sick leave on two key indicators of poverty, income and the need to utilize welfare services.[…] The authors argue that the main reason for these correlations are the higher cost of medical expenses, lack of preventive care and missed wages incurred by individuals and families who do not have paid sick leave benefits.

As LeaAnne DeRigne, Ph.D., associate professor of FAU’s Phyllis and Harvey Sandler School of Social Work, simply puts it, the study shows : “Paid sick leave benefits serve as a structural mechanism for preventing working families from becoming the working poor. Given the public investments made in welfare, food stamps and other social services, mandating paid sick leave is a clear policy lever for reducing the need for these services among millions of individuals nationally.”

If Vermont House bill H. 196 had not been vetoed and had instead become law, it would according to reporting in vtdigger.com have been paid for with a 0.136 percent employee payroll tax covering parental and family leave insurance. This would have provided workers taking this benefit to receive 70 percent of their income during the leave period.

Remarking on his veto of this bill Governor Scott said “While the goals of this legislation are admirable,” the governor said in a statement accompanying his veto, “it simply is not responsible to impose a new $16.3 million payroll tax on Vermonters.”

So Governor Scott, help us voters understand why exactly is it “simply responsible” to veto rather than sign H. 196 – a bill that clearly supports working families. Because I found that even the conservative Koch bros.-funded American Enterprise Institute concluded that financing such a plan through a payroll tax was a sensible approach.The group  admits it is not a “terrible” additional burden to pay for implementing family leave. And that seems almost an endorsement considering it’s from Koch Bros. funded organization.

So since he claims the goals of family leave bills are “admirable” yet still kills the bill, my question for Phil Scott would be: what shred of evidence – a study to cite, perhaps, that shows a small payroll tax increase could possibly do as much damage to Vermont working people as the lack  family leave benefits now does?

Remember: Affordable for whom?

Coins of his realm: Trump’s chump change

International, ,

What is it with Republican Presidents declaring success way before it is actually achieved? 

As if he wanted to cast in stone his own version of George Bush’s infamous “Mission Accomplished” banner (the one prematurely celebrating “winning” the war Bush & Cheney started in Iraq) the Trump administration prematurely minted commemorative coins commemorating the planned summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong UN. Trump the vainglorious fool and his GOP followers were actually anticipating he would be awarded a Nobel Peace prize telling reporters: ‘Everyone thinks I deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.’

Now since the not unexpected cancellation of Trump’s Un* meeting the commemorative coins (should we call them “Trump-pence”?) are now selling at a substantial discount. Trumpchange1pence

Given Trump’s authoritarian tendencies the photo-shopped version on the left might give Donald the title he aspires to

Some believe the Trump coin could become a collectible loosely falling into a category known by numismatists as mint-made error coins or simply error coins. These groups of coins with distinctive characteristics (often built-in defects) sound like Trump.

*Sec. of State Pompeo: “[…]the summit between the president and Chairman Un.”  What’s Kim Jong-un’s Surname? Mike Pompeo Is Learning the Hard Way

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, hired actors attended NOLA rate payer meetings

National, ,

Hey, guess what energy company with a Vermont connection hired actors to attend and disrupt a series of New Orleans city council meetings on the company’s new gas-powered generating plant and electric rates?  Yes, Entergy,  (soon-to-be former) owner of Vermont Yankee – the  decommissioned nuclear power plant – hired “rent-a-crowd” actors supplied by a company based in Los Angeles. And it was a special performance directed to support the fossil fuel power supplier: One of the demonstrators, Keith Keough, said he was paid to clap, “every time someone said something against wind and solar power.” 

Poynter.com reports on the investigation done by The Lens, a non-profit investigative organization. Poynter.com makes clear the last thing they want to do is give oxygen to conspiracy nuts and hoaxsters who claim mass shootings and terrorist attacks are the work of crisis actors and “fake flag” operations. (And contrary to the beliefs of right-wing internet conspiracy nuts, factcheck.org shows there were no paid “crisis actors” among the Parkland shooting high school demonstrators.)

But in New Orleans, paid actors disrupted a city council vote that will affect every person in that community who pays an electric bill. […] Lens reporter Michael Isaac Stein writes. “They were paid $60 each time they wore the orange shirts to meetings in October and February. Some got $200 for a ‘speaking role,’ which required them to deliver a pre-written speech, according to interviews with the actors and screenshots of Facebook messages provided to The Lens.”

inflatablesupporters3

Several rent-a-crowd companies here and overseas are identified in the article. One company executive draws a line at supplying a crowd for hate groups. But reportedly rented crowds are often hired to “swarm people like paparazzi in order to make people feel good to give them the celebrity experience.”

We now know, but always suspected, Vermont Yankee’s owner Entergy to be the kind of corporation that would resort to hiring supporters and hacks to its cause, but what kind of public figure would be so insecure as to hire an “adoring” crowd?

Oh, wait we know that too: Donald Trump, of course. In January 2017 the FEC concluded, after he denied it, that Trump paid actors to attend his 2016 campaign launch.

Well, we always knew that Entergy couldn’t be trusted to deal in an up-front, honest, and straightforward manner. This is just a reminder: Let the state and the buyer beware! And pay no heed to that crowd applauding the deal – some of them could be actors, you know.