His "flatlander" comment really says that Waitsfield, Fayston and Warren
are full of a bunch of people from somewhere else south of here, with
agendas that must be, therefore, bogus. I really think it's part of an
anger that stems from the geographic reality that causes Moretown to see
less economic benefit from the skiing and other activities just around
the corner.
The little bumper stickers admonishing you to slow down in Moretown
village remind you that some folks are pissed off that you are just
cruising through. I have no idea how many people hold that angst, and I
do not claim that it is any specific number, but it exists, and I do
believe Mr. Van Deusen is a proud proponent of this type of resentment
spreading. That is not the way to unite anyone on an initiative that you
support. That's basic politics, Mr. Van Deusen. What are you doing?
He argues that grabbing as much subsidy as possible is the way to go.
How much do you want? "More." How much do you need? "More." How much is
enough? Perhaps it is a consumption mindset problem. Or a version of the
poor stepchild who in his youth wasn't fed as well as his siblings and
who now gorges without self control and feels good about it. It is
possible that he has sufficient backers to keep him on the select board
for years to come, to vote for any and all projects that will bring more
"free" kickback money - I mean, uh, a "host town agreement." Maybe
WalMart and McDonald's and any project (except a quarry) can just
proceed.
The bottom line is that Mr. Van Deusen sees no problem whatsoever in the
permanent nature change for an irreplaceable, unique asset, resource,
or whatever you want to call it - well, you either get that argument or
you don't. He tries to negate the pristine ridge argument, claiming
timber is going to be cut anyway so we might as well have the
construction and yet Vermont is relatively heavily forested as compared
with 100 years ago, and has been cut a couple of times already, so I am
not sure why that should alarm us.
The litany of other points he raises are important to really scrutinize
as this is the Kool-Aid that the company from somewhere south of here
wants you to drink. Lowering taxes and creating jobs -- who could
possibly object to the admirable goal of reducing taxes for working
families? Yet it skirts the point, which is that the means of attaining
the goal is objectionable to many, myself included. Creating five jobs
is also not a selling point in my view as compared with the impacts.
Mr. Van Deusen might instead choose to focus on finding taxpayer relief
by other means, say, within the scope of better management of the
Moretown municipal budget perhaps, instead of riding around
self-aggrandizing, carrying on in his self-appointed dual role as the
Realtor of irreplaceable assets and Boston-based industrial energy
dealmaker.
DelBrocco lives in Waitsfield.
