Taylor, can you link the actual bill - all of the reports thus far have very little detail about the actual law, and it's really hard to find the text of the bill in the legislative record (for me at least).
Why does Seven Days insist on calling a mob a 'Mob' or a "mob"?
According to the interwebs:
mob
mb/Submit
noun
1.
a large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.
"a mob of protesters"
synonyms: crowd, horde, multitude, rabble, mass, throng, group, gang, gathering, assemblage
"troops dispersed the mob"
verb
1.
crowd around (someone) in an unruly and excitable way in order to admire or attack them.
"he was mobbed by autograph hunters"
synonyms: surround, swarm, besiege, jostle More
I can't think of a more appropriate use of a word, without the ambiguity added by the scare quotes, than the current.
I don't think that bringing a few (or many) millions of extra pork dollars should be the top priority of a senator. He should be throwing his substantial political capital around for major issues and ideas, not just bringing [ed. undoubtedly well-deserved and much appreciated] over-sized cheques to publicity events back home.
Ten years ago I saw him in national media frequently, now he's vanished.
He's held the same office since I was ONE year old, and I am starting to get long in the tooth.I like Pat personally, but I'd rather have someone with enthusiasm than seniority.
What does state and local land use law have to do with any matter of federal law?
“If this project gets approved, in this location, no farmland in Vermont is safe.”? From what I've read maybe "If this project is rejected, in this location, then no property owner in Vermont is safe," would be more accurate.
I absolutely believe that there are community and statewide resources that do need to be considered and minded through inclusive processes. But in our state of 6.15 million acres, to prevent someone from investing in and improving their land because adding 254 homes is not commensurate with the loss of the potential agricultural use of 178 acres is ludicrous.
If there are not homes built here, instead they will be built elsewhere in Vermont on 1,2 or even 10 acre lots on the edges of active farms, causing far more environmental impact than this development will. Heck, think about how much gasoline all these families will save because of the proximity to the interstate! The VPR commentator yesterday spoke truthfully when he talked about the beautiful view from I-89 being sullied - this might go against some people's aesthetic taste, but I do not want his aesthetic taste to dictate land use and property rights in our state.
Real environmentalism is more than a postcard view from the interstate.
who cares?
this is a school board race: being a communist, anarchist or fascist would have little guidance in the day to day affairs of a local school board.
Re: “Vermont Senate Sends Marijuana Legalization Bill to Governor”
Found it.
Here's the bill as passed by the House
https://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Doc…