If your indignation is temporarily on park thanks to a reasonable outcome of the Vermont election, and you’re tired of Tea Party travesties, here’s a little something to get your social justice juices flowing again.

Apparently, if you have a big enough income and own a local chalet, this may just be the equivalent of a “get out of jail free” card in Colorado!  When a cyclist (Dr. Steven Milo) was struck by a hit-and-run Mercedes driver (Martin Joel Erzinger) in Eagle County, Colorado, the perpetrator was not subjected to felony charges because the county prosecutor felt his job, managing a billion dollars in funds at Morgan Stanley, might be impacted.

According to the local paper, the DA, one Mr. Mark Herlbert offered this defense:

“Felony convictions have some pretty serious job implications for someone in Mr. Erzinger’s profession, and that entered into it…When you’re talking about restitution, you don’t want to take away his ability to pay.”

To which the victim, countered:

“Mr. Erzinger struck me, fled and left me for dead on the highway…Neither his financial prominence nor my financial situation should be factors in your prosecution of this case.”

One cannot escape the thought that if Dr. Milo, who is a New York physician, had been the driver and Mr. Erzinger (who is a homeowner at Arrowhead) the victim, the DA would have locked-up Dr. Milo and thrown away the key.

(Update:  Randy Brock easily won reelection, making it all the more incomprehensible why someone who represents himself as a friend to small business found it necessary to do something like this.   I thought the story of this odd bullying escapade might have been overlooked in the election aftermath; so I’m returning it to the front page for one more go-round. – promoted by Sue Prent)

Rather than join the soothsayer’s forum, I thought I’d tell a little election night bedtime story along the lines of “Bambi meets Godzilla.”  

Now you all probably know that former State Auditor and current Franklin County Senator Randy Brock is facing-off in this election against a bright 27-year old St. Albans small business entrepreneur by the name of Michael McCarthy.  Mr. Brock has relied primarily on name recognition and a reputation as a “nice guy” to retain his seat, keeping his head down and his mouth shut.  This might seem inordinately cautious on the part of an experienced campaigner like Mr. Brock; but Mike McCarthy was shooting real bullets in his well-articulated positions on issues important to Vermonters…like healthcare, education, job growth and fair taxes.

Apparently this all became too much for Mr. Brock and so yesterday, while Mike was attending the Biden rally with fellow Democrats in Burlington, Randy Brock and Brian Dubie brought Channel 5 news into McCarthy’s tiny St. Albans business, “Cosmic Bakery;” for what purpose isn’t precisely clear.  McCarthy received no prior warning of the visit, so perhaps it was meant to be an ambush confrontation.  If so, what sort of desperation drives two highly seasoned professional politicians, including a current candidate for Governor to ambush a freshman candidate during a busy day in his little retail bakery?  Are they insane, one is tempted to ask, or just plain bullies looking for a good time?

The picture isn’t much prettier if they didn’t expect Mike to be there, knowing how likely it would be that he would join the highly publicized Democratic rally in Burlington.  That would demonstrate a level of cowardice befitting neither of these two former military officers.  

All their unscheduled visit succeeded in doing was to disrupt a small local business and distress Mike’s very private girlfriend, who found herself confronted with a camera as she tried to simply do her job.  Shame on you, Mr. Brock; “nice guy” indeed!

One can only conclude that the prospect of Michael McCarthy’s political future sends a chill right through the aging bones of Vermont’s Republican party, sufficient to bring out the Big Guns in embarrassing escapade.

As we all seem to be having a crack at some final GOTV words, these are mine: support the good people who are down-ticket from Peter Shumlin, too.

I  just watched a rebroadcast of the candidate forum for Lt. Governor that took place in St. Albans a few weeks ago; and I’m so glad that I did! I had met Steve Howard and heard him speak briefly, taking away a favorable but indistinct impression.  It wasn’t until I saw his performance in that debate that I could really size him up in relation to Phil Scott, who also appears to be a nice enough guy.

It really is a shame that most voters will probably go to the polls having never heard a debate between these two.  Unlike the high profile Shumlin/Dubie show-downs which featured two strikingly different personalities sparring through a thicket of highly charged talking points, this forum was more of a relaxed conversation between two guys with very different perspectives who still seemed capable of sharing a cup of coffee later on.  

In the St. Albans forum, moderator Emerson Lynn adopted the annoying and odd habit of personally grilling Steve Howard on his responses to each question, occasionally to the complete exclusion of Candidate Scott.  Despite this disproportionate amount of adversarial attention, Mr. Howard rose to the questions with grace and authority, turning the two-against-one scenario to his distinct advantage.  Mr. Scott’s assertions on all issues seemed to be grounded less in fact than opinion and lacked a certain depth when compared to those offered so substantially by Mr. Howard. I was really quite amazed at how great was the gulf in capability between the two men as revealed in this exchange. It’s difficult for me to believe that the undecided voters who were present in the audience of that forum could reach any conclusion other than that Steve Howard would make an excellent Lieutenant Governor (or even Governor, should it come to that); and that Phil Scott would probably be a nice guy to have as a boss on a construction job.  

On another note, I have to say how happy I was to see that the Burlington Free Press finally did, in today’s edition, what every single newspaper in the state should have done weeks ago:  they published a factual “cheat sheet” for battle weary voters to scan for simply stated positions from both candidates (Shumlin and Dubie) on each of 14 distinct issues.  This was a godsend to Democratic phone-bankers today who could finally refer undecideds to a single neutral source for the rudimentary facts one should have in order to make an informed decision.  I rather doubt that the Dubie camp welcomed this straight-forward distillation of the candidates’ positions as we did, since they tried so hard throughout the campaign to distract voters from that very thing.

It’s been a rough and tumble road this time around, but now that election day is within sight there is a growing sense of excitement in the air that kind of reminds me of 2008 (bite your tongue, girl!) As has been remarked in other diaries on this page, volunteers are suddenly pouring out of the woodwork to participate in the GOTV effort.  Somehow, despite all of the poison emanating from the Dubie camp (or perhaps because of it) the league of liberal voters have come to life again. Happy Halloween!

Democratic Candidate for Auditor, Doug Hoffer has had a busy and gratifying several days, picking up endorsements from  the Free Press and independent Republican Senator Vince Illuzzi. While both developments are certainly noteworthy, it was his latest observations on current Auditor, Tom Salmon’s somewhat erratic attentions, that particularly caught my eye.  

As the Addison Independent, reported on October 14, Salmon lists among his significant activities, an interest in the economics of farming, to wit:

Salmon and his colleagues – in concert with the Vermont Agency of Agriculture – are participating in the effort to create better economic conditions for farmers. To that end, they have assembled a group of Vermont-based entrepreneurs who are brainstorming ways to put more money in farmers’ pockets.

About this curious foray into Ag issues, Doug Hoffer observes,

With so much work to be done, why has the Auditor chosen to dabble in agriculture policy? What are his priorities?… It is curious why Mr. Salmon convened a group of non-experts without consulting those who are actively working on agriculture issues.

Mr. Hoffer goes on to wonder whether Mr. Salmon is even aware of the network of programs already in existence to address the local foods issues and the economics of agriculture:

If Mr. Salmon is aware of Farm-to-Plate, why was no effort made to communicate with the principals to determine what has been done so as not to reinvent the wheel (and waste time and money)?  If Mr. Salmon was not aware of the Farm-to-Plate project, it suggests poor preparation and raises questions about the seriousness of his interest in this issue.

Perhaps the everyday chores of the Auditor’s office aren’t quite grand enough for Mr. Salmon and he seeks to grow it into something more suitable to his larger ambitions.  In a communique with Agriculture Secretary Roger Albee, Mr. Salmon proposes to  

Establish an Agricultural Business Development Cabinet….The purpose (of which) will be to gather, coordinate, and implement the “good ideas” that emerge from various segments of our working landscape – agriculture, dairy, agri-tourism – with the effort of economic development and labor force training to enable a unified team approach to development in Vermont.

I was particularly interested in whom Mr. Salmon saw fit to include among his first group of collaborators, as that might give some indication of what sort of “cabinet”  he has in mind to shape food and farm policy in the coming years.

As it turns out, the group chosen by Mr. Salmon includes only one farmer,  Amanda St. Pierre, a large-scale dairy owner in Berkshire.  Apart from Ms. St. Pierre, the group is comprised of a vet (Kent Anderson), a financier (Bruce Lisman), a career bureaucrat (Michael K. Smith),  a familiar e-marketer (Jerry Tarrant), Mr. Salmon’s deputy (Joe Juhasz) and not one but three developers (Angelo Pizzagalli, Ernie Pomerleau and William Stenger). No crop farmers; not a one.   Didn’t Mr. Salmon learn that a balanced diet includes five servings of fruit and vegetables a day?

Quite apart from Doug Hoffer’s fair observation that Salmon’s foray into farm policy represents yet another distraction from the legitimate responsibilities of his office, which he has already claimed were so burdensome that he couldn’t quite get around to detecting that hefty bit of embezzling that went on in the Dept. of Children and Families for five years; and quite apart from his equally legitimate issue with Salmon’s apparent ignorance of Farm to Table;  the brain-trust that Mr. Salmon has engaged in this “reinvention of the wheel” does not inspire much confidence in me.  I would not  like to think that a group so heavily representative of the sectors traditionally not friendly to land-conservation and sustainability might get their meathooks even further into Vermont’s agriculture and land-use policies.

If Chittenden County is the heart of Democratic Vermont, Franklin County is it's arthritic right shoulder.  I can say that because I love the place and am one of the stalwarts who regularly apply the necessary analgesic. Be that as it may, Bernie Sanders is generally  a good draw up here, and he was the headliner in this morning's breakfast rally at the Franklin County Museum for Peter Shumlin and the entire Democratic Roster.  

Sharing the stage with Bernie and Peter were candidates Steve Howard, Jim Condos, Doug Hoffer, former candidates Doug Racine and Susan Bartlett, and Franklin County Democratic Senator Sarah Kittell. Randy Brock challenger Michael McCarthy provided coffee and treats from his "Cosmic Bakery;" and reps. Jeff Young, Kathy Keenan, Michel Consejo and Dick Howrigan were all in attendance. For that sizeable delegation of elected representatives and hopefuls, there was an audience of about sixty enthusiastic Democrats and Progressives on hand.

Last evening's smaller local rally at Dem Headquarters on Main St. did almost as well, as over fifty individuals packed the tiny space, cheek to jowl, downing hot cider after a  brisk honk-and-wave to cheer speeches by Peter Welch, Peter Shumlin and Sara Kittell. I saw some duplication in the crowds, but many people who were in the Friday night group didn’t make it to the Saturday morning event.

The message at both events was resoundingly GOTV.  This morning Bernie was at his rousing best, emphasizing all that is at stake in this election, not just for Vermont but for the whole country.  We were well-reminded of the unique role our little state can play in spear-heading a move to single-payor and truly clean energy industries with the potential to bring a vibrant middle-class back from near extinction after many long years of Republican dominance over the nation's economic outlook.

Peter followed Bernie, reiterating his commitments to single payor, early childhood education and rational penal reform.  He placed particular emphasis on his support for marriage equality and a woman’s right to make her own reproductive choices.  As he had done the evening before, he promised that no matter how many lies Brian Dubie rolls out in his attack ads, he will never stoop to that level.

Susan Bartlett and Doug Racine held the final spot on the agenda, both reiterating their unwavering support for Peter Shumlin and urging the audience to step up to the plate and GOTV. I thought Doug was in particularly good form, looking rested at last, bringing with him all of the sincere conviction that we saw in his own grassroots campaign.  After the last round of standing applause, the crowd was exhorted one last time to sign up for a spot on the duty roster for GOTV as they filed out of the auditorium with yard signs and bumper-stickers. These Franklin County Democrats want everyone to know that they are most definitely not for Dubie!

Doug Hoffer has just called our attention to a very interesting issues brief from the Public Assets Institute on Vermont’s education spending that dispels some of the misconceptions being promoted by Republican partisans in the current election cycle to justify Dubie’s ham-handed “plan” for education cuts.  Perhaps most immediately compelling is how the issues brief illustrates the lie in Dubie’s oft-repeated distortion of Vermont’s property tax relative to other states.  We are reminded that, unlike most other states, some school funding is a component of property tax in Vermont; and that upper income Vermonters still contribute  the smallest amount, as percentage of income, for public education.  While Act 68 has significantly reduced the burden on middle income residents by tying their contribution to income rather than property value,  Mr. Dubie’s favorite sector, the rich (whom he favors making even richer through tax breaks) still make-out like bandits when it comes to their relative contribution to public education.

And what about the claim that education costs in Vermont are “sky-rocketing?”  Not true, says the PAI; much of the increase in school spending in recent years, as in many business sectors, has been due to the significant increase in health care costs.  This is a fact that Peter Shumlin has been trying to drive home to the electorate in his pledge to achieve an equitable and affordable healthcare system for Vermont.  Furthermore, says PAI:

The growth in education spending has been declining since 2005. There was an anomalous bump in fiscal 2009, following passage of legislation that required voters in school districts with high spending growth to vote twice on the school budget. Districts anticipating that they might be subject to the two-vote requirement in fiscal 2010 may have moved certain purchases to fiscal 2009 to keep their 2010 growth below the threshold. In fiscal 2011 spending was actually lower than the previous year.*

Finally, the issues brief offers the long view that investments by the community in education strengthen the economy:

The benefits include higher personal income, employment, and tax collections and reduced crime and welfare dependence. Because education is labor intensive, such spending creates more jobs per dollar than many other sectors. The jobs resulting are direct (teachers and school staff) and also indirect (e.g., electricians who wire the school) and induced (workers at the market where school staff buy groceries).

These are commonsense arguments.  The Public Assets Institute has provided simple graphics reflecting the statistical evidence supporting the arguments.  Why isn’t this front page news in the Free Press?

Is anyone else sick and tired of the speeding ticket story? When the largest and therefore most influential newspaper in our moderate to left-leaning state belongs to Gannett Press, can we expect anything else?  Jim Douglas can thank his multiple terms of office largely to the oxymoronic “Free” Press.  Argue as they might that the Freeps is a “local” newspaper, the fact remains that a vast out-of-state corporate empire with a right-leaning agenda controls our front page news.

We can take polls and make projections; we can extrapolate how the “independents” will break; but on November 2, the outcome may well depend on the perpetual “undecideds,” many of whom tell persuasion callers quite frankly that they’ll make-up their minds as they enter the voting booth.  It’s not difficult to guess that those voters will abdicate their responsibility for an informed decision to the front page that they glance at as they drink their morning coffee.

You won’t get much front-page real estate dedicated to Brian Dubie’s whopper about the non-violent offenders’ list, a true character barometer if ever there was one; but you will get a week’s worth of front-page speculation on Shumlin’s paid and uncontested speeding ticket!

For all the posturing superior that print journalists do as they stand proudly at the bow of their sinking ship, with independent papers largely a thing of the past and unbiased news coverage a myth there is little to be smug about.  

It’s great to see Jim Condos getting such broad support among labor organizations in his bid for the office of Secretary of State.  No state office is more of a hub for integrating the concerns of business in Vermont with those of a vibrant labor community on whom the health of the economy depends so much.  Jim Condos’ commitment to providing an effective and efficient Secretary’s office, dedicated to transparency and accountability, is built on a solid foundation of experience over the years in service to Vermonters.  He has pledged to demand greater accountability from public officials and to strengthen campaign finance laws.  The roster of labor endorsements for the Condos campaign is impressive:

Vermont AFL-CIO

Vermont State Employees’ Association

Vermont State Building Trades Council

Northeast Kingdom Central Labor Council

UA Local 693 Plumbers and Pipefitters

Vermont Troopers’ Association

Sheet Metal Workers Local Union 63

Professional Fire Fighters of Vermont

VT-NEA

VT League of Conservation Voters

United Profession AFT Vermont

VT Teamsters Local 597

More about these endorsements appears in the  Condos press release diary in the sidebar.

Notice how carefully the Freeps front page story on the Agency of Human Services embezzlement skirts the issue of Tom Salmon’s culpability? It is raised and dismissed in barely two sentences late in the article:

The case has triggered debate in the race for state auditor, with challenger Doug Hoffer asking why incumbent Tom Salmon’s office did not catch the alleged five-year scheme.  However, Human Services Secretary Hoffman and DCF Commissioner Steve Dale had closer oversight responsibilities of the division in which Lantagne worked.

But, you well might ask, wasn’t Tom Salmon the state’s elected auditor  for much of the five year period over which the embezzlement took place?  Perhaps other heads should roll as well, but few would argue that the “buck” doesn’t stop in full on the desk of the state auditor.

I listened with interest to a recording of the October 5 VPR debate between Doug Hoffer and incumbent, Tom Salmon.  I really wanted to understand Tom Salmon’s rationale for his office having overlooked this huge discrepancy; but I got nothing.  Not only on the topic of the embezzlement, but on many other questions put to Mr. Salmon, his replies were lost in a sea of incoherent double-speak that seemed to go nowhere.  His contempt for his opponent was, to say the least, thinly-veiled; but he was factually challenged with regard to Mr. Hoffer’s credentials, and had apparently made little effort to inform himself, making Mr. Salmon come off as petty and ineffectual.  He wasn’t even aware of audit reports authored by Mr. Hoffer that are included on the state auditor’s own website! The longer Mr. Salmon spoke in response to most questions, the further he strayed from the point.  In sharp contrast to Mr. Hoffer’s concise and focussed remarks, Mr. Salmon’s were vague and often emotionally charged. In defense of his flip to the Republican party, Mr. Salmon characterized himself as an “original thinker.”

Toward the conclusion of the debate, Mr. Salmon proposed that the office of Auditor might better be filled by appointment; and perhaps for a term of ten years!  To some this might suggest that Mr. Salmon has found the demand for timely accountability to the electorate something of a burden.  It would certainly have been handy not to come up for reelection in the immediate aftermath of what represents one of the most glaring thefts from a state agency that Vermont has ever seen; and to have a term of office sufficiently long to effectively “bury” any embarrassing failures.  When asked if appointment wouldn’t compromise the integrity of the office,  he quickly volunteered that, rather than the governor making the appointment, he envisioned  a “government accountability committee” performing that function.  How this additional layer of bureaucracy would be created he left to the listeners’ imaginations.   When the moderator turned to Doug Hoffer to ask if he agreed with each of Mr. Salmon’s radical suggestions, his reply was an emphatic and repeated “No!”

One is left with the impression that Mr. Hoffer is the man with boots-on-the-ground knowledge and skill, while Mr. Salmon comes off a poor second, having, at best, faintly quixotic pretensions, and at worst, a nasty inclination to duck responsibility.  

I’m front-paging this for the next day or two because it is likely to be over-looked otherwise, and this is a long-standing controversy that is finally going to get a public hearing by ANR.

Those who have been following the Cabot waste-spreading story will be interested to know that there will be an opportunity on October 12 from 6:00 to 8:00 PM to put questions about the operation directly to representatives of the Agency of Natural Resources.  

The grassroots group Whey To Go, which has repeatedly expressed concern about the operation and Agrimark/Cabot’s failure to build a wastewater treatment facility, are asking the public to attend the hearing at the Old Schoolhouse Common at 122 School St. in Marshfield.  Because the spraying permit held by Cabot Creamery (operated by Agrimark) is up for renewal, ANR has set-up this public hearing to “answer questions and take testimony from concerned citizens.”

Waste Water Doesn’t Belong on Farm Fields

Whey to Go offers the following summary of their issues and concerns regarding the operation:

– Cabot Creamery currently sprays 150,000 gallons of industrial waste water daily on Vermont farm fields and manure piles from Randolph to Craftsbury and Irasburg. Another 35,000 gallons/day of waste are pumped into holding pits on site.

– Whey is removed from the wastewater, processed, and sold to other food and supplement producers.

– The waste water includes a range of industrial cleaners and sanitizers that cause:

o Nausea, vomiting, and severe inflammation of the stomach and

intestinal tract

o Damage to the nose, throat, and respiratory tract

o Potentially, cancer

Cabot Creamery’s Withdrawal is Untested

– Cabot Creamery pulls 100,000 gallons/day of groundwater at their Cabot, VT plant. However, Cabot Creamery has never tested the capacity of the aquifer, and so could be threatening the groundwater source.

A History of Violations

– Cabot Creamery amassed 13 environmental violations in as many years between 1996 and 2009.

– In 1983 and again in 2005, Cabot Creamery spilled ammonia into the Winooski River damaging the river for miles. The 2005 spill killed an estimated 15,000 fish along 5.5 miles. Regulators discovered after the second spill that Cabot had not fulfilled its 1983 commitment to develop hazardous materials policies.

Cabot Should Live Up to Vermont’s Green Name

– According to the USDA, Cabot Creamery’s corporate owner, AgriMark, makes $575 million in sales annually. AgriMark should ensure Cabot Creamery lives up to Vermont’s green name and build a wastewater treatment system.

– AgriMark should provide for independent testing 1) to discover the capacity of the aquifer from which they draw, and restrict its water use at the Cabot plant to that level, and 2) to ensure neighbors’ wells aren’t contaminated with the chemicals and other pollutants stored at the Cabot plant.

Whey to Go may be reached through Jill Alexander:  4reiki@fairpoint.net