(Rethinking the role prisons should play in Vermont was a central theme of the Democratic campaign for governor, so it is appropriate to keep the conversation going even as we face other challenges. - promoted by Sue Prent)
The only way to close the revolving prison door is to open another one.
While I am quite tired of the "War on [insert social problem]" formulation, it's still good to see the governor working on an issue he spoke about on the campaign trail:
Shumlin joined lawmakers and judicial branch officials to highlight efforts to lower the number of people who return to prison after being released by stepping up addiction treatment, mental health counseling and other services for nonviolent offenders.
Shumlin's opponent last election tried to demagogue on this, and barely failed to scare enough Vermonters overall though he handily won our county, where there is a correctional facility, by roughly 2:1. I appreciated the governor's not-entirely-original idea to reduce costs in corrections by reducing the nonviolent offender population and reinvesting savings in early education.
Reducing recidivism saves us a great deal of money in the short- and long-term. As the Freep article I link to notes, it costs about $48k/yr to incarcerate versus $6500 for supervision. Fiscally-responsible governance demands we do all we can to keep offenders from returning to prison.
And from a moral and security perspective, it also makes a great deal of sense. How can any citizen exercise their full measure of human rights if we set them up to fail after releasing them? And how can our communities be safe if we have ticking timebombs wandering around with no moderating, mitigating forces to help them walk the straight and narrow?
As several people have raised question about the 5% administrative fee I mention in the latter part of this piece, I decided to contact Roger Marcoux of the Sheriff's Association for clarification. His response is now posted in comments __________________________________________________________
I bring these stories of Franklin County municipal monkey-business to the GMD community both to entertain you and as object lessons in how far out of whack the local process can become when citizens don't keep their hands upon the throttle.
The melodrama over the St. Albans Town policing contract continues to unfold. Sheriff Robert Norris is now suing the City of St. Albans for "predatory pricing" practices and is seeking an injunction to prevent the Town's contract with the City from going into effect.
As you may recall, the Town Selectboard voted by a margin of 3 to 2 to award that contract to the City of St. Albans, whose bid for the job came in at one-million dollars less than the Sheriff's bid.
There was a general rhubarb raised over this decision by the Sheriff and his merry band, egged-on by Selectboard Chair Bill Nihan who had flip-flopped to the pro-Sheriff side in time to represent one of the two dissenting votes, after initially saying he supported awarding the contract to the City. But then, it was coming up to election time, and Mr. Nihan needed those pro-sheriff voters in order to squeak by for re-lection... which he did, by just twelve ballots.
In the previous election, he had barely made it by two votes; and we are now learning that those two ballots may be presumed to have been from his two sons who live and work in New York City (in the financial industry, of course), as they have apparently been routinely voting in St. Albans for years despite little to suggest that they ever lived here! According to the Messenger, the voter status of those two junior Nihans is currently under investigation. But that's another story for another time...
There was also a star-turn by the Town Manager, Christine Murphy, who, we are led to believe, took it upon herself to approach the Sheriff for a new, lower bid after the Selectboard had already voted to award the contract to the City.
I've seen video-tape of the Selectboard meeting following this indiscretion, and came away with the distinct impression that someone put her up to it. It was, to put it mildly, a complete circus, stage-managed on the eve of the Town Meeting vote to bring out the Sheriff's supporters and get them to the polls.
The Sheriff is alleging that the difference between the City's original price quote for services, given in 2007, and the one given in 2010 is evidence of price-fixing. Says the Sheriff, the City is trying to monopolize police services. This, despite the fact that, according to the Messenger, the Sheriff's office currently provides coverage for 62% of Franklin County's population and the City only serves 15%. Even with the City holding the new contract for Town policing, the Sheriff's share of the county pie will only be reduced to 50%, while the City's share would rise to 28%.
After eight years of controversy, appeals of the permit for a proposed Walmart at exit 20 of I-89 in St. Albans Town had a final half-hour of oral arguments before the Vermont Supreme Court this past Wednesday at the Vermont Law School in S. Royalton.
The room was packed with about a hundred spectators. As if to illustrate our claim that the local permit review process had been contaminated by conspicuous and persistent conflicts of interest, former Town Selectboard Chairman, Bill Nihan, took his seat in the front row, cheek-to-jowel with applicant Jeff Davis of JLD Properties, his attorney Stewart McConaughy, and project engineer Sam Ruggiano.
Mr. Nihan has been a consistent figure in Town government throughout the Walmart saga, even popping-up on the special "Ad-Hoc Committee" that was formed by the Northwest Regional Planning Commission, under pressure from the Town, to "reconsider" Davis' Walmart project after the usual NRPC Project Review Committee had rejected it. Not surprisingly, that "Ad-Hoc Committee," under the heavy thumb of Mr. Nihan and friends, returned a decision favorable to the project. But Mr. Nihan does not even play a minor role in our assertions of a tainted process.
In fact, the pattern of conflicts of interest throughout the process was so widespread and insidious that former VNRC attorney Jon Groveman was forced to narrowly focus on the most egregious examples (due to filing limits on the number of words in the written arguments.)
The abundant evidence of conflicts of interest that was included in the written arguments was not wasted on the Supreme Court justices who peppered attorneys from both sides with many questions on the issue. Everyone, even the attorney for JLD, seemed to finally agree upon the existence of those conflicts. What remained to be evaluated was the validity of the applicant's assertion that, since the Environmental Court hearing (the venue for our appeal of the Act 250 decision) was considered "de novo," meaning a new look at the evidence, contamination of the local permit process was unimportant.
As VNRC's Jared Margolis very ably argued, if the Supremes were to accept this view of the local permit process, it would send an appalling message that corruption could simply be overlooked; and it would have a "chilling effect" on concerned citizens' access to that process. If those citizens did not possess the financial means to appeal a local decision to the Environmental Court, they would simply be deprived of their right to a fair hearing.
Sure as Town Meeting comes to pass every year, Marilyn Hackett gets another virtual slap in the face from her righteous neighbors in Franklin. After ten years, this time will likely be the last, since Ms. Hackett has finally resolved to sue the municipality to have them remove a Christian invocation from the agenda of the next Town Meeting...and she will most likely win.
As anyone who read my post on the issue this time last year may recall, she hasn't come to this decision easily or quickly.
Alleging a violation of Vermont's Constitution and the state's Public Accommodations Act, the Vermont branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed suit against the Town of Franklin and moderator Tim Magnant for repeatedly opening Franklin's town meeting with a Christian prayer.
Maintaining that the Town's persistent disregard for Ms. Hackett's beliefs is in violation of the Public Accommodations Act, attorneys are seeking an end to the annual prayers, recovery of damages and associated legal fees.
Each year Ms. Hackett requests that the invocation be dropped from the agenda in deference to her personal beliefs. She doesn't proselytize and asks only that her right to fully participate in Town Meeting without the imposition of publicly led prayer be respected. Each year, the Town Moderator defies both Ms. Hackett and the letter of the law by opening the meeting with a Christian prayer led by Rev. Jason McConnell. The current Town Moderator is Tim Magnant.
A previous Moderator, Hugh Gates, addressed her complaint by "inviting" anyone objecting to the prayer to leave the room. This was an invitation that Ms. Hackett found considerably less than accommodating. Once, the assembly even took a vote, by a show of hands, on whether or not to allow the prayer; but, as Ms. Hackett rightly observed, you can't vote away another person's rights under the law.
If you've ever wondered what Republican reps from Franklin County do with their time in the Statehouse, your puzzling days are over! Judging soley from a resolution that recently came to my attention, it would seem that they pretty much concentrate on the work of getting themselves re-elected.
Now before I go any further with this, I am obliged to remind you that I am an active member of the Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth. We're the grassroots group that has, for almost eighteen years, diligently maintained opposition to the proposed location of what would be the state's largest Walmart on a tract of agricultural land, near the border of St. Albans Town.
Appearing in the Tuesday, January 18 Journal of the House, J.R.H. 7, the "Joint resolution in support of the construction of a Walmart store in St. Albans Town," must be a high priority for sponsoring representatives Dickinson (St. Albans Town), Branagan (Georgia), McAllister (Highgate), Pearce (Richford), Perley (Enosburg), Savage (Swanton)...and my own local rep and new next-door neighbor, Dustin Degree. With all the serious budgetary, healthcare, education, energy and infrastructure issues that the Legislature faces this term, the best use this bunch could find for their elected office was to advocate on behalf of an out-of-state retailer in a vainglorious attempt to...to do what exactly?
The issue of whether the store will or will not be permitted is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court of Vermont. No other official entity has any say in the matter at this point, so their resolution is utterly meaningless...just a red herring they can wave at their Walmart-deprived constituents come re-election time. "End the wait for Walmart" is a favorite Republican campaign theme in these parts. In a letter-to-the-editor a couple of years ago, Lynn Dickinson even went so far as to imply that electing her could somehow clear the way for Walmart! I remember responding that she should familiarize herself with the way the legal system works in this state.
To our Republican reps I have this piece of advice: If you have so much free time on your hands, when next the county is embroiled in a controversial permit debate that goes on for years, you mightshow up at one or two of the hearings before you start drafting resolutions on topics you know nothing about, as is evidenced by the text of your resolution, which shows a fundamental ignorance of the factual evidence and of how the project lines-up with the ten criteria of Act 250.
C'mon Franklin County Republicans, is this the best use you can make of your time in office?
At the risk of being extremely dull at this liveliest of seasons, I think it might be time to revisit Vermont's Open Meeting Law. This is the very important rule that protects the public's right to know, and ensures that no decisions are made in secret by City Councils or Selectboards.
South Burlington City Council Chairman Mark Boucher said Monday that he gave retired City Manager Chuck Hafter a laptop computer and printer after Boucher privately polled the rest of the council in April. The council at the end of its regular meeting was asked to re-affirm the private deal of giving away a taxpayer-owned computer to Hafter.
What's wrong with that, you might ask? The value of the used computer was relatively little and the City has a full back-up. The problem is that, by law, City Council members are not permitted to "privately poll" themselves about a matter concerning City property:
Whenever a quorum (a majority) of a public body meet to discuss the business of the board or to take action, the open meeting law will apply. This means that if a majority of a board find themselves together at a social function they must take care not to discuss the business of the board!
The exclamation point is actually there in the law for emphasis.
A couple of weeks ago, a similar issue was raised in the St. Albans Messenger (not available online) following a meeting of the Town/City Fire Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee includes individuals who also sit on the Town Selectboard. The other members of the Selectboard apparently decided to attend the meeting as well, providing, by default, a quorum capable of decision-making for the Town Selectboard. By law, this obligated the Selectboard to formally "warn" the meeting so that the public would be aware that a quorum would be present. Several of the Selectboard members have been serving in that capacity for enough years that they can not claim ignorance of the law, and the City Manager shares responsibility for this over-sight. As Michelle Monroe mentioned in her Messenger coverage of the meeting, if a member of the public were to complain, the Town would be liable for a fine of $500.
It would appear that such a small fine is insufficient penalty, as City Councils and Selectboards seem to be pretty casual about observing the law. And this returns me to my other complaint about the laws governing conduct by Vermont's public officials: the lack of adequate definitions and meaningful penalties for the exercise of conflicts of interest. Both conflicts of interest and open meeting violations are byproducts of the traditional intimacy and informality of Vermont's institutions of government. While this intimacy has it's upside in terms of unique opportunities for public involvement, we must not allow the nature of this relationship to obscure the fact that allowing violations of open meeting and conflicts of interest to go unchecked will ultimately corrupt the process.
I think we should take a moment to commend Martha Abbott for taking one for the team; the "team" being Vermont's best interests. Today's Free Press carried a gracious "My Turn" by the withdrawn Progressive candidate for Governor, including the following comments:
I will decline the Progressive nomination for governor, a nomination I sought in order to ensure that the Progressive Party would not have a candidate in that race this year. Someday there will be a voting system that will give Vermonters a real choice between more than two candidates in the general election. But we are not there yet. We have a lot of work to do together.
As an unaffiliated, small "p" progressive, do I hear an "Amen" from anyone in the choir?
With all the excitement and suspense since the primary, I never got a chance to say how honored I was to be a part of the grass-roots movement to carry Doug Racine to the governor's seat. I think what we accomplished deserves recognition and a moment of celebratory reflection.
Conventional wisdom is that money wins elections. If there is any take-away from the whole race, it is that thatain't necessarily so(cue Gershwin). With all the funding that other candidates could claim, the passion of roughly 600 grass-roots volunteers in the Racine campaign pretty-much levelled-out the playing field. "Money doesn't buy happiness," as the saying goes; but apparently, it also doesn't buy elections in Vermont. I say this with no disrespect to the other candidates, who all had their share of informed, committed supporters; but because this bodes well for the general, where Brian Dubie will be surfing on national cash.
What we learned from the primary, and what will empower us as we move into the general campaign is the certain knowledge that Vermont voters as a whole are becoming smarter, more engaged, and are swelling the Democratic/Progressive ranks.
It is a testament to Doug Racine's personal magnetism and his honest and realistic approach to issues which matter to Vermont voters that his message resonated so well without a boatload of media buys.
Whatever the final outcome, this primary has restored my hope for the future of Vermont and my commitment to the cause of public education in the service of democracy. Thank you, Doug!
Apparently, the Democratic candidate for governor was scheduled to be at a gubernatorial candidate debate, and she passed up the opportunity to spend a few hours hanging out with members of the VTSDA and the Vermont Biosciences Alliance on the Spirit of Ethan Allen III. The event, incidentally, was sold out.
Check out the other people Resmer spotted on the lower deck:
State Auditor Tom Salmon, Lt. Governor hopeful Phil Scott, Secretary of State candidate Jason Gibbs, and Lt. Governor and gubernatorial candidate Brian Dubie among the attendees.
Just when we need a little leavening to lighten the mood during these final days before the primary, the FP served up something today that more than fills the bill. In a front page feature on the three GOP suitors for a waltz with Peter Welch, we learn that John Mitchell is fond of citing Otto von Bismarck and believes the marketplace alone should decide the fate of small family farms. Another contender, Keith Stern has already had three unsuccessful runs for Congress, in which he never garnered more than 1% of the vote. His "bold" ideas include making Social Security recipients work to "earn" their benefits. It's not hard to imagine how this idea will be received, considering the obvious argument that they have already worked to earn those benefits!
But those two guys do not provide the entertainment value of one Paul Beaudry; aka "Bachelor #3." Even the right-leaning Free Press seems a little agog at his temerity:
Beaudry is the most rhetorically flamboyant of the three, using attention-getting language and sometimes making hard-to-prove assertions.
Examples, anyone? Here we go:
He has asserted that Vermont has enough natural gas and oil under its land to eliminate state income taxes and send every resident a yearly check.
Approximately 50 people gathered on the Statehouse lawn to listen to speakers, enjoy performances by "Bread and Puppet" and the "Raging Grannies;" and to view a photo-petition of over 400 individuals that added still more numbers and impact to the written petition of over !,700 signers who want answers to their questions about what exactly the wastewater and extraction practices of Agrimark-Cabot are doing to the surrounding watershed and groundwater. If everything is on the up and up, it's time for ANR to fulfill their role as a public interface and provide coherent explanations, backed-up by concrete evidence that will reassure the concerned community that they have nothing to worry about. Lacking that irrefutable evidence, an independent analysis of Agrimark-Cabot's draw and discharge practices would go a long way toward rebuilding this community's confidence in the ANR's ability to protect their health. ------------------------------------------------
It's about time more attention was directed toward Cabot Creamery's questionable waste management practices. I have been following this issue and sharing the developing story on GMD since last fall. Now, Toxics Action Center has announced an upcoming press conference on the issue, together with a rally on the Statehouse lawn:
Vermonters Call on Cabot Creamery to Green Up
What: Press conference and small rally on the Statehouse lawn. 30-40 supporters are expected to join Whey To Go, a local community group, and Toxics Action Center, a public health and environmental nonprofit. Whey To Go will announce the results of its petitioning effort, with supporters asking the CEO of Cabot Creamery's parent company, Agrimark, to adopt stronger environmental practices. Bread and Puppet will perform a short skit.
When: Wednesday, August 11, 10:30AM
Where: Statehouse Lawn, Montpelier
Speakers: Jill Alexander, Whey To Go
Norman Lussier, Lussier Farm, Swanton
Jessica Edgerly, Toxics Action Center
Visuals: Compilation of the hundreds of photo petitions taken of supporters.
It is in the best interests of Cabot and the Vermont brand to have these complaints fully explored, and any necessary remedial action undertaken without delay.
We have some of the best school outcomes in the country. Despite Republican indifference to that fact, which ill-serves their Vermont failure message, this is one very good reason why high-quality job providers might choose to locate here. One cannot but wonder what effect this fiscal "efficiency" may have on the long term performance of Vermont schools, and thus, their position as an asset to the state's economic development.
There is no question but that the federal grant to bring high-speed Internet access to every nook and cranny of the state will grow our economy. Every gubernatorial candidate recognizes this and has made achievement of this goal a plank (large or small) of her or his platform. This latest development demands that each craft a more nuanced message about IT beyond simple supply. If Brian Dubie's slow response time for other issues is any indication, we can expect him to get up to speed about the new IT realities sometime in 2011.
The two lead stories blend effortlessly into a single line of questions about the future. Will distance learning provided through broadband access succeed in offsetting the increasing economic limits on public schools; and what will the long-term impact on community be if public schools begin to disappear as gathering places? Will a blanket of broadband shape Vermont as one giant bedroom suburb for Boston, New York and Montreal? Do we have the will to support, through our taxes, a socially interactive public education system and the tradition of diverse and local economies throughout Vermont?
The goings-on in Franklin County never fail to entertain, and often recollect the opportunistic politics of much earlier times. A weekend Messenger profile of the county Sheriff's race reveals some interesting facts concerning the incumbent, Democrat Bob Norris. Apparently referred to in some law-enforcement circles as "Benefits Bob," Sheriff Norris' administrative approach has raised a few eyebrows. Complaints of inter-departmental friction with local and state enforcement are coupled with questions regarding liberties Norris' department may have taken in billing the state for certain contract-related expenditures. In Franklin County, what expenses the county may be billed for is left entirely to the discretion of the side judges who appear to have allowed the Sheriff wide-latitude to use public funding sources to cover costs that might more appropriately have been included in contractual expenses.
In a July 7 Messenger feature, Michelle Monroe gave a detailed account of what is known of the financial management of the department, but the picture was still somewhat hazy:
On March 22, the Messenger requested from the Franklin County Sheriff in writing "a detailed accounting of what expenses were billed to Franklin County during FY 2009 and the current fiscal year. If a formula was used to determine what share of various costs was to be billed to the county, please include a copy of that formula." Norris said no formula was used to determine what was billed to the county. He pointed to statutory requirements and the county budget to show what expenses were paid by the county.
Asked about the training paid for by the county, Norris said how much training the county pays for is at the discretion of the assistant judges.
Two Republicans are vying for the privilege of challenging Norris in the November election. One of them, Paul Morits currently serves as a detective on the St. Albans City Police force, but worked in the Sheriff's office before that. He characterizes the relationship between the Sheriff and other law enforcement bodies as poor owing to the Sheriff's inclination to be"territorial."
This might just be dismissed as the rumblings of a rival candidate but, according to the Messenger:
That came to light in February, when Norris turned a city police detective away from a briefing at his office regarding a meth lab bust.
(Here is the latest from candidate for governor, Matt Dunne: - promoted by GMD)
Anyone who says the economy is doing fine in Vermont isn’t talking to the same Vermonters I am.
Since 2003, the number of new businesses in Vermont has dropped every single year. Jobs are being lost in all sectors and in all parts of the state and there has been no leadership shown in Montpelier to turn our economy around.
Nobody knows the challenges of operating a company in Vermont better than today’s business leaders. They are on the front-lines trying to convince Vermont students graduating from our state colleges and universities to stay and work in Vermont. They are working to attract new investments to grow their companies and have dealt with the unresponsive and non-transparent bureaucracy in Montpelier. It is these entrepreneurs and executives who know what kind of leadership is necessary in Vermont and what types of changes need to be enacted to make business more successful here.
Earlier this week, we entered an exciting new phase of our campaign by releasing the names of 26 business leaders who are endorsing the campaign. As the only candidate to have worked in multiple companies in Vermont, I was honored to have support from so many of my peers.
Will Raap, Chairman of The Earth Partners and Founder of Gardener's Supply and Mike Lane, Chief Operating Officer of Dealer.com joined me at an event in Winooski to announce these endorsements. As business leaders, they recognize that this next election will determine where we go as a state, not just for the next year or two, but for the next several decades. The next Governor must not only understand our challenges, but actually have the experience to deliver on the promise of a better economy.
Will and Mike joined 24 others in endorsing the campaign, including:
It looks like "Whey To Go," the concerned citizens' group in Cabot, could use a little help in persuading the state to investigate its claims of damage to the aquifer by wells operated by dairy processor Agri-Mark.
You can read the whole story here, following back through all the links. Once you have, I hope you will consider taking the time to send a letter as requested by the group. You will find a sample letter among the comments.
I have never met a tax and spend liberal in my life. I have never met one person who thinks that the way to fix a problem is to just throw money at it. Throwing things is generally not a great strategy for solving problems. Money throwing not withstanding, there is no doubt that many of our societal problems are insoluble without financial resources.
The charge of “tax and spend liberal” is a canard used to discredit the idea that the welfare of our neighbors and community is directly connected to our own well-being. The question is how can we invest in the future when we can’t pay today’s bills? Vermont’s answer must be that even with our belts cinched tight we must not fail to make investments that will produce a more prosperous future.
There is an old joke: a man is praying, "Please God, please let me win the lottery!" The hand of God reaches down and taps him on the shoulder and says, “ Schmuck! Buy a ticket.” Investing in Vermont’s future is no lottery ticket. On the contrary, we know these investments are a sure thing. Simply stated, if we do not invest in a prosperous future how can we expect to have one?
Here are a few ideas that seem a basis upon which to build consensus.
Jill Alexander of Whey to Go has sent me the following appeal:
Sue, could you please read the attached "sample" and encourage all the readers to send public comments? They can email their comments to Rodney.pingree@state.vt.us; Catherine.Gjessing@state.vt.us and please forward a cc: to 4reiki@fairpoint.net so that we can keep track of how many letters they receive. PLEASE help us before our wells go dry. Thank you. Also please encourage folks to write letters to the editors of these three papers: news@thehardwickgazette.com letters@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com and letters@timesargus.com; and let them know you care. Thank you.
I will add the sample letter to the "comments" section of this post and urge you to take a few moments to write to the State about this important water issue. This has the potential to set precedent regarding access to the aquifer that will impact everyone's future.
_____________________________________________________________
Monday night, the ANR held a public hearing so that neighbors to the Agri-Mark/Cabot facility could express their concerns.
Said ANR's Rodney Pingree, chief of water resources:
The permit is pending, but we're suddenly hearing about this from neighbors who say they're being affected but don't know how or why...There's a lot of things that haven't been documented. We want to take information at this hearing, but we aren't prepared to point fingers at anybody. We need to get the full picture
.
--------------------------------------------------
As reported last week, Agri-Mark is seeking a permit for three existing water wells which collectively withdraw 30 million gallons of water per annum. These wells have never been permitted and yet they are already in operation. The neighbors have been alarmed by evidence that their own wells are being depleted by the draw and have requested a public meeting with the Agency of Natural Resources to address their questions about the operation.
A public meeting has now been scheduled for this coming Monday, June 21 at the Cabot Town Hall (above the library), at 6:30 PM. The good folks who are being impacted by these wells are requesting that anyone who can make it to the meeting try to do so to give them much needed support.
These wells have never been subjected to impact studies or analysis of any sort, yet it seems that ANR is poised to grant them a permit to continue withdrawals. Why is Cabot allowed to drill wells without getting permits? Get over there on Monday night and ask some tough questions!
Maybe its just me, but discussion of the Governor's travels while in office make me distinctly uncomfortable. Apparently, compared to some other states, Vermont taxpayers are not nearly so much on the hook for his ramblings as they might be; and I suppose that's all well and good. Nevertheless, one has to wonder what exactly he is saying when he wanders about the globe, presumably to carry a message about Vermont. What is he saying to China, to France and to Canada?
Set aside, for a moment, the ethical question of whether or not, as governor, he should ever be traveling at the expense of a foreign power. Is Governor Douglas truly the person we want representing the Vermont brand? The message he has consistently broadcast is that Vermont is a poor place to do business; that our taxes are burdensome; and that our young people are fleeing from the lack of opportunity here.
He seems to favor low-grade investments from out-of-state entities like box stores, but has paid little more than lip-service to the agricultural heritage of the state, to fostering green technology, and to achieving statewide broadband access; all of which offer our greatest opportunities for home-grown prosperity in Vermont. His nearsighted focus on the corporate interests of unreliable entities like Entergy and IBM betrays a deficit of imagination and a lack of confidence in Vermont's own potential for innovation.
As we approach the end of the Governor's final term of office, perhaps someone should give us an accounting of how productive his travels have been for Vermont. How much have our exports to specific countries increased, and how many more tourists are we receiving from Quebec? With this information, we might be better able to evaluate the prospect of a continuation of Governor Douglas' agenda of Vermont-bashing under a Dubie administration. After all, Dubie's opening salvo in his campaign was that infamous web-banner essentially proclaiming Vermont to be a failing state.
I think we've all heard that you catch more flies with honey. Perhaps it would be worth a try.
You may remember that a small group of concerned neighbors to the Agrimark facility in Cabot (Whey to Go) tried unsuccessfully last fall and winter to dissuade the ANR from issuing a permit to increase the amount of waste the plant could disperse in the area. They raised questions about the composition of the waste, anecdotal evidence that some components posed a risk of toxicity; and asked why the wastewater facility that Agrimark was supposed to build had never materialized.
Now, a new twist has been added to the story. It seems that Agrimark has indirectly applied to the ANR for permits to drill wells in several locations on the property. When adjacent landowners were notified of the application, they were puzzled why Agrimark's representatives would only now be asking for permits for what appear to be already existing wells. Whey to Go Spokesman, Jill Alexander contacted me about this more than a week ago, but I was waiting for clarification she had requested from the ANR before posting about this story.
Today, I received the following from Jill:
To my fellow petition signers,
First, thank you for signing our petition and sharing your concerns regarding Agri-Mark's, (DBA Cabot Creamery) waste water spraying. We need your help again.
The Agency of Natural Resources recently discovered that, for the past 20 years, Agri--Mark, DBA Cabot Creamery has unlawfully withdrawn tens of thousands of gallons of water each day from their unpermitted wells. Instead of reprimanding Agri-Mark, or investigating whether this has depleted Cabot's water supply, ANR intends to permit Agri-Mark's water wells!
We need you to voice your concern by requesting a public hearing before the June 10th deadline.
Agri-Mark's plan is to pull 15,000 gallons of water per day from these water wells, but the company has no plan to assess how this would affect others in the area. Plus, ANR would count on Agri-Mark to report its own water withdrawal. Agri-Mark has chalked up a long list of permit violations. Why should they be trusted with our water?
Here's how to weigh in and request a public hearing: (Application PID N-2049-07.0 under 10 VSA, Section 1675 (c).)
1. Email Rodney Pingree at the Water Supply Division, 103 South Main Street, Waterbury, Vt. 05671 @ rodney.pingree@state.vt.us. and also Scott Stewart @ Scott.Stewart@state.vt.us. who is also at the Water Supply Division of ANR.
2. Please cc: sandra.noyes@yahoo and Jill Alexander @ 4reiki@fairpoint.net so we can keep track.
Senator Bernie Sanders and thousands of other Vermonters will join together Saturday May 1st at the Healthcare Is A Human Right Rally in Montpelier.
11am: March from City Hall, 39 Main Street
12 Noon: Rally at Statehouse Lawn
It's for your health!
Need details, see the links and contact information below for the Vermont Workers' Center
From the email sent to me by Jonny Leavitt of the Vermont Workers Center:
The day will feature art, theater, music, and entertainment for all ages. Invite your neighbors and co-workers, bring your friends and family, and come celebrate with the Healthcare is a Human Right Campaign
Join with thousands of Vermonters and Senator Bernie Sanders for a rally which will help put Vermont on course to lead the country in establishing a healthcare system in our state that treats healthcare as a public good for all. The bill S.88 has now been voted through both chambers of the state legislature and is on its way to becoming a law that will design and implement a universal system of healthcare in Vermont.
Can you help us make the rally even bigger?
- Take the I'll Be There pledge that you'll be there at the rally and will try to bring family and friends to show our legislators that we need healthcare as a human right! http://www.workerscenter.org/may1 - Help promote the May 1 online and Facebook and Listen to a PSA by Willem Lange, see more here: http://workerscenter.org/node/513 - Trying to figure out how you'll get to the rally? We have information on transportation and carpooling here: http://www.workerscenter.org/t...
in Vermont, I was honored to have support from so many of my peers.
