14 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(01/28/16 3:43am)
Middlebury’s Charter House Coalition currently helps house and feed over 500 people per year through a number of ever-expanding programs. The non-profit has come a long way since the organization started hosting monthly community dinners back in 2004. “If someone had told any of us back in 2004 what we were getting into, we probably would have run the other way,” jokes Doug Sinclair, executive director of the non-profit.
Sinclair is one of the community members who has seen Charter House grow organically, from a time when it hosted quiet dinners where volunteers matched the number of guests, to the far-reaching shelter and meal-provider it is today.
At the beginning Sinclair was simply one of many members willing to pitch in some extra time to help those who were food insecure.“We’ve just responded to community needs as they’ve arisen and as more people have wanted to get involved,” Sinclair said. Word spread rapidly about community dinners and within the year, they were a weekly event. In 2005, the organization rented its first apartment to help a family who needed shelter, commencing the Charter House’s housing program. By 2007, the entire apartment building was under Charter House ownership.
The economic downturn in 2008 created a crisis in supplying enough emergency beds and meals. The back portion of the Charter House building was opened because it was empty at the time, but now welcomes around 20 guests per night during the winter months and dozens more for community lunches and breakfasts.
As the organization grew, management demands increased along with it. Prior to his relocation to Vermont 12 years ago, Sinclair worked as a chemistry and physics research manager developing electronic and photonic devices.
“Managing a volunteer organization is very different than managing most kinds of commercial operations, but managing research has a lot in common with managing volunteers because you’re managing a lot of people each bringing their own talents and ideas,” Sinclair said of his experience. Indeed, the volunteer basis of Charter House makes it unique. “We have not discovered any other organization that has this many volunteers,” said Sinclair. Over 950 volunteers participate annually in Charter House programs, 30 percent of which are college students. The number of hours volunteers collectively contribute totals to the amount of 12 full-time paid staff, saving the organization hundreds of thousands of dollars each year.
Apart from the college and its students, numerous church groups and other service organizations have been integral to the continued operation of the Charter House. Many volunteers choose to come in for a couple hours a week, but Sinclair’s weekly commitment ranges from 15-20 hours in the slower summer months, and far beyond 40 if the College is out of session but the winter shelter is open.
“To some extent my job is to plug the holes,” Sinclair said. “The management team has to jump in any time something comes up that isn’t covered elsewhere.” Thus, there is no one thing Sinclair does on a day to day basis. His responsibilities range from budget concerns to large-scale rethinking of the organization’s programs, to everyday staffing of the shelter. Sinclair is the first to admit that the financial tasks and other details are not his favorite part of his role.
“The management kind of things you do because they need to get done,” he said, “The part I enjoy most is working with volunteers and working with the folks we’re serving. There’s so much energy in people who come work here. It makes it a lot of fun for me.” Sinclair particularly likes the engagement from student volunteers who help out frequently in all of the Charter House’s programs, including the warming shelter, fund-raising, community meals and farm-to-table gardens. Student initiatives have also been formative in the organization’s development. Sunday Grill Night, conceived of and executed by the Men’s Rugby Team this past fall, has been a huge success and helped accomplish the Charter House’s goals of providing at least one meal for community members every day of the week. Sinclair’s interest in working with students also manifested itself in his other occupation as a chemistry and physics teacher at state colleges, a position he retired from just last May. He enjoys being around those who are still figuring out what their life will entail, a situation he himself experienced upon his move to Vermont.
When he moved here with his wife, the change in location was the only detail of which he was certain. Sinclair was drawn to Middlebury because his son attended college here, graduating in the early 90's.
"The first thing was to move to Vermont, the second was: what am I going to do?" Sinclair recalls. “I decided to take a year to explore different possible things to do.” His volunteer work developed in the background as he continued teaching until it became what he calls his “full-time hobby.” He reflects that his own involvement with the Charter House has developed parallel to the growth of the organization itself.
“The reason we’re still involved is because we found out how much value it brings to the folks we’re serving but also brings a lot of value to each of us and so many volunteers continue to say, ‘gee, I get more out of it than I put into it.’” Though Sinclair admits that recent discussion has turned towards a transition of power, he insists he will continue to be a regular volunteer as long as possible. In all likelihood, Sinclair’s successor will be multiple people, as the responsibilities he fulfills are fairly demanding for a single volunteer position. But this is merely a positive sign that the Charter House hopes to continue to grow into an even greater community force than it is today.
(01/27/16 9:50pm)
Since returning for J-term you might have noticed that your dining hall coffee is better than usual. But you may not know just how much better it is. Dining Service’s recent switch to Vermont Coffee Company represents more than an improvement in taste. Your new morning brew also happens to be fair trade, certified organic and locally sourced from Middlebury. Doesn’t it taste better already?
Amidst this change, we encourage the Middlebury community to recognize the purchasing power we have as a residential college that feeds thousands of people multiple meals a day. It’s easy to forget the flaws inherent in our modern food system when we only see the food that magically appears in our buffets every day.
Vermont Coffee Company prides itself on being fair trade and certified organic, rare claims in an industry notorious for its exploitation of labor. Most coffee laborers work on plantations under slave-like conditions, earning less than a living wage and living on-site in dismal conditions. In order to compensate for the low wages, workers often illegally enlist their children, violating child-labor laws and thus excluding them from other labor protections.
While the plantation owners may seem like the villains in this situation, they generally resort to such measures because purchasers favor the growers with the lowest prices. Fair trade certification works to combat this phenomenon by recognizing growers and purchasers who endorse working conditions such as living wages, as well as the rights to organize, have a grievance process and equal opportunity for employment.
Companies like Vermont Coffee Company operate under the belief that customers would be willing to pay more for ethically-produced goods. “With fair trade, we are part of a new model where commerce is also an exchange of values,” states the company’s website under the outline of its Organic, Fair Trade Policy.
The organic certification helps mitigate environmental impacts and improves worker conditions by saving both the soil and workers from regular exposure to harmful chemicals involved in most industrial agriculture. In order to be certified organic, growers have to comply with regulations limiting the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. Vermont Coffee Company possesses certification from both Vermont Certified Organic and USDA Organic.
These environmental factors and labor ethics are two of the most pressing issues of the food system – especially the coffee industry – that we influence with our food choices. Furthermore, our dining halls’ investment in Vermont Coffee Company keeps dollars in the local economy. Based on these criteria, switching to Vermont Coffee Company has pushed the dining halls’ percentage of dollars spent on ‘real food’ over 30 percent, surpassing the agreement signed by former president Ron Liebowitz in 2014 to reach this number by 2016.
Real food, as defined by the national organization The Real Food Challenge, is any food product that falls under the categories of local, humane, fair trade and ecologically sound. The real food movement on campus, started by EatReal, has been embraced by dining services and the administration in order to support a more sustainable food system. Current interns are researching pathways to achieving 50 percent real food by 2020 through product switches and greater institutional change.
While we are excited by Dining Service’s commitment to supporting real food and the values real food represents, we also hope that individuals in the Middlebury community similarly take up this responsibility in their personal choices. Even with something as seemingly simple as your daily cup(s) of coffee, you can endorse positive change in the world far beyond Middlebury.
For more information, please visit go/eatreal.
(04/08/15 10:09pm)
In Feb. 2015, the Board of Trustees announced the construction of two new residential buildings to be erected in Ridgeline and Adirondack View. Plans for the project, which at the moment still await approval from the administration, include residences targeted specifically toward upperclassmen. The new residences will differ in structure from current on-campus housing options for juniors and seniors, particularly those of the social houses that occupy Ridgeline. While an integral component of residential and social life on campus, many students know little about the history of the Ridgeline mansions.
The four large houses of Ridgeline were completed in 1998, though planning had begun years beforehand. The college struggled to obtain permits from the town allowing them to construct in the previously untouched forest. The initial application included plans for eight new houses and one multi-purpose social barn, and was denied. Though the project was eventually given the go-ahead by the town after some adjustments, controversy ensued when the college began clearing brush for construction without receiving Act 250 approval, which examines community and environmental impacts of construction projects.
In 1990, the College banned single-sex organizations because of their exclusive nature and some issues with misogyny within these organizations. This resulted in the break-up of many pre-existing fraternities and sororities. The ban, coupled with the college’s desire to expand its student population by 20 percent, led administrators to turn their eye to the Ridgeline space. With the exception of Brooker House, the homes were built with the intention of housing the fraternities that remained after the single-sex organization ban.
Like the College’s goals for new proposed residence construction, the administration in the 1990s also hoped to lure students away from town neighborhoods.
“We thought we’d build nice new houses up in Ridgeline, where they’ll draw students to the center of the campus,” said Dean of Ross Commons Ann Hanson, who was Dean of Students at the time of the houses’ construction. “That way they can continue to offer social life but not bother the neighbors.”
In the ’90s, students had limited say in the architecture of the homes, designed by alumnus Steve Nelson ’79 and his partner Jeremiah Eck, though they could offer opinions on interior matters such as furniture. Nonetheless, the student population greeted the houses warmly upon their opening.
“Students would say it was ironic that they would probably live in the nicest place they would ever live in their whole life while they were undergraduates,” said Hanson.
A Campus article from the time reports the SGA President touting the benefits of having the social houses clustered together, making party hopping easier and safer for students. In contrast, some townspeople worried about the impact of having a “fraternity row.”
Consideration of neighboring Middlebury residents has played a large role in the college’s decision to pursue additional on-campus housing. However, other goals have provided motivation as well, namely the housing crunch of recent years and determination to get rid of the mods.
The modular homes were brought to campus in the late ’90s during a housing crisis, at which time the college did not have enough rooms for students even if all of the lounges were filled. Only meant to last ten years, the homes have today become a part of campus culture.
The College hopes the new housing will continue to offer something akin to the experience of living in the mods or off-campus. Current plans are tentative, but include three connected buildings of three townhouse-style apartments, which each house about eight students. A second, large suite-style building would include units holding three to four beds with common rooms and shared bathrooms as well as large building-wide common areas, kitchens, and dining spaces. This building is meant to offer a less isolating suite experience, in contrast to the Atwater or LaForce suites, in which residents seldom run into those who do not share their immediate living space. In this way, the College hopes to create more diverse living options, to accommodate a wide array of preferences.
“Other than the mods, we’re adding to what we already have, we’re not taking away,” Associate Dean of Students for Residential and Student Life Doug Adams said.
Buildings similar to the townhouses were recently installed at Trinity College and scouted by Facilities Services project managers and other Middlebury College staff and administrators.
“The buildings we saw at Trinity are high quality, well built with nice materials,” Tom McGinn, the College’s project manager for the new residences, said. “I think they will be a good addition to the student housing mix here at Middlebury.”
“I think it’s really cool what they’re doing. Of course, I won’t be here to experience it,” Andrew DeFalco ’15.5, president of Chromatic house said.
The houses are ideally expected to be finished in time for the Fall 2016 housing draw, although those involved with the project insist this deadline is very tentative and optimistic.
Many feel that the addition of new upperclassmen housing is likely to alter social dynamics on campus.
“Atwater was the last [residential housing] addition, it really changed the way students interacted with each other,” Adams said. “It changed the flow of social life on campus.”
Tim Baeder ’16.5, vice president of Chromatic house, expressed similar sentiments: “There are going to be 24 new upperclassmen apartments with eight to 10 students living in them, there are probably going to be a lot more parties on this part of campus. This isn’t bad, it’s just different.”
Baeder also wondered how the new housing options would affect the social houses’ ability to fill beds, a mandatory stipulation of their continued existence.
“It’ll be interesting to see how the administration works to incentivize living in the social houses with all these other options.”
As the college works toward finalizing its plans, the administration hopes for as much student input as possible.
“Our hope is to have a lot of conversations with students in terms of what [the new housing] will be about, how we should be using it, and how it should add to the community,” Adams said.
Working plans will be posted on the College’s website and otherwise made public as the project progresses.
(03/11/15 11:46pm)
Researchers at the University of Vermont released a study investigating the use of antipsychotic medications on children in the March edition of Pediatrics. While the results concluded that the inappropriate use of the drugs is not a concern, about 50 percent of prescribers failed to meet best practice standards.
Amidst increasing nationwide use of such drugs by minors, lead author Dr. David Rettew and his team wished to gain understanding of what was causing the upward trend and if there is any reason for alarm. Rettew is the director of the Pediatric Psychiatry Clinic at the University of Vermont Medical Center and the Vermont Center for Children, Youth, and Families.
“Part of our concern is that these medicines may be getting pulled out too early in the treatment planning for things like oppositional behavior, ahead of things like behavioral therapy that could be tried first,” Rettew said in an official press release.
To collect information, the researchers examined Medicaid claims for July to October of 2012, extracting the names of Vermont physicians who had prescribed antipsychotic medications to children and sending them mandatory surveys.
In total, 147 doctors responded, accounting for prescriptions to 647 patients. Ultimately, the team decided that the drugs were issued under the proper circumstances in 92 percent of cases.
“It was pretty clear from our data that antipsychotic medicines were only being used once other things didn’t work, or other types of treatments or other types of medications failed,” Rettew said. “And I think that’s really good news because it reflects the idea that doctors are not prescribing these medicines casually or in a knee-jerk way.”
While Rettew seemed comforted by the lack of overuse, he insisted, “I don’t think we in the medical community can be too excited about a best practice rate of 50 percent … and we should be working on ways to improve that number.”
The standards for best practice guidelines were taken from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The recommendations include not only prescribing medications as a last resort but also stipulations such as appropriate testing before prescription as well as follow-up, not issuing such medications to children under 5 or using multiple antipsychotic drugs at one time. The greatest violations to best practice were due to a lack of adequate blood testing, both before and after commencement of drug use.
“The number one reason why a prescription did not follow best practice guidelines was not because it was being used inappropriately, it was because the doctors were not getting the recommended lab work that’s supposed to go along with these prescriptions,” Rettew said.
Such testing is important for keeping track of cholesterol and blood-glucose levels, elevations of which are common side effects when using these types of drugs. A leading reason for insufficient blood testing was reportedly children’s aversion to having the lab work done and undergoing the process of blood sampling. However, the researchers also feel that many physicians simply are not aware of the guidelines.
The report includes recommendations for doctors in order to mitigate poor performance on best practices. Namely, the authors tout the incorporation of electronic medical records that use software capable of alerting doctors when tests should be done. Additionally, the team is pushing for the better training of doctors that may work with children taking these drugs, even if the doctors are not the ones to prescribe them. The team is also looking for better access to therapy for children in Vermont and improved information sharing between centers to ensure consideration of patient history.
Interestingly, the rates of pediatric patients on antipsychotic medications in Vermont has fallen in recent years, by 45 percent for children ages 6 to 12 and 27 percent for ages 13-17. This contrasts with national statistics in previous years from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which report that usage increased by 62 percent for children on Medicaid between 2002 and 2007.
The aim of Rettew and his nine coauthors was not to undermine the validity of such drugs. “I’m not anti-antipsychotics; I just want to make sure they’re used very carefully,” Rettew said. “These findings could help us design a game plan for measures to improve best-practice prescribing.” He admited that while “there are risks associated with using these medicines … I think they’ve saved lives.”
(02/18/15 9:58pm)
Last week, Vermont Gas announced that due to a nearly 80 percent price increase in the past six months, the company has terminated Phase II of their two-part pipeline extension plan, which means the plant will no longer extend from Middlebury to the International Paper plant in Ticonderoga, N.Y.
Skepticism began to rise over the summer when Vermont Gas released that the projected cost required for Phase I would surpass the predicted $86 million, and likely reach $154 million. As a result, the Public Service Board asked for a remand from the State Supreme Court in order to investigate the price jump. Although this request materialized in a 30-day examination of cost-related developments, the project was allowed to continue without much scrutiny.
When an updated cost estimate for Phase II was released, which predicted a required $105 million instead of the former $74.4 million, plans to complete Phase II, the International Paper plant, which had previously agreed to cover a portion of the cost, no longer found the project commercially worthwhile and withdrew from the deal.
In an interview with the Addison Independent last month, Chris Recchia, the Commissioner of the Department of Public Service (DPS), shared that the more recent budget increase would be examined more carefully than the one in July. Although the DPS initially supported the pipeline project, the department has grown wary of the exploding costs due to its loyalty to ratepayers and landowners along the pipeline route who bear some of the burden of greater construction costs.
Louise Porter, member of the DPS counsel, wrote in a statement that, “the department strongly urges the board to investigate whether the Phase I project remains in the public good in light of the revised cost estimate.”
Porter further notes that a “cost increase of this magnitude” is reason to revisit Vermont Gas’ Certificate of Public Good, a requirement for utilities infrastructure and services, and urges the board to look into “all relevant changes to the project to date,” not just financial ones.
In line with the department’s request, the Vermont Supreme Court has granted regulators unlimited time and scope concerning the second investigation, unlike the previously limited examination of cost-related developments. Although Vermont Gas rejects the need for increased breadth, the South Burlington-based company has stated it accepts the push for a second project inspection.
Despite the pipeline’s recent setback, the company continues to assert that the pipeline will provide cheaper, more environmentally friendly energy to customers.
Don Rendall, president and CEO of Vermont Gas, insisted in his interview with VT Digger, “this is still a good deal for the customers in Addison County and will be a good deal for the state of Vermont.”
Governor Peter Shumlin told the Burlington Free Press that he is supportive of both the pipeline extension plan and the Public Service Board’s new position as overseer.
Governor Shumlin states, “I am gratified Vermont Gas will be putting a renewed focus on offering strong public benefits and a choice for Vermonters of natural gas service through its ongoing expansion to Middlebury and continued exploration of how to drive farther south to Rutland. I know that the Public Service Board and Department will provide vigorous oversight. The state’s interest and mine has always been in getting the choice of affordable natural gas to more Vermont residents and businesses, to help expand economic opportunity.”
Unfortunately for Vermont Gas, few are as encouraging as the governor. The termination of Phase II has reinvigorated protests against the pipeline.
The opposition coalition, comprised of groups such as Just Power, Rising Tide Vermont and 350Vermont, stated to the Burlington Free Press that the Vermont Public Service Board should “revoke the Certificate of Public Good for Phase I in light of the near doubling of Phase I costs, the stark climate impacts of fracked gas, and impacts on landowners in the path of the pipeline.”
Similarly, Greg Marchildon, the Vermont State Director of AARP, commented, “the public deserves to know what the additional costs are, how they are being justified, and if the project is still viable given that the projected cost has now gone from $86 million to $154 million in just a matter of months.”
Paul Burns, Executive Director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, who also opposes the pipeline, admits that it would be “astounding” if either Vermont Gas or the PSB terminated Phase I. Burns insists however, “I think it’s a very real possibility.”
Despite the uncertain fate of Phase I, Vermont Gas plans to continue construction after winter under its currently valid Certificate of Public Good.
(01/15/15 1:58am)
On Tuesday, January 6, the Vermont Coalition to Regulate Marijuana held a news conference, a day before the state legislative session was set to begin. Advocates for marijuana legalization believe that 2015 could be a year of unprecedented progress.
The leader of the coalition, the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), announced the coalition’s formation in July 2014. Proponents of criminal justice reform, civil rights protection, medical professionals, and political groups join the MPP in its campaign for marijuana legalization reform. The organization defines its mission as “changing federal law to allow states to determine their own marijuana policies without federal interference, as well as to regulate marijuana like alcohol in all 50 states, D.C., and the five territories.”
Vermont has been taking steps towards greater marijuana legalization since 2004, when it permitted the use of the drug for medicinal purposes. In 2013, the state decriminalized the possession of small amounts of the drug. In 2014, a bill was introduced outlining the legalization and regulation of recreational marijuana, but it did not pass.
Instead, a bill approving a study of the costs and benefits of legalization was passed. The RAND corporation, which conducted the study, is expected to reveal the results of its investigation within the next week. However, new legislation is in the works. State Senator David Zuckerman of Chittenden intends to introduce a legalization bill within the first few weeks of the legislative session.
Supporters of legalization cite the failure of prohibition as a policy as a reason for reform. “No matter how you slice it, marijuana prohibition has not been an effective policy for the state of Vermont,” said Matt Simon, the Political Director of the MPP for New England.
Simon instead touts the economic benefits of legalization, stating, “Creating a legal market for marijuana would result in businesses’ being able to make money, hire people, create jobs, increase economic activity in Vermont, and we see it being a win for Vermont businesses.”
The MPP has demonstrated its investment in Vermont by hiring a field director for operations in the state, paying a grassroots outreach director, and contributing thousands of dollars to local and statewide political candidates over the past few years.
Dr. Joseph McSherry, a neurophysiologist at the University of Vermont Medical Center, emphasized the social benefits of legalization. He posited that regulation would make it more difficult for underage people to access the drug. Additionally, he believes the health effects of marijuana are less harmful than those of alcohol.
The opposition effort is spearheaded by the Vermont branch of Smart Approaches to Marijuana. Debbie Haskins, the Executive Director, disagrees that legalization would decrease marijuana availability to teenagers. She warns against the negative impacts of marijuana – including drops in IQ, changes in attention span and memory, and higher incidence of anxiety, depression, and other mental disorders.
Haskins does not think economic incentives should outweigh these social risks, saying, “We hope that Vermonters care enough to have this discussion based on science rather than emotion or for money.” Similarly, others worry about the impact of such drug legalization at a time when opiate addiction is a major concern in Vermont.
The public has demonstrated significant, though not overwhelming, support for the legalization of Marijuana. The MPP conducted a poll in May 2014 that reported that 57 percent of Vermonters support regulating marijuana like alcohol. A poll of voters conducted by WCAX last October found that 49 percent of voters supported legalization, while 43 percent opposed it and 8 percent were uncertain.
Vermont politicians have expressed similar ambivalence towards the issue. While Governor Peter Shumlin has stated that he is open to the idea of marijuana legalization, he wants to wait to see how the policy change plays out in Colorado and Washington State.
“I don’t think it’s going to be something of a major priority this year,” says Vermont State Senate Minority Leader Joe Benning. Benning himself supports legalization with the benefits of taxation and regulation, however, not of all of his colleagues are on the same page. “I think people are still waiting to see how it works with the decriminalization, and also with Washington and Colorado, trying to figure out what they’ve done.”
In 2014, Colorado garnered $60 million in revenue from taxes, licenses, and fees relating to medicinal and recreational marijuana. However, the state has had difficulties with diversion, road safety, and a lingering black market.
As the state contends with a $100 million budget deficit, marijuana legalization may take a backseat to other issues in Vermont’s political spotlight.
(11/19/14 9:38pm)
On Oct. 30, a letter was delivered to the Vermont Governor’s administration and to political candidates advocating for the return of Vermont prisoners that are being held in out-of-state, private, for-profit prisons. Nearly thirty Vermont organizations, groups and businesses signed the document. The effort to bring prisoners back has been spearheaded by the grant-funded group,
Vermonters for Criminal Justice Reform, established in 2013.
On its website, the group states, “At VCJR we believe the state will save money and create more productive communities by limiting incarceration to what works, based on evidence, and redirecting spending to job training, treatment, and education.”
Currently, approximately 500 of the state’s 2,000 prisoners are sent to institutions in Kentucky and Arizona. The practice started in 1998 due to overcrowding at Vermont facilities. These private prisons are owned by the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). Activists reject the CCA’s business model, which they state in their letter, “is driven by a perverse incentive: the more people incarcerated…the more money for shareholders.”
The CCA has responded by asserting that the company has provided its inmates from Vermont with an array of educational, mental health and faith-based programs over the years they have held prisoners from Vermont.
The contract with the CCA is up for renewal next year. Suzi Wizowaty, a state legislator from Burlington and the leader of VCJR has stated, “We’re trying to use this opportunity of expiring of the contract with CCA to bring people’s attention to the fact that we use CCA, and it’s an ineffective response.”
The cost of housing prisoners in Kentucky and Arizona is seemingly cheaper than keeping them in Vermont, $67.43 and $74.30 a day, respectively, compared to $159 a day. However, other costs offset this disparity, including the funds necessary to send employees to visit these out-of-state prisoners, such as caseworkers who meet with inmates.
The real cost of holding inmates out of state, activists say, falls on families. Many do not have the financial means to visit their relatives in out-of-state prisons. Video communication options, such as Skype or FaceTime, are not available, and phone calls can be expensive as well. This disconnect also has adverse effects on the prisoners. Many have written letters from prison describing the isolation of their sentence, which research has shown negatively impacts a prisoner’s reintegration into society.
Another point of contention surrounding use of out-of-state prisons is that only males are sent to such facilities. This practice was declared unconstitutional in a court decision over the summer written by Judge Helen Toor, a Vermont Superior Court Judge. She claimed that males were being denied equal protection and that there is no constitutional justification for treating male and female inmates differently. Michael Carpenter, a Vermont inmate being held in a Kentucky prison, challenged the law and brought the case forward.
The decision included particular emphasis on how the system separates inmates from their children and cites national data that shows prisoners who visit with their children are more likely to get a full-time job upon release and are less likely to be repeat offenders. The Department of Corrections defended itself by insisting that there is no constitutionally protected right to visitation.
As it is unlikely that a fiscally struggling state government could find the estimate $100 million needed to build a new prison to expand its capacity, the proposed solution is to reduce the number of incarcerated people. The letter cites success in reducing prison populations in New York, New Jersey and California as affirmation that such a goal is feasible. The state Corrections
Commissioner Andy Pollito has expressed hesitancy toward change by telling the Associated Press that the state has managed to stem sharp growth of its prison population. Though the Vermont prisoner population is decreasing steadily by about 13 inmates per year, the activists wish for more aggressive change.
Some suggestions to help realize this goal include treatment for mental health issues and addiction instead of incarceration, particularly for those who have committed non-violent drug-related crimes, as well as helping inmates find housing after their sentence so they are not waiting in prison. Karen Richards, executive director of the Vermont Human Rights Commission, stated that funds should be repurposed “to provide the treatment and services necessary to help former offenders be successful and productive members of their communities.”
The groups have called for a meeting at the Statehouse on November 19th in the House Judiciary committee. However, a tepid state response to the movement – called Locked Up & Shipped Away – makes its success uncertain.
(10/22/14 11:24pm)
Teachers in South Burlington went on strike last Tues., Oct. 14, canceling classes and other activities in the district for most of the following week. After five days of striking, a tentative agreement was reached on Saturday concerning health care coverage and salaries for teachers. Classes resumed on Monday though both sides need to vote on the agreement before it can be implemented. More specific details of the compromise have yet to be released.
The teacher’s union decided in a meeting the week before picketing began to set a strike deadline on negotiations with the board. The decision followed months of unproductive discussion about teachers’ pay and health benefits. The cause of tension was the teachers’ desire to keep their existing health care plan. While the school board had conceded to retain the plan, they were proposing changes in salaries and premiums to offset costs.
The board members stated that rising health care costs would make it difficult to continue with the same health insurance policy while maintaining reasonable property tax rates, which have risen by 13 prercent in South Burlington over the past two years. South Burlington teachers are, on average, the highest paid statewide, according to a fact-finder report that was produced in August.
Both parties spoke out against how the other side handled the situation. The union accused the school board of stalling negotiations by showing up to a scheduled meeting unprepared the week before the strike. Teachers were additionally irritated by a meeting held for school staff about health insurance plans that they claim was an attempt to negotiate directly with teachers, outside of the negotiation process outlined by state law.
The school board, for its part, felt it had made significant concessions. Elizabeth Fitzgerald, the board’s chairwoman, said about the proposed health care plan, “This is not the exchange, it’s not single-payer, it’s not speculative, and it’s far more generous than many of the plans the taxpayers in our community enjoy.” They were furthermore disgruntled by the extremity to which teachers went to further their cause, saying, “They were willing to put the education and activities of the students at risk despite the fact that the board has demonstrated significant compromise.”
Discussions could not commence until Thursday, when the entire board would be available to meet. Talk between both sides occurred in the Franklin Tuttle Middle School library and continued until 1:30 a.m. Friday morning, at which point the board members postponed negotiations. Though the teachers were resistant to disbanding without reaching consensus, the school board said in a statement, “At this point there is little if any progress that can be made in resolving this dispute this morning.” Negotiations reconvened at 3:00 p.m. on Friday.
Extracurricular activities, including sports, were reinstated on Friday as well, as other staff and administrators could run them without the teachers. “I am reinstating student activities at this time because academic days of instruction will be made up, yet the events within the co-curricular schedule will not,” Superintendent David Young said.
A mediator, John McNeil, was brought in to work with both sides toward an agreement. He commended both the board and the union for their efforts, stating on Saturday, “This was no longer about what you really wanted, this was about what you could accept. Even though you might have to - from your perspective - hold your nose and accept it. Both parties compromised from where I’m sure they would have preferred to be, but in the end I think they found an agreement that works to the advantage of the public here in South Burlington and the community at large, and especially the kids that are attending school here.”
Though classes recommenced on Monday, the incident has brought attention to policy regarding teacher walkouts. Governor Shumlin expressed disapproval of the teacher strike. “When you see what’s going on in a community like South Burlington, the people that get hurt are the kids, the moms and the dads who suddenly have no place for their kids to go during the day,” he said.
Shumlin hopes to outlaw teacher strikes in favor of mandatory binding arbitration, which is the policy for a number of other state employees. The change would make it illegal for districts to impose contracts and for teachers to strike as a means to gain concessions. Walkouts are illegal in 36 states and Vermont is the only state in New England where it is still allowable.
Steve Dale, the head of the Vermont School Board’s Association, explained that the boards are opposed to the change because they feel the nature of the process would decrease the likelihood of innovation in times of economic constraint and that involving an external arbiter is not a good method to resolve issues.
Despite support from the NEA for the change, the organization did not feel such discussion was appropriate at the time of the strike. “We really don’t appreciate the Governor’s taking the time to have this policy discussion while, you know, several hundred of our members are walking the picket line,” said David Allen, spokesman of the Vermont NEA. Now that the strike has come to a close, changes in policy might gain momentum.
(09/17/14 3:42pm)
Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin recently announced his bid for a third term in office. As the Democratic nominee, Shumlin will be running against Republican Scott Milne and Libertarian Dan Feliciano.
Shumlin’s platform emphasizes economic matters, including job creation, income inequality, healthcare reform, renewable energy sources and resolving Vermont’s opiate problems.
Shumlin insists he has focused on increasing job opportunities “like a laser.” During his time in office, approximately 9,200 jobs have been added to the market. Vermont’s unemployment rate is one of the lowest in the country.
However, Eric Davis, the retired Middlebury College Professor Emeritus of Political Science, says Vermont’s labor statistics are not as clear-cut as they seem. The low unemployment rate fails to reflect the lack of income growth in the middle class or the insufficient income tax revenues that have been plaguing the state.
Davis said that households in the middle class “have seen their incomes be stagnant for the last four years while health care costs are going up, property taxes are going up, and other aspects of the cost of living are outrunning their income gains.”
Shumlin, however, is aware of these challenges.
“The wealthiest are seeing their incomes expand, middle class Vermonters are continuing to get kicked in the teeth and lower income Vermonters are losing ground,” Shumlin said. “So we’ve got a lot more work to do.”
Shumlin has recently implemented a plan to raise the minimum wage in order to combat Vermont’s income inequality problem. In 2014 he signed a bill into law that will increase the state minimum wage, which is currently $8.73 per hour, each January over the next four years until it reaches $10.50 an hour by 2018. Shumlin advocated the gradual increase to mitigate the impact of the bill on business owners.
“Our challenge is to make sure that this state is affordable,” Shumlin said, “that we balance budgets, that we don’t raise taxes, income sales ... which I haven’t done in four years as governor, because we need to keep the state competitive.”
Despite these goals, Shumlin has been accused of ignoring in-state economic problems. Milne criticized the governor for focusing too much on national issues when he should have been addressing issues such as rising property taxes. Vermont has struggled with school properties, and Shumlin acknowledges that rising taxes combined with shrinking school enrollment are unsustainable.
He has stated that his administration will be working to find solutions for schools that are too small to be economically viable. However, Shumlin ultimately feels that such measures must take place on the local level.
“Changes need to come from the ground up and not the top down,” he said.
One of Shumlin’s most significant projects is his push for Vermont to be the first state in the country to implement a single-payer health care system. He has taken strong stances on health care, stating that “[healthcare] is holding us back as a nation.” He further says that adopting a single payer system will help the Vermont economy as out-of-state businesses will want to move their operations here.
“We think we can come up with a much better system moving from premiums to one where you pay for health insurance based on your ability to pay,” he said.
Shumlin has received criticism for the state’s handling of Vermont Health Connect, the state’s version of the federal Affordable Care Act. Technological difficulties made signing up for the program a challenge for many users and have yet to be completely resolved.
“The most frustrating job [I’ve] had to undertake is dealing with the health care situation,” Shumlin said, “There is no silver bullet.”
Vermont Health Connect was created to keep Vermonters’ health benefits higher than the federal exchange benefits. If Vermont joined the federal exchange, Shumlin has said he believes that health care costs in Vermont would rise.
By January, Shumlin aims to create a plan for implementation of the single payer system for the Vermont legislature to discuss, which will include a two billion dollar tax package to finance it. However, as a result of the Affordable Care Act, states cannot go to single payer health care until 2017.
Another key point in Shumlin’s platform is his strong support for renewable energy options.
“Climate change is the biggest challenge that we are facing,” Shumlin said.
He has expanded solar energy usage in Vermont during his time in office, and boasts that Vermont has more solar jobs per capita than any state in the country.
Shumlin is also an advocate of energy efficiency and affirms that his administration is serious about Vermont’s goal of being powered by 90 percent renewable energy by 2050. Shumlin was decidedly in favor of closing the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.
Under Shumlin’s leadership, Vermont became the first state to ban hydraulic fracturing in 2012. Shumlin called the science surrounding the safety of fracking “uncertain at best,” citing potential water pollution caused by fracking.
Despite Shumlin’s strong stance on fracking, he is in favor of the Vermont Natural Gas Pipeline, which will transport fracked natural gas from Canada. In a recent interview on Vermont Public Radio, Shumlin commented that the pipeline would take people that are currently burning dirty oil and move them to a cleaner fossil fuel. He sees natural gas as a “transition fuel on the way to renewables.”
Shumlin is also dedicated to reducing Vermont’s opiate problem. During his 2014 State of the State Address, he spent his entire 34 minutes speaking about the heroin addiction problems plaguing the state. Each week, the value of the quantity of heroin and other opiates entering Vermont totals over two million dollars. Additionally, almost 80 percent of prisoners in Vermont jails are in jail due to drug charges.
Keeping these Vermonters in jail is costly, adding up to approximately $1,120 per week per person. To ease these costs, Vemont decriminalized marijuana in July of 2013, becoming the 17th state to decriminalize marijuana, making possession of less than an ounce punishable by a small fine rather than arrest and jail time.
Shumlin remarked that this was just “common sense,” adding that Vermont’s limited resources “should be focused on reducing abuse and addiction of opiates like heroin and meth rather than cracking down on people for having very small amounts of marijuana.”
To deal with the heroin problem, Shumlin is pushing for the creation of more treatment centers for drug addiction, which would cost $123 per week per person. This would allow the more than 500 heroin users currently on waiting lists to get receive treatment and potentially avoid jail time.
Additionally, Shumlin would like to create a system in which the police direct addicts to treatment centers when they are arrested, as this is the moment when addicts are most likely to agree to treatment. Shumlin also advocates imposing tougher laws to prevent drug dealers from entering the state.
Shumlin is also in favor of increased gun restriction. He has commented that “we should not be living in a country where someone can walk into a school and shoot up 23 little kids.” He added that semi-automatic weapons - like those used in the Newtown Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting - have no place in society. However, Shumlin does not advocate for a total ban on guns. He wants to allow guns to be used by hunters in Vermont and rural areas across the country.
In May of 2014, Shumlin signed into law a bill that will make Vermont the first state to require foods that contain genetically modified ingredients to be labeled as such. The new law is supposed to take effect in July of 2016 but faces challenges from food manufacturers who threaten to sue and from congressional legislation that would prevent states from implementing labeling requirements.
The implementation of this GMO labeling law and the handling of the state after Hurricane Irene are some of Shumlin’s most important accomplishments. Irene struck in 2011, his first year in office, destroying 500 miles of roads, hundreds of private homes and businesses, and damaging the state office complex in Waterbury. Despite the praise he has received, Vermont continues to rebuild to this day.
Like all incumbent politicians, Shumlin has a number of accomplishments and failures. Seeking a third term in office is a fairly recent phenomenon amongst Vermont governors. However, voters tend to favor incumbents, and Shumlin is currently heavily weighted to win the seat in November.
(05/07/14 6:13pm)
Vermont guns are being used to purchase hard drugs from surrounding states, exacerbating both the drug epidemic in Vermont and gun violence in the broader New England area.
Despite an historically democratic electorate, Vermont’s history and tradition of hunting and shooting sports has led the state to maintain relatively relaxed gun control policies compared to other states across the country. Though the price of guns is fairly consistent from state to state, criminals can easily evade the gun restrictions of their home state by purchasing from Vermont citizens, and are thus willing to pay more for Vermont guns. Firearms can be sold illegally for hundreds of dollars more than their original purchasing price in states such as Massachusetts.
The trade is easy to facilitate because Vermont gun laws often do not require registration or documentation of firearm sales.
Across the Vermont border, guns are harder to come by, but drugs are plentiful and cheap in nearby urban areas. The guns that are traded for drugs in Vermont frequently end up in areas such as Springfield, Massachusetts, Boston and New York City. Due to low drug availability in rural areas of Vermont, a $4 bag of heroin can be sold for up to $40.
“It’s a supply-and-demand scenario,” Vermont U.S. attorney Tristram Coffin said.
The increased buying power of handguns has given rise to other forms of crime because theft of firearms has become more frequent. An unidentified man recently stole 32 guns from a sports shop in Hardwick on April 19.
Nearly $2 million worth of heroin and other drugs are entering Vermont every week, and addicts are looking for ways to pay for them.
Governor Peter Shumlin discussed the growing epidemic of heroin and other opiate addictions in Vermont in his State of the State address early in 2014, and announced that $10 million of state money will be dedicated to treatment programs. Shumlin further intimated that another $10 million in federal grant money will be dedicated to prevention counseling.
While Vermont hones in on its growing drug problem, officials from other states are more concerned about the increased gun violence made possible by the interstate sale of Vermont weapons.
Between January 2011 and January 2014, twelve recovered guns at crime scenes in Springfield, Massachusetts have been traced back to Vermont. This number is greater than any other outside state.
“Years ago, we rarely saw guns from Vermont and New Hampshire,” said James Neiswanger, the police Chief of Holyoke, Massachusetts. “Now it’s much more commonplace.”
Due to the lack of documentation requirements for private gun sales, the number of guns leaking from Vermont remains difficult to quantify.
Jim Mostyn, the resident agent in charge of Vermont’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), reports that many of the guns known to be missing are unaccounted for.
For these lost weapons to be tracked, they must be recovered by authorities in other states, as well as traced back to Vermont. Furthermore, the missing guns that prosecutors are aware of represent a small fraction of the overall number.
“Since we catch a relatively small proportion of the drug traffickers, we’re going to be catching a relatively small proportion of the drug traffickers who are then exchanging drugs for guns,” Coffin said.
Jon Rosenthal, co-founder of the Massachusetts-based Stop Handgun Violence group, believes that mandatory background checks on all gun sales, including private sales, would help combat the problems caused by gun and drug trafficking. However, many Vermont gun owners say that such regulations violate the state constitution, which states that “the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state.”
Many Vermont citizens have remained vocal proponents of personal gun rights. A proposed assault weapons ban, inspired by the Newtown killings, was withdrawn after fierce grassroots and legislative resistance.
Vermont has the highest rate of gun ownership in New England; 42 percent of residents own a firearm, in contrast to the 12.6 percent of Massachusetts residents who own a gun.
Ed Cutler, president of Gun Owners of Vermont, a gun advocacy group, is urging a focus on reducing drug demands rather than increasing gun control.
While law enforcement officials in Vermont agree that adding ATF agents would lead to a greater number of dealers getting caught, finding the funding for such measures is difficult.
(04/16/14 4:17pm)
The Vermont Senate gave preliminary approval to a bill that would protect medical professionals from prosecution by state regulators for prescribing long-term treatment for Lyme disease on Thursday, April 10.
The vote, 27-0 in favor of the legislation, followed a unanimous precursory vote by a Senate committee on Friday, April 4, which recommended the bill’s passage during the full Senate vote.
The decision follows a heated controversy over the use of long-term drugs — medication lasting longer than a month — antibiotics for curing symptoms of chronic Lyme disease, which has become a more viable option because of the bill. In the past, any health professional who wished to prescribe long-term antibiotics feared the risk of losing his or her medical license on account of professional conduct charges to the Medical Practice Board.
Though no such incidents have occurred in Vermont, these limitations have led Vermont citizens to seek treatments in other states. States such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, California and Rhode Island have approved similar legislation to protect doctors from such prosecution.
Lyme disease is considered an epidemic in Vermont and can be found in every county in the state. Last October, the Center for Disease Control reported that the number of Lyme cases in Vermont has increased by over 1000 percent during the past eight years. Though the disease is fairly treatable when caught in its early stages, it can become severe if patients go a long time without being diagnosed, potentially leading serious neurological problems.
Dr. Stephen Phillips, who practices in Connecticut, treats many patients for Lyme and insisted there is “overwhelming evidence” that the Lyme bacteria can persist after short or moderate antibiotic treatment.
Ellen Read, a victim of chronic Lyme disease from St. Albans, Vt., shared her story, saying “My recovery was incomplete. I went on to develop debilitating neurological Lyme disease.”
Read discussed the impact of the disease on her life – as she was unable to work – by saying, “I estimate my lost earnings to be between $200,000 and $250,000.”
Though victims of long-term Lyme symptoms look hopefully to the new procedure, the treatment is still considered experimental, and has caused much debate between medical professionals over its necessity and effectiveness. Many doctors disapprove of the long-term antibiotic treatment because it involves an elaborate process, including intravenous administration and surgery. Moreover, there is no concrete evidence that the new technique is effective in curing symptoms of Lyme.
Represent George Till of Jericho, Vt., said during an interview that studies conducted by the National Institutes of Health had “not demonstrated any long-term benefit from long-term antibiotics”. Dr. Robert Wheeler, chief medical officer and vice president of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont, asserted that repeated or long-term intravenous antibiotic therapy is “not medically necessary.”
Extensive use of antibiotics carries additional risks, such as widespread evolution of bacteria to develop increased resistance. Dr. Harry Chen, the Vermont Health Commissioner, has expressed concern that expanded use of antibiotics could create more “super-bugs”, impervious to current treatments.
Some people are objecting the government’s role in legislating medical decisions. Madeleine Mongan of the Vermont Medical Society openly opposed the bill, stating, “we don’t think it is appropriate for the legislature to be legislating the standard care.”
Karen Allen, a lawyer representing the Vermont Association of Justice, said, “I’m not saying this shouldn’t be treated with long-term antibiotics. I’m saying it shouldn’t be legislated. The Legislature is not the place to settle this medical science controversy.”
Allen argued at a panel in front of the House Health Care Committee in February, insisting that state law did not prevent doctors from issuing long-term antibiotics, and that they could not be prosecuted by the medical practice board for pursuing such treatment as long as they “are documenting it and have done due diligence.”
In contrast, many view the new bill as allowing health professionals greater freedom to decide the proper course of action for their patients. Susan Chinnock of Westford, Vt., a victim of Lyme disease, believes the bill gives doctors “the right to treat as they see fit.”
The bill outlines the necessary steps doctors must follow if they wish to treat their patients with long-term antibiotics, including documentation of diagnostic reasoning in addition to obtainment of patient consent prior to administering a Lyme disease diagnostic test or long-term treatment. The legislation also states that doctors can still be prosecuted if they are found to have violated professional standards in other ways.
(03/19/14 3:59pm)
Upon opening her inbox, Reverend Stephanie Allen noticed one unread email from an interesting source: Middlebury’s Memorial Baptist Church. The email turned out to contain a job offer, which Allen decided to take, and thereby become the town’s first female pastor.
Allen’s role at the church involves a number of duties beyond planning worship and preaching. She teaches bible studies, provides counseling for the congregation, and is available for visitation. She will also occasionally conduct services off site.
Reverend Allen arrived two weeks ago from Cleveland, Ohio, where she spent the past sixteen years of her life. Allen earned her Masters of Divinity and Doctorate in Hebrew from Ashland University during her first several years there. Later, she helped with ministerial work at a local church.
Prior to Ashland, Allen obtained her undergraduate degree from University of New Hampshire, where her husband also studied. She credits this as part of the reason that her family was willing to make the big move. “It was a big decision, but my husband went to UNH also and we both really wanted to get back to this area,” she stated in an interview.
Along with her husband, Allen’s five children have joined her in Middlebury. She admits that having children has added to the difficulties she faces, especially as a female in a profession that consists predominantly of males. Allen says that many people ask her how she manages five kids plus the congregation, “which is never a question you would ask a man.”
In the U.S., the vast majority of church ministers are male, despite reforms that have allowed women to be ordained. The branch Allen belongs to, The American Baptist Church, has been open to female ministers since 1830. Still, only approximately 12 percent of the ordained members are women.
When asked why she thinks this pattern of male dominance persists, Allen cited many peoples’ discomfort with female clergy.
“There are still a lot of denominations that are not accepting of it, and people have never been exposed to it,” she stated, “so they just can’t wrap their mind around what that would even be like.”
Women also face compensatory discrimination from the church itself. “They call it the stained glass ceiling in ministry work, when men get paid a lot more,” said Allen. Despite these challenges, Allen shares that she was never intimidated by her career. She has nine ministers in her family, two of which are female.
However, Allen’s gender has only been one factor that has made her stand out in her profession.
“More than my gender has really been my age,” Allen said, sharing that she was the youngest at seminary. Many women who do decide to get ordained do it as a second career, resulting in a higher average age.
Accordingly, Allen is excited for the youthful demographic that accompanies a college town like Middlebury. The American Baptist Church actively reaches out to Middlebury College by holding bible studies on campus. This involvement is one major reason the position appealed to Allen.
Allen also enjoys the wide range of education that exists in the congregation as a result of the college.
“I feel like you get the best of a small town but then you also get the academic aspect of it.”
Allen hopes her arrival will open up opportunities for more females to take up religious leadership roles in the Middlebury community. More than anything else, she believes it was acclimatize people to the idea of a female minister. “Even if people don’t have strong opinion, it’s just something they’re not used to,” Allen said. “Hopefully we can normalize it.”
(03/13/14 1:35am)
Last week, the towns of Cornwall, Shoreham and Monkton voted against a plan to extend a Vermont Gas pipeline from Middlebury to Rutland. The pipeline would pass through their town land.
The non-binding votes, held in town meetings, showed strong opposition to the project. Cornwall’s vote was 126-16, while Shoreham’s was 63-38.
Vermont Gas, based in South Burlington, is preparing a plan to install a pipeline that will bring natural gas from Canada through Vermont, and eventually into New York. Phase 1 of the plan involves construction of a 41-mile pipeline extension from Burlington to Middlebury and Vergennes. The state’s Public Service Board approved Phase 1 last December. Phase II would expand construction of the pipeline to Rutland and eventually to the International Paper Mill in Ticonderoga, New York.
The construction of the pipeline is a regional project, meaning individual towns officially have no role in the approval of the proposal. However, sufficient public outcry and petitioning in Cornwall, Shoreham, and Monkton has enabled the issue to be deliberated in town meetings. Middlebury never had such a vote, and opposition was not as vocal.
There are various perspectives as to why these three towns have reacted more strongly than Middlebury to the proposed pipeline. Isaac Baker ’14 has interviewed affected landowners and studied various aspects of the issue for his senior thesis work. Small towns such as Cornwall, Shoreham, and Monkton would experience the imposition of the pipeline, but would not receive the economic benefits of the gas, since delivering gas to homes is not cost effective in more rural areas, according to Baker.
More densely populated areas like Middlebury are more likely to garner the advantages of cheap fuel since most businesses and residents will have access to the gas.
“The economic benefit is going to be felt in a big way [in Middlebury],” said Baker.
Vermont Gas is strategically trying to affect as few people as possible in the construction of its pipeline. Consequently, there are only six affected landowners in Cornwall. However, in opposition to the pipeline, “people are rallying more around property rights” than environmental issues, explained Baker.
Affected landowners are anxious about the disruption the pipeline construction would cause their land. The project requires a lot of machinery and would overturn potentially precious soil. The repercussions of such disturbances could be significant, especially for farmers whose livelihood depends on their land.
Rising Tide Vermont, part of an international organization dedicated to reducing environmental degradation, has been involved with community meetings and organizing affected landowners who oppose the pipeline. According to a member of Rising Tide Vermont, the three towns that voted against the pipeline may have done so because affected landowners will suffer the property damage, without reaping the benefits of the project. Additionally, the landowners in these small towns are more reliant on their farmland than in places like Middlebury.
Vermont Gas has said, “If people don’t want the pipeline, we’re not going to come.” Rising Tide believes that “the point of the vote was to hold them to that.”
Staunch opposition from towns such as Cornwall, Shoreham and Monkton has led to speculation that Vermont Gas might implement eminent domain. The official project website of the Addison Rutland Natural Gas Project, or ARNGP, states, “If the project has been found to be in the public interest by the Public Service Board but an individual does not choose to grant an easement, then the option of eminent domain is possible” as a last resort.
Rising Tide also opposes the pipeline because the natural gas it would carry would be obtained through the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing. Vermont became the first state to ban fracking in May of 2012. Fracking has been criticized for causing devastating pollution of the air and water in communities where it is practiced.
Indeed, those who have spoken out against the pipeline feel it would be a step backwards for a state that hopes to be 90 percent reliant on renewable energy sources by 2050. Though natural gas is the cleanest-burning of all the fossil fuels, activists believe the state should hold to its commitment to promote truly sustainable energy. “By using nature, we can create a sustainable future, but we have to get cracking. Now’s the time to do it,” said owner of Vermont Soap Larry Plesent in a recent press conference.
In contrast to these sentiments, the College publicly backed Phase I of the proposal in a statement issued by President Ron Liebowitz last May. In a letter of support released in March 2011, the College asserted that “we continue to believe that the pipeline will benefit the region and the college in numerous ways for years to come.”
Liebowitz cited both the economic and environmental advantages of natural gas. According to the project website, natural gas is 43 percent cheaper than oil and 56 percent cheaper than propane, as of April 2013. The company also projects that Phase I of the project will decrease Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions by 300,000 tons over a period of 20 years.
Some local Middlebury business owners have spoken in favor of the pipeline. The General Manager of the Middlebury Inn, Geoffrey Conrad, sounded excited about the project in an interview a few months ago with Channel 5 news. Though he acknowledges the investment it will take to convert all of his heaters and other equipment to support natural gas, he is eager for the long-term economic benefits.
“Our propane and heating oil expenses each year are over $100,000 and they’re projecting 50 percent savings,” he said.
Doug Dimento, a spokesperson for the Agri-Mark, which has one of their two Vermont locations in Middlebury, released a statement in support of the pipeline saying that that “reducing costs will make [their] products more competitive in the national marketplace and hopefully will increase cheese production, sales, and
returns back to [their]farmer owners.” Many believe that Vermont would benefit from this competitive edge.
The impetus for Phase II of the ARNGP was an agreement between Vermont Gas and International Paper’s Ticonderoga Mill, located just across the Vermont border in New York. Vermont Gas has promised that the pipeline will be providing natural gas fuel to the industrial mill by 2015. According to Jake Nonweiler ’14, who studied the pipeline project closely as part of his senior seminar, the company is offering to invest tens of millions of dollars to fund the project in order to receive long-term economic benefits. Additionally, International Paper hopes to for a 20 percent reduction in its greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Approximately 35-40
percent of the mill’s current energy consumption is based on fuel oil. Switching to natural gas could help the company reach this goal.
The benefits for International Paper are clear. However, because Vermont residents of towns such as Cornwall and Shoreham won’t profit as much as others from the advantages of the pipeline, Phase II is meeting a lot of resistance.
“In general, part II is more contentious and more difficulty to justify. It’s more a benefit to one entity, and that’s International Paper,” Nonweiler said.
(02/27/14 1:07am)
Tim Perkins and Abby van den Berg of the University of Vermont’s Proctor Maple Research Center have discovered a new technique for extracting sap from maple trees that would produce 10 times more sap per acre than the current method. Unlike the current technique, which utilizes wild maples, theirs uses young, cultivated saplings.
The industry has undergone a number of modifications since the era of spigots and buckets. Today, most farmers harvest sap from maples using a network of tubing that winds through the natural forests from tree to tree. Vacuums are placed at the end of tubes to draw out the sap more efficiently.
Perkins and van den Berg’s breakthrough occured while they were studying the movement of sap through the maples, intending to augment their yield. By chopping off the tops of saplings and placing a vacuum directly over the stem, water is sucked from the soil straight through the plant.
The younger trees are able to regenerate their branches before the next harvesting season. This method allows growers to plant the maples in a “plantation,” rather than relying on wild trees.
Reactions to the proposed technique have been mixed. The plantation method will increase predictability during the harvesting process and allow farmers to expand their businesses without investing in increasingly expensive woodland. The technique also mitigates the effects of natural disasters, decreasing the recovery period by decades.
However, many farmers fear of losing touch with the tradition that the industry is steeped in.
“[The new process] is the antithesis of what people expect from the maple syrup industry,” David Marvin, owner of Butternut Mountain Farm in Morrisville, Vermont, said.
Marvin is proud of his undomesticated maple production.
“Informed consumers like a wild crafted product,” he said, emphasizing the sustainability of natural resources involved in the current process. “I’m not faulting the researchers. They’re just doing what researchers do, but it needs to be put in a human context.”
Saplings are resistant to pests, particularly the Asian longhorned beetle, which threatens a number of hardwood trees in North America. Most crucially, saplings freeze and thaw with smaller temperature fluctuations than mature trees, a necessary component of sap development, making them a bastion against climate change for the industry
The new method vastly opens up the maple industry, as anyone with several acres of arable land could now start producing sap. Laura Sorkin, co-owner of Thunder Basin Maple Works, wrote in a recent article, “Any region with the right climate for growing maples would be able to start up maple ‘farms.’”
Other farmers worry that the industry will shift away from areas with natural maple treasuries, such as Vermont, to regions that lack forests but are abundant in labor.
The maple industry is a weighty component of Vermont’s economy. In 2013, Vermont churned out 1.32 million gallons of syrup, accounting for 40 percent of the nation’s annual production, and commercial manufacturers operate in every county in the state.
Perkins has made it clear that the new technology is not yet on the market and, at this point, would not be economically advantageous.
“There are so many small trees and sap collection devices needed, “ Perkins said in a recent interview with CBC news “that the price right now is roughly about the same for the plantation method as the traditional method.” Though it might take several decades, he insists the method will get cheaper with time.
Still, Perkins does not predict farmers will completely abandon the traditional process.
“This new technique isn’t meant to replace the traditional maple production methods,” he said. “It’s made as an additional tool that maple producers can use in certain circumstances if needs dictate.”