Living and Working in Burlington Vermont

Before I begin, I need to state upfront that Burlington Telecom is an active member of the Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce and that we also enjoy excellent relationships with Burlington City Hall. This post is not meant to take sides in what has become a highly political and emotional issue within the city. It is meant to take a giant step backwards and reflect on some questions that really should be at the heart of the debate.

Let’s begin with the rhetoric and theatre that has surrounded the debate. There are some legitimate questions that the city administration needs to answer concerning the transfer/loan/appropriation of cash flow dollars to cover a hole in the Burlington Telecom budget. However, until a thorough audit is conducted and until we understand the legal options and opinions that were given to the administration to consider, I’d suggest that everyone take a breath and refrain from calling for the head of Marie Antoinette. It makes for good political theatre and gets peoples' names in the paper but there is a city (with some significant challenges ahead of it) that needs to be run. Up until this point, absent particular likes or dislikes for certain personalities and normal partisan saber rattling, I have not heard many people complain about the daily operations of city hall.

To me, and to many with whom I have spoken with, there are three larger questions that should be debated before we call for draconian measures to be taken at city hall. First, is the hypothesis that created a municipality-owned and operated telecommunications utility still legitimate?; second, once there is agreement that it makes sense under some business or social construct, then is there a business plan (tax and fee model) that can ensure that the operation can remain financially viable over the long haul?; and third, does the cost of that business plan to residential and commercial tax payers justify the business or social case?

It seems to some outside observers that there is a rush to castigate those who are now in charge. Maybe we will find that here is reason to do so but until then, perhaps we should first get all the facts out on the table. In the meantime, for our financial sake, let’s review some of the basic premises that led us down this path originally.

 

 

On Wednesday the 28, the Vermont Council on World Affairs (VCWA) moved their offices into 60 Main Street and became part of the larger Lake Champlain Regional Chamber family. The VCWA retains its own Board; 501 C (3) status and its affiliation with St. Michael’s College as its academic institutional collaborative partner.

VCWA's affiliation with the Chamber offers them access to a wider audience as they promote their mission of providing a wide range of public educational programs on key foreign affairs issues and hosting international visitors from across a number of disciplines. The VCWA has a long history of bringing national and internationally renowned speakers to Vermont and is perhaps best known for both its Ambassador Speaker Series and International Visitor programs.

For the LCRCC, this affiliation brings with it a number of benefits:

1. It expands our ‘leadership and education’ programs to include an international focus. This is a value-add for our members.

2. It provides a forum for members to understand emerging markets for either the import or export of their goods and services.

3. It offers ‘business to business’ connections with foreign markets for companies that may be interested in those opportunities

4. It adds depth to our focus on youth development by building upon our successful engagement with Iraqi, Canadian and French youth this summer and expanding these opportunities.

5. As commerce becomes increasingly more globally focused, it allows the LCRCC to focus more deeply on key issues affecting the international business climate.

6. It will reconnect our region's focus with our Canadian partners as we build upon the successful trade and youth programs that VCWA has hosted in the past.

As president of this organization, I am thrilled by the promise and opportunities that this affiliation holds and I look forward to sharing more about our successes in the near future.

 

 

It always strikes me as somewhat unfair when some giant picks on the little guy. Being someone that tends to root for the underdog (baseball excluded), I was particularly disturbed to read that Monster Energy Drink is suing Rock Art Brewery, a small and funky brewery based in Morrisville. Monster Energy’s claim is that Rock Art’s signature ‘Vermonster’ brew infringes on their brand. Given that beer and caffeine-laden drinks have never ever been confused for one another, this recent David vs. Goliath seems even the more absurd. Honestly, how many times has any college student seriously trying to pull an all nighter mistakenly chugged a cold beer instead of one of the many energy drinks on the market? How many times has someone stood in front of a store cooler on a hot Vermont July afternoon dreaming about a beer and mistakenly purchased a ‘tasty’ energy drink? How many times has a family off for a wonderful birthday bash at the local scoop shop ordered up a six-pack of Vermonster brew instead of that oh so delicious Ben and Jerry’s treat…. also named a Vermonster? Hey, why doesn’t Monster Energy Drink sue Nestle? Oh, right, size does matter! Folks, despite the well known W.C. Fields line that there is a sucker born every minute, people are just not that dumb…..which brings me to the point of this blog post.

Small business is at the heart and soul of Vermont’s economy. If not for the entrepreneur, the individuals, couples, and families willing to risk their savings to launch an enterprise, our state would not have the outrageous successes that we boast today. Where would we be without IDX, Ben and Jerry’s, Dealer.com, Lake Champlain Chocolates, Green Mountain Coffee, Magic Hat Brewery, the Skinny Pancake, Epik1, a host of successful software start-ups, and our ever growing brew and wine industry?

Rock Art Brewery started as one person’s dream in his cellar. Good beer and a good business plan made him successful in a very competitive micro-brew industry. To celebrate that success and this state, he named a beer after it. God love him. For his temerity he is now being sued by a corporate giant with the financial wherewithal to tie him up in court until hell freezes over. It is the school yard bully tormenting the little kid all over again, and we should all be outraged. If the spirit that makes Vermont a fertile creative ground is allowed to be extinguished, then all of our businesses will shine just a little less brightly.

 

Rarely do I hear as loud and sustained drumbeat of complaint as I have from many of our members concerning recent legislative tax changes. The sounds are coming from all sectors and sizes of business. Here is what I think galls people the most.

For as long as folks can remember, there was a dynamic tension between the tax habits of government and those who actually create wealth that is taxed—or those who simply have accumulated it. Government has increased tax burdens proportional to its need to support critical programs, but never overreached into areas that would fundamentally place Vermont businesses at a competitive disadvantage. This year we seemed to have reached the tipping point. The tax package adopted by the Vermont legislature this past session took aim at three areas that further eroded Vermont’s business development competitiveness, upset the retirement planning of many average citizens, and removed one deduction that raised a small amount of money while removing a tax break that most middle class wage earners could access.

• Capital Gains: far from the “loophole” that both the legislature and administration attempted to portray it as, the Vermont exemption was one tool that supported entrepreneurship and small business development. In a sense, it penalizes folks for starting a successful business, spinning it off, and investing in another start up. Add to that the fact that Vermonters who had been nesting their retirement in land acquired many years ago will now experience a significant reduction in their realized savings, and this new tax had the effect of disproportionately hitting the young that we want to encourage to stay here and the older folks to whom we should be demonstrating sensitivity.
• Estate Tax: the tax, while a nice political football, actually hurts the preservation of small family businesses, including the traditional Vermont family farm.
• Vermont Income Tax Deduction: There aren’t many tax deductions that are available to taxpayers of moderate means. The ability to deduct your state tax payment was one of them. At a time when citizens of moderate means are struggling to pinch pennies, taking this off the table just makes no sense.

There are probably more significant issues that create the din of noise coming from our membership but these are three that fall into the ‘no brainer’ category. So, in the hopes of restoring any competitive advantage we might have and to help the struggling middle class, why not Repeal them. At a minimum, let’s have the newly formed state Blue Ribbon Tax Structure Committee review the real effects of these three new taxes.

By the way, what’s your view? Please let me know. You can post your response to this blog free of charge simply by entering a user name.

The silly season is upon us. No, not Halloween or the distasteful commercial run-up to Christmas, but the political season which is now just 13 months away. It even sounds funny saying that. Thirteen months! We are becoming our worst nightmare.

One of the problems with long election campaigns is that candidates have to find something to establish their platform. In past campaigns, those of us in the tourism business and those in businesses that rely on tourism cringed every time a candidate decided to use the health of the lake or the effectiveness of the current Governor’s “clean and clear” program as the crucible upon which to forge their environmental credentials. Many of us have been involved in lake issues for a long time and some have been involved for a lifetime. Our political allegiances are as diverse as the colors of the rainbow. The commonality that many of us share is the belief that the signature program of the last eight years to clean up the lake is actually working. Sure, some reporters love to point out flaws and weaknesses to make their copy more edgy and some for other reasons. The fact is that when you actually talk to scientists and those who live water issues every day, they’ll tell you that but for the clean and clear program our lake and related water systems would be a whole lot worse for wear.

Ok, not to be accused of being an apologist for any person or party, I will admit that the ‘spin’ put on this program could have been a lot less ‘spun’. Fifty plus years of well meaning but wrong headed agricultural and municipal practices were not going to be remedied in six or seven years. Most of us cringed when we heard those words. But, the truth is that the systems, practices, alliances, research and activities put in place under the clean and clear program will bend the curve and over time make the lake even cleaner than it already is.

So my New Year’s wish (hey, if politicians can start campaigning 13 months before an election, I can have a New Year wish three months early) is that those who are campaigning for top elected offices focus on real environmental issues confronting us and refrain this year from telling us that there are monsters under our beds. Let’s not make the clean up of our lake a political football.

Thanks.