sell your ride
post your service
sell your stuff
post your class
browse all jobs
post a job
homes for sale
for sale by owner
post your listing
If you're looking for "I Spys," dating or LTRs, this is your scene.
If you're looking for full-on kink or group play, you'll get what you need here.
While I'm somewhat sympathetic, this story screams NIMBY. The only real proposed solution that would address the concern would be to open another dog park. To the extent that there are solutions that require, tags, or parking passes, or whatever, the issue will always be enforcement. By who and how will those be enforced? Enforcement costs money, likely more money than it would raise. With respect to a fee, I pay fairly high property taxes here in BTV. We don't charge fees for basketball courts, tennis courts, trails, soccer or baseball fields, skate parks, or bike paths. Singling out dog parks is patently unfair. Property taxes support access to all these parks equally. Here, the idea of a fee is used not as a revenue generator, but as a barrier to use. That's improper.
A better idea is to educate those who use the park of their impacts on the local neighborhood and ask them to respect the neighborhood. My experience at that park is that the vast majority of visitors are fairly contentious folks who are thankful to have a nice place in town to take their dog. I'd wager they'd do what they could to alleviate the neighborhood's concerns.
Vermonters clearly endorse this practice because they refuse to support real, meaningful sentencing reform. Every time a particular crime catches the news cycle the public outcry to lock them up for life starts all over again. Those feelings have consequences, namely that legislators, state's attorneys, and judges now endorse the idea that non-violent offenders should go to jail for every increasing sentences. That practice needs to stop but it simply will not.
Even though we learned on Friday that there is a potential $1.5 million whole from PILOT funding, the Mayor is behind this budget?
Now I see how the school district could run up a $2.5 million deficit. It's easy to over spend when you have no idea how much money you actually have.
This budget should be rejected. Until the school board presents the voters with an actual sustainable budget that has rock solid revenue projections and is accurate on expenses, any budget should be rejected.
How are we, the voters, supposed to vote on this issue when it appears the full impact of the school district's poor budgeting process has STILL not come to light?
It's telling that the state's attorney for the county won't appeal Kupe's dismissal. That's a tacit acknowledgement that the ordinance cannot survive briefing and a constitutional challenge.
What's almost is bad is Chief Schirling fear mongering that somehow reinstating the status quo from a year ago will somehow lead to a massive influx of undesirables on Church St. This is and has always been about catering to the Church Street merchants.
If Burlington wants to remove these folks from Church St. then they need to completely relocate all their services from downtown.
I'm excited to watch AG Sorell lose another big case and have the state fork over millions in attorney fees to the grocers association. This law, while it might be a good idea, is so clearly unconstitutional, that its legislative supporters should be ashamed.
Quite simply school spending has gotten out of control in Burlington. A recent 7 Days article noted that there has been a 30% increase in the Burlington school budget in the past few years. This growth rate is unsustainable. This comes on top of the stories of what can only be described as gross incompetence in previous years budgets and an inability to do even simple things like filing quarterly taxes. The board's incompetence created a $2.6 million dollar defect and a potential $100,000+ IRS issue.
Now, the school board wants the voters to approve this "honest" budget that is millions of dollars more than the one we rejected. I suppose on some level we can be happy that in 2014 modern and accounting and budgeting have made their way to the school board, but that's not enough to sway my support.
An honest budget would have come in lower than one the voters rejected AND be accurate. All this current proposal does is bring the board's shady budgeting nightmare into the light, and they shouldn't be rewarded for that.
All Comments »