Sunapee sueing the state

[RISkier]

NH does perfectly fine with no income taxes. Not sure on the corporate taxes but property taxes dont seem to be rediculously high, albeit higher than other states. The NH liquor stores really bring in the revenue, theres never a shortage of customers at those badboys. NYE, even the store in my local town of Exeter was mobbed.

I don't know enough about the local economics to really comment on the impact of a Sunapee expansion on either the State's or the local economy. But we've stopped at the big liquor store on the section of toll road on I93 a couple of times. We're not real liquor drinkers but we really don't find the wine prices to be that much better than our local prices. What am I missing?

 

[snowman]

I completely disagree with highway tolls. There is no ungreener tax on the face of the earth in my mind. Having to slow down and stop...and sometimes sit waiting...when there is no good reason for it is ridiculous. The amount of fuel used to stop, hold and start vehicles at a toll both is probably equivelent to the same amount of fuel it takes to go 3- 5 miles at highway speed. Tolls should be outlawed. Almost all the roads here are toll free and the money to build them is re-couped thru fuel tax. I think the only toll road in Canada is in my province and there was outrage over it where we've technically already paid for it thru fuel taxes. Driving thru the northeatern US and hitting a toll booth every 20 miles drives me nuts!

The word is, in the next 20 years, here in Canada atleast, the move is going to be away from income taxes and the focus is going to be on user fees and point of sale taxes. I agree with that much more. Those who use the services and participate in the economy pay the way. Why Harper keeps lowering the GST (federal sales tax) baffles me. It counters the plan.

 

[threecy]

The property taxes in NH generally run a bit higher than MA, however they are lower than a lot of rural places in MA.

This thread is getting dangerously close to a political thread.

Improving that road from Route 10 to the restaurant (I always get the name confused, the One Mile West I think?) is something that should probably happen anyways, regardless of Sunapee expanding. At the time in which the Muellers took the lease on it, I think it was implied that they'd have a fair shot at doing more than just running the existing area.

The locals and the state need to take a look at Sunapee now, compare it to Sunapee 15 years ago, and also compare it to Blue Hills. I still think its unfair to not even give them a shot at it - there are PLENTY of houses and condos being built in that area by others - the Muellers own a bunch of property and simply want to expand the state's ski area to serve it. A upscale real estate development (with clauses in place to make sure it doesn't turn into full time housing) is a great source of property tax for towns at a generally low recurring cost (the biggie of course being that the condo owners wouldn't have kids in the school system).

 

[bobbutts]

Driving thru the northeatern US and hitting a toll booth every 20 miles drives me nuts!

Oh yeah? what road is that you're driving? New Hampshire has just a few tolls. And typically one per road. Vermont has no Toll roads (well except for Stowe )
Also easy pass is everywhere and encouraged, so fewer people are stopping. I'd suggest a mandatory RFID tag on cars, but that brings up civil liberties problems.
..

and Re threecy:
Of course this thread gets political, we're talking about the Govt.

 

[FridayHiker]

Random comments without quoting people. There were too many quotes.

Re "giving the Mueller's a shot at it", this is NOT a decision that can be undone. You can't say "Let's see whether we like it or not then go from there". Local people do NOT want it. It's not evenly divided -- not even close. After the construction is done, the jobs that will be created are the sort that go unfilled in other resort areas of the state. That's why quite a few local ski areas wind up filling jobs with foreign guest-workers.

Ditto for Cannon. Though there is a coalition of local restaurant and hotel owners who are seeing dollar signs and have been putting pressure on the State to pursue a lease, in general, Franconia is against it. Though one poster wrote that it's a zoo in Franconia, in reality, anyone who lives up here can attest to the vast differences between Lincoln and Franconia, and Franconians LIKE IT that way. They were relieved 20 years ago when I-93 was kept narrow through the Notch, and they still find that to be a GOOD thing that --right or wrong -- they feel has protected them from becoming like the Lincoln area.

Re gas taxes, the NH DOT is in a funding crisis right now, with concrete and construction costs up about 40% during the past few years, with the "10-year-plan" having recently been deemed to actually use about 30-years' worth of funds, lay-offs threatened, projects scaled back drastically, and little money to be found. Tolls were increased, but I believe that the toll money is earmarked for the turnpikes. Plowing of town (i.e. non-numbered) roads is done by the Town road crews, not State crews, with funds raised by local property taxes. Though I often hear that NH property taxes are high, in reality they're not that bad, even in the high-tax towns (and tax rates vary quite a bit from town to town).

In the long run, it's NOT all about money and taxes. It's about quality of life. Bethlehem NH was just offered $10 million over ten years to allow the dump there to expand and operate for ten more years. The town overwhelmingly voted "No". Bethlehem's a very small town -- just 2,000 or so, I think -- but as in many small NH towns, it's not about money. It's about wanting to live somewhere beautiful and peaceful and clean.

 

[bobbutts]

In the long run, it's NOT all about money and taxes. It's about quality of life. Bethlehem NH was just offered $10 million over ten years to allow the dump there to expand and operate for ten more years. The town overwhelmingly voted "No". Bethlehem's a very small town -- just 2,000 or so, I think -- but as in many small NH towns, it's not about money. It's about wanting to live somewhere beautiful and peaceful and clean.

I see the same problem in this story as I do at Sunapee. Bethlehem already has a dump so how peaceful and clean is that? They allow the dump to be in town and then they screw them out of running their business profitably. At Sunapee they allow a busy resort in the town but take away their ability to expand.

It's not as simple as voting against things that disturb the peace and cleanliness. If that was the case then they should run these businesses out of town entirely.

 

[riverc0il]

Now, when you go to the expansion itself, you're employing more people. More people working means more income tax for the state. I don't know the exact intricacies of NH taxation,.

You are right about that.... no income tax in NH.

 

[riverc0il]

I can't speak to corporate taxes. Property taxes are a bit higher. I've been looking at condos near Portland and then comparable properties in NH. For $160K condo outside of Portland, the tax is around $2200. A similar property outside of Portsmouth NH would have taxes around $3000. So yes, they're higher compared to here, but not ridiculous so. Even at that, the savings I would enjoy by not having 8.5% of my income gone in income taxes, far outweighs the higher property tax. Nevermind the lack of sales tax on top of that. I'm not certain how the property tax compares in Mass.

Here is an example of how property tax in NH is really bizarre. That same $160k condo here in Ashland has a tax value of around $3500 or so per year whereas you quote Portland as around $2200. Each city/town has different tax rates. Plymouth is through the roof which is why we avoided buying there despite working, shopping, and dining in Plymouth. From what I understood when we were house hunting, there is currently a move to make taxes more appropriate to valuations. I.E. some towns have extremely high value and low taxes. I noticed this was especially true in towns that have mostly upper end, vacation, and second homes and not many "locals."

 

[riverc0il]

I completely disagree with highway tolls. [SNIP]

The word is, in the next 20 years, here in Canada atleast, the move is going to be away from income taxes and the focus is going to be on user fees and point of sale taxes. I agree with that much more. Those who use the services and participate in the economy pay the way. Why Harper keeps lowering the GST (federal sales tax) baffles me. It counters the plan.

Tolls ARE a user fee. You use the roads, then you pay. If you car pool, take public transit, or other wise do not use the roads, you don't pay. Those who participate in using the roads help pay to keep them usable. The more you use them, the more you pay. The tolls on 93 and 95 in NH are well placed. I think locals should have an exemption (note: I would not include myself or anyone north of Concord for such an exemption).

In reference to toll booths eating gas, unless you drive through them at peak hours, you can coast through the toll booth with easy pass with only a very minimal impact on your total gas consumption.

 

[riverc0il]

I see the same problem in this story as I do at Sunapee. Bethlehem already has a dump so how peaceful and clean is that? They allow the dump to be in town and then they screw them out of running their business profitably. At Sunapee they allow a busy resort in the town but take away their ability to expand. .

The ability to expand was never given. How is that taking it away?

 

[FridayHiker]

At Sunapee they allow a busy resort in the town but take away their ability to expand.

What right to expand is being taken away? It's STATE land, and I don't know of anything that ever gave the Mueller's the right to expand there? Didn't they realize it was STATE land when they signed the lease?

 

[threecy]

What right to expand is being taken away? It's STATE land, and I don't know of anything that ever gave the Mueller's the right to expand there? Didn't they realize it was STATE land when they signed the lease?

When the Muellers first took up the lease, it was pretty clear from the beginning that they wanted the chance to expand the mountain and do some developing - it's not like they decided last year to expand and bought the property. They've had plans (and rather conservative ones) for over half a decade. The state knew this and I think it was implied that they'd at least get a fair chance to present their ideas. The current issue is that it's being tabled without discussion at the current stage it's at.

Sunapee has been MORE than open with locals - holding many meetings, presenting their ideas, listening to concerns, etc. It's not like they need an interstate installed to do this - the road right now is certainly a bit narrow and curvy, but the roads leading there now aren't dramatically better...in fact some skiers actually take the road that would go near the proposed second base area.

 

[snowman]

Tolls ARE a user fee. You use the roads, then you pay. If you car pool, take public transit, or other wise do not use the roads, you don't pay. Those who participate in using the roads help pay to keep them usable. The more you use them, the more you pay. The tolls on 93 and 95 in NH are well placed. I think locals should have an exemption (note: I would not include myself or anyone north of Concord for such an exemption).

Yes, they are. They are a FLAWED user fee though. Combine the extra gas used, construction cost of the plazas, accident costs, employment costs and they are the biggest example of waste that I can think of. If you just tax gas more, you have 0 leakage of funds meant for road building to toll collection costs and you help the environment by lowering overal fuel consumption.

In reference to toll booths eating gas, unless you drive through them at peak hours, you can coast through the toll booth with easy pass with only a very minimal impact on your total gas consumption

Try cruising thru one towing a 32 foot boat, or any sort of trailer, or a tractor trailer. I've guestimated my extra fuel consumption to be in the neighborhood of 3 gallons per toll plaza on a bad day. It takes a CRAPLOAD of fuel to get any sort of load moving, however, once you're at speed it takes a mere fraction of that to keep it moving. What's more, they charge you per axel, which is also severely flawed. Axels have very wide ranging ratings. You might have 6 x 3500 pound axels on a trailer to balance out a heavy load (which limits damage to roads), not even be loaded, and get charged so much money you need a credit card to pay, MEANWHILE, someone else can come thru with one 21,000 pound axel overloaded and get away with only paying a couple dollars. :angry:

 

[bobbutts]

The ability to expand was never given. How is that taking it away?

sure, point conceded. The wording changes, but my point remains. It is not resort vs. no resort since it already exists. I'm just discounting the Peace and Quiet argument vs. the expansion a bit.

I don't really have a strong opinion on this expansion either way anyway. As a Sunapee skier I'd like to see it expand, but I am generally against corporations throwing their weight around against their local community. I'm saying this may be a case of the opposite where the state and community are throwing their weight around against this company. Who exactly is hurt by these new trails and condos?

 

[riverc0il]

There is also the issue of precedent. I think someone else mentioned if this was granted, it could not be taken back. Likewise, every company with a contract with the state might look for this issue as a precedent to further take advantage of their situation as contractors/leasers. The reverse could just as well be true if the state was asking the Muellers to do something for the state... such as with Rocket's argument reversed... if Sunapee had not been managed well, would the state have the right to demand additional concessions not already stipulated in the lease? Definitely not. It is important on the grounds of principle and on precedent, for both parties, to not grant more than what was originally agreed upon.

 

[FridayHiker]

sure, point conceded. The wording changes, but my point remains. It is not resort vs. no resort since it already exists. I'm just discounting the Peace and Quiet argument vs. the expansion a bit.

Correct. But ask the people from Ludlow, VT about the Peace and Quiet vs. the expansion and they will tell you that the town changed dramatically after the Mueller's started expanding them mountain. Many of the people in Goshen/Newbury/Sunapee have zero interest in being the site of a repeat performance of that.

 

[threecy]

if Sunapee had not been managed well, would the state have the right to demand additional concessions not already stipulated in the lease? Definitely not.

I don't know if that's really a good comparison for this - they're asking for the use of some more land that's not currently included in the lease, if I'm not mistaken. If they were asking to cut more trails in the existing area or put in a water slide or something, I could see that comparison.

 

[bobbutts]

Correct. But ask the people from Ludlow, VT about the Peace and Quiet vs. the expansion and they will tell you that the town changed dramatically after the Mueller's started expanding them mountain. Many of the people in Goshen/Newbury/Sunapee have zero interest in being the site of a repeat performance of that.

Who are these people? Business owners? Long-time residents? Everybody? not trying to be a jerk, I'm curious.

 

[deadheadskier]

Yes, they are. They are a FLAWED user fee though. Combine the extra gas used, construction cost of the plazas, accident costs, employment costs and they are the biggest example of waste that I can think of. If you just tax gas more, you have 0 leakage of funds meant for road building to toll collection costs and you help the environment by lowering overal fuel consumption.



Try cruising thru one towing a 32 foot boat, or any sort of trailer, or a tractor trailer. I've guestimated my extra fuel consumption to be in the neighborhood of 3 gallons per toll plaza on a bad day. It takes a CRAPLOAD of fuel to get any sort of load moving, however, once you're at speed it takes a mere fraction of that to keep it moving. What's more, they charge you per axel, which is also severely flawed. Axels have very wide ranging ratings. You might have 6 x 3500 pound axels on a trailer to balance out a heavy load (which limits damage to roads), not even be loaded, and get charged so much money you need a credit card to pay, MEANWHILE, someone else can come thru with one 21,000 pound axel overloaded and get away with only paying a couple dollars. :angry:

So wait a minute, people who don't use the highway / tolls should be penalized by fuel tax? Not everyone uses the highway all the time. The biggest point in tolls is to collect money from interstate commerce. Whether it's lumber trucks coming down from Canada or tourists vacationing, the point is to bring money from outside of the state in to help support road building. There's NO guarantee that someone is going to buy there gas in this state when driving through or visiting. I live in Maine, yet I'm in Mass or NH five days a week. Guess where I buy ALL my gas? Not here. Tolls are guaranteed revenue. It is a use tax, just the same as fuel tax only it's guaranteeing you're receiving money from out of staters using your roads. Gas tax doesn't offer that guarantee.

Cry me a river about you using more gas towing your 32 foot boat with your monster truck. If you can afford those luxories, you can afford the gas.

Trust me, I don't like paying for tolls more than anybody; I spend an average of $40 a week on them, but I'd rather pay the tolls than see fuel tax go up. It's a much more fair solution for the locals.

The only thing I buy in your arguement is the environmental impact. There is a lot of merit to that point. Then again, what happens the day when alternative fuels that leave no impact have arrived? How are you going to afford to repair roads then when there's no fuel or little fuel to tax? You got it, tolls my man.

Deal with it.

 

[FridayHiker]

Who are these people? Business owners? Long-time residents? Everybody? not trying to be a jerk, I'm curious.

Town officials, primarily. Here's an article about Goshen folks meeting with Ludlow folks:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/...6&Kategori=REPOSITORY&Lopenr=405260303&Ref=AR