-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
VT proposing restrictions on Short Term rentals
- Thread starter djd66
- Start date
abc
Well-known member
I haven't skied at Mount Snow much before the pandemic. So I don't know what it was like during "normal" years. I can only compare it to K, which I skied more often. The few days I skied at MS this year, it was quieter for sure. No one breathing down my neck. No idiots passing too close. Even far fewer clumps of people standing in choke points blocking people from getting through.
The lift lines were at times long. But the slopes were definitely WAY quieter. And at North Peak, not even the lifts were crowded. I had the trail all to myself most of the time. I definitely like it that way. But obviously it "can't be" because Vail would probably lose too much money.
Are you skiing mid-week or weekends? Or both?
Also not exactly sure how you can make a comparison involving MS when you admit you didn't ski much at MS previously. Comparing crowds from 1 resort 1 year to another resort another year is kind of irrelevant.
You also have a reduction in uphill capacity on lifts due to COVID. So even if there's less people skiing down the slopes at one time due to more people waiting in line, it doesn't mean the resorts are that much quieter overall. And that uphill capacity restriction will disappear eventually.
KustyTheKlown
Well-known member
skiing mid-week is completely irrelevant to the discussion, and i think she skis mid-week.
skiing weekends has been as busy as ever, if not busier, this year, at least in my perception. that perception is informed by a lot of sundays at magic (clearly busier than in the past), a powder day and a saturday at Stratton (unbearably busy), many weekend days at sugarbush (equally busy with a normal year weekend), two weekend days at Bolton (busier than I've ever seen bolton), and two weekend days at Jay (surprisingly busy given the border closure).
while the travel restrictions may have stopped some people from going to Vermont, they clearly didn't stop most people, and i think skiing in general has seen a major bump this year because its a relatively safe thing you are allowed to do outside. whether skiing remains this popular when other indoor winter activities return (no going to the mall, movies, concerts, etc this season) remains to be seen.
skiing weekends has been as busy as ever, if not busier, this year, at least in my perception. that perception is informed by a lot of sundays at magic (clearly busier than in the past), a powder day and a saturday at Stratton (unbearably busy), many weekend days at sugarbush (equally busy with a normal year weekend), two weekend days at Bolton (busier than I've ever seen bolton), and two weekend days at Jay (surprisingly busy given the border closure).
while the travel restrictions may have stopped some people from going to Vermont, they clearly didn't stop most people, and i think skiing in general has seen a major bump this year because its a relatively safe thing you are allowed to do outside. whether skiing remains this popular when other indoor winter activities return (no going to the mall, movies, concerts, etc this season) remains to be seen.
I'd largely agree and thought I remembered her saying in the past she skis primarily mid-week as well which is why I asked the question. And if she's skiing mid-week and still saw long lift lines at times on some lifts, then that to me doesn't imply things are "quieter" than other years. Although maybe some long lift lines are normal for MS mid-week even in a normal year. I don't know. At Sugarbush mid-week lines would be absolutely unheard of unless it was a big powder day.
The one caveat I would say is that I have heard some normal mid-week skiers say they're seeing MORE people mid-week than other years due to some people living in VT and working remotely in the winter, etc this year. So from that perspective, those local people aren't necessarily happy that they don't have the slopes entirely to themselves like other years. (Good for the mountains though to see more mid-week business as really that's a key way to drive some growth without creating "crowds").
abc
Well-known member
I normally only ski mid-week (or spring weekends). But this year, I "accidentally" found myself skiing on a Friday, which was like night and day compare to Thursday.
I also drove by on Saturday specifically to check out the parking and lift line. It looked to me Friday was "close to" as busy on that one late January weekend (after the 2-3" every day during the week).
kingslug
Well-known member
The 7;30 chair at Stowe went from a few to very crowded.. Stowe is way more crowded than ever.
dblskifanatic
Active member
- Joined
- May 24, 2019
- Messages
- 767
- Points
- 43
Mount Snow seems to be busy as well!
Don't say that out loud, someone in Albany may get an idea.....
That would be a first.
More regs and less freedom - that's a strategy. What country are we living in?
Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.
and my favorite:
Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.
Ronald Reagan
Breeze
Member
Hardly seems worth it to get into the discussion of STR in tourist locations. Either you own property you want to consider income property, or your neighbor wants you to accept the fact that 4 more cars on the street and 8 more people in the upstairs unit are what you can expect every week during the winter.
Don't be surprised when your local businesses can't find help.
Don't be surprised when your local businesses can't find help.
drjeff
Well-known member
Personally it has seemed to myself and many of my Mount Snow regular friends, that the downhill volume has been noticeably less this year, especially on the weekends.
The wait time in the majority of lines, while long, generally speaking haven't been much longer of a wait than we used to have the last couple of "normal" seasons
Zermatt
Active member
The issue at the heart of this thread is dead on arrival. The US constitution prevents states from regulating interstate commerce. Which means, you can't treat a resident different from a non resident (this was the heart of many discussions this summer about travel restrictions...which are legal so long as everyone is treated equally).
You can close the thread now. Resident homeowners of Vermont cannot be treated more favorably than non resident homeowners.
You can close the thread now. Resident homeowners of Vermont cannot be treated more favorably than non resident homeowners.
Agree - but they are treated differently. Higher tax rate than residents ( a town issue - at least in Fayston). Lobbyists are now more prevalent that ever - exploding in the last 25 years. Those with the most dough, generally win the game.
Here's a 7 yr old piece that illustrates why most in Congress' real goal is the 7 figure one after their term is up. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/shadow-lobbying-complex/
That wonderful piece of paper ( US Constitution) gets ignored more frequently than ever these days . .
kbroderick
Active member
The tax rate is tied to the property use, not to by whom it is owned. A second home (or rental property) owned by the sixth-generation-local down the street gets the same tax rate as a similar property owned by someone from Boston or NYC.
Maine offers a property tax offset for owner-occupied homes ($20k homestead credit against property value), which is nice, except that at this point, $20k anywhere near a ski resort doesn't offset a whole lot of home value. I guess it makes a difference until the next assessment comes around...
In Vermont, there is a non-residential tax rate and a residential tax rate, which are different rates.
Then there is homestead tax abatement for which there is income sensitivity for the first $400k value of the home (capped at 5%of income under 47k) along with other income sensitivity up to 139k income (don't know that calculation). So if yo earn 40k a year and your home is worth 400k, then your tax bill would be $2000.
In order to qualify for the tax abatement and for the home to be your primary residence, you need to have occupied your home on April 1st and you need to have rented it for fewer than 183 days in the year. So this bill with the residency requirement saying that the home needs to be occupied for 270 days is already flawed as it would require changes to current property tax residency rules for the homestead credit.
Couple of things that don't fit the narrative but are important:
Resident vs non-resident really is Homestead vs non-homestead. Basically either you live in the house or you don't. I think there are a variety of laws out there that define what that means but generally you can only have one primary residence. It is not a scheme to screw the out-of-staters who so generously their wealth upon us. It applies equally to Vermonters that may own multiple properties (as if any of us "poor-folk" here can actually afford that) as it does to anyone else. I suppose the philosophy here is that the state wishes to incent residential home ownership through tax policy but once you get to your second home it is not in the state's interest to subsidize that.
Second, a quick look at the property tax rates for the towns of Waitsfield, Warren , and Fayston shows that the tax rates are essentially equal for Resident/Non-Resident. Other towns may be different but the outrage over this issue is a bit overplayed.
People really hate paying taxes, I get it, but we also tend to be a bit self-serving when we discuss such topics. I have seen cases where someone claims residency elsewhere to avoid income taxes but then complains that they are now paying higher taxes on their now non-resident property. I have also seen people fight tooth and nail to lower their property assessment to pay less in tax and turn around and sell it for twice the tax value. You can't have it both ways.
Resident vs non-resident really is Homestead vs non-homestead. Basically either you live in the house or you don't. I think there are a variety of laws out there that define what that means but generally you can only have one primary residence. It is not a scheme to screw the out-of-staters who so generously their wealth upon us. It applies equally to Vermonters that may own multiple properties (as if any of us "poor-folk" here can actually afford that) as it does to anyone else. I suppose the philosophy here is that the state wishes to incent residential home ownership through tax policy but once you get to your second home it is not in the state's interest to subsidize that.
Second, a quick look at the property tax rates for the towns of Waitsfield, Warren , and Fayston shows that the tax rates are essentially equal for Resident/Non-Resident. Other towns may be different but the outrage over this issue is a bit overplayed.
People really hate paying taxes, I get it, but we also tend to be a bit self-serving when we discuss such topics. I have seen cases where someone claims residency elsewhere to avoid income taxes but then complains that they are now paying higher taxes on their now non-resident property. I have also seen people fight tooth and nail to lower their property assessment to pay less in tax and turn around and sell it for twice the tax value. You can't have it both ways.
Not true in Vermont (at least not in the town where we own). There is specifically a resident and non resident tax rate on the tax bill.
Edit: Check out: Understanding Your Property Tax Bill | Department of Taxes (vermont.gov)
You misunderstood what kbroderick said. He said the rate is tied to the property use, which is true. It isn't a resident vs non-resident rate. It is a homestead vs non-homestead rate (usage meaning living there vs not living there). Not a "VT Resident" vs "Out of stater" rate. You can be a VT resident and still pay the non-homestead rate on a property in VT if that isn't your primary home (for example you could have a homestead property in Burlington that you live in and a condo at Killington that is a 2nd home. Even though you live in VT, you'd still pay the non-homestead rate on the Killington condo because you're living in your Burlington property).
Similar threads
