imagrownassmanbtv | Seven Days | Vermont's Independent Voice

Seven Days needs your financial support!

Member since Jan 19, 2019



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Ranked-Choice Voting Proposal Advances in Burlington

Why would anyone want to accept a system that has uninformed allocation of votes? Nobody knows who is left after the 1st or 2nd round of votes. So if you make choices based on your second choice and that second choice is no longer available, you’ve voted for someone that’s no longer running. It makes more sense if you were able to vote after each round with the full knowledge of who is remaining and who got knocked otherwise so your vote strategy would be informed. This is the main failing of IRV voting, uninformed voting of whoever is left after each round. It may be more time consuming, and expensive but Burlington is better off with a runoff election after the first election if no one gets 40%. If your side can’t be bothered to show up for the runoff, to make an informed decision based on the remaining candidates then you probably deserve to lose. I’ve offered it before but it makes for interesting reading for anyone interested in how odd the last election using IRV was that led to the disastrous Kiss administration. It’s all starting to feel like the Progressives want to find a way to win without having to compete like a traditional party does by relying on a majority or plurality. This system doesn’t produce a winner that lost the first two rounds against the people’s choice only to win in the 3rd round. That’s doesn’t pass the smell test for a fair election.

23 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 12/03/2019 at 7:07 PM

Re: “Burlington Progs Want to Bring Back Ranked-Choice Voting

Ufff, where does the Grownassman even start with this topic? Elections are sensitive topics so the rules that govern them have to not just be fair but more importantly never give up any perception of not being fair. By this measure the current system is better than IRV as IRV has too many rules to follow and can produce results that are not fully intended or perceived as fair or common sense. This is what happened in 2009 when Kiss got re-elected as he was not the winning candidate of the people in the first or second round of voting. No system is perfect but there is only one system that is the lesser of all evils and that its whoever gets the majority of votes wins. In a town with multiple parties 40% sounds reasonable as a threshold to win as it’s probably impossible not to have a split outcome where no one receives above 50% of the total votes. If there is less than 40% have a run-off election between the two largest vote holders which is a fairer way to determine a true winner, than blind allocation of votes in an IRV system which happens when you don’t know who actually won in the 2nd or 3rd round of votes. For a better breakdown of why IRV does not work click here

37 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 11/30/2019 at 5:12 PM

Re: “Weinberger Touts Burlington's Improved Credit Rating

This is one of the many reasons why Miro will get re-elected because on the fundamentals of running a city he is boss. People may differ with him philosophically but he pretty much fixed all the progressive boodoggles he inherited. Burlington will re-elect him because he is a sound financial manager and saves taxpayers money. Could anyone imagine what the tax and financial outlook would be had the progressives remained in power the last 7 years? The Pension fund liabilities, Burlington Telecom, Airport financing fiasco, were all created by Progressives and Miro fixed them all without significantly raising taxes.
Hasnt done anything for the poor? Miro created the first permanent wet shelter in Burlington, doubled the amount of money for affordable housing, and increased city money/efforts to alleviate the heroin epidemic which is one of the root causes of homlessness. You have to give Miro some credit for this Gigrape52, Like all municipalities across America, Burlington has a homeless population that defies easy fixes.

41 likes, 20 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 07/30/2019 at 12:06 PM

Re: “Judge Allows Construction, Tree Removal to Proceed at Burlington's City Hall Park


Planning processes like the one's for City Hall Park have many opportunities to be heard. Just because your ideas weren't incorporated in doesn't mean you weren't heard. It means you didn't have the majority of votes at any point in the process to take charge of the plan that was being pushed. Burlington cannot get consensus on anything, it's truly a cat herding type of town so the only logical step is to default to majority citywide referendums or to have our duly elected officials vote in our place to again make majorities to decide. If you can't win the day you have to respect the majority will or else nothing will get done in this town which is what many folks opposing everything in this town want. Cities have to get projects done and can't please everyone, there will be people who won't win the day even if it's close 50% plus one is the only fair way to make citywide decisions without giving minority opposition veto power. If you have a better process than 50% plus for making decisions the minority opposition has an obligation to share it with us. Instead they'd rather hide behind "better plans" and the "process was rigged" rather than deal with the very real numbers that they never had the votes, they then cry foul and commence to hold up projects with lawsuits. This is a real threat to democratic rule in Burlington.

67 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 07/11/2019 at 7:01 PM

Re: “South Burlington Council Wanted a Say in Burlington Zoning Change


I can chill with the best of them because I'm Grown. I notice you never deal with the substance of majority decision making by 50% plus one. Is there a better system that doesn't give minority veto power to the animated few? You have no answer for this except my side must be heard no matter what, which is not what the majority agrees with. You also don't deal with the dysfunction your alternative creates towards getting anything done without appeasing minority opinion stakeholders. I'm not pro anything but pro common sense and the Coalition Against Everything does not traffic in common sense. I'm a generation X'r by the way and I recognize that one of the defining features of any city is that they change. I can logically recognize that the trees in city hall park will be replaced, because none of the trees in the old city hall postcards are there now. You know times change. Also I know that hundreds of trees have been planted by the Miro administration alongside other nonprofits. Lastly, I think my referenced article actually hits the point head on in that many well-intentioned folks still end up being in the way of progress and democratically determined decisions which is what The Coalition Against Everything is, plus most of them are boomers. Here's a toast to you Charles as I have cold one on my porch.

Mr. Grownassman

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 07/11/2019 at 5:33 PM

Re: “South Burlington Council Wanted a Say in Burlington Zoning Change


You frustrate people when you say "If you check the facts and figures you will find that when he has received a majority vote, it's usually only a few percent." because what you just said constitutes a majority decision that should be respected. Otherwise it's a recipe for nothing getting done which is probably what you guys want. Just because you're close doesn't mean you get to contest everything. It means you lost the vote and the day and that you should respect the will of the people because the will is equal to 50% plus one. It's not the go ahead to re-litigate your better plan. It means it didn't make the cut and you have to move on. There's an interesting article in the huffingtonpost that points out that nationwide many progressive boomers are holding up housing and transportation needs by overwhelming and abusing municipal forums to over represent their points of view. Do you fit into this demographic Charlie? I recommend it to all the Coalition Against Everything members as most of them seem to fit this mold.…

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 07/11/2019 at 2:41 PM

Re: “Friends, Foes and Rivals: The Latest Burlington-SoBu Dustup Is Nothing New

This should be a no-brainer because what's the alternative to not re-zoning and revitalizing this never to be used as industrial space real estate. It will be an instant and significant boost to the Burlington Tax Coffers. Higher Ground will bring energy, jobs and tourism to an area that's dead after 4:00 pm. The parking is already built and if it doesn't get done, I wouldn't be surprise if down the road, Burton rethinks the need to stay in Burlington as most of the low altitude skiing (That's VT) will go away in ten years or so due to global warming. The property and sales tax on food, alcohol and tickets will be very significant if its built. Higher Ground will be slightly bigger than the two combined venues they currently use at their south burlington location. With the bigger combined space Burlington will start booking more and more big name bands that rightly recognize that Burlington is a vital market to hit in the northeast tour circuit. You combine that with Talent Skate Park, Mad Taco, Misery Loves Company, maybe some brew pub tie in and you truly have a destination that will flourish and help revitalize that part of Burlington which again is dead after 4pm.

15 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by imagrownassmanbtv on 07/06/2019 at 12:55 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Keep up with us Seven Days a week!

Sign up for our fun and informative

All content © 2020 Da Capo Publishing, Inc. 255 So. Champlain St. Ste. 5, Burlington, VT 05401
Website powered by Foundation