Solimano to address Killington Select Board re: $100,000k

[ndscaper]

For those of you who may be interested Mike Solimano will be addressing the Select Board this evening with a “request” for a $100,000 subsidy for promotion of the World Cup. This is the same amount that Chris Bianchi suggested the town set aside in a “Strategic Investment” to promote the World Cup returning. I don’t know why this dance is occurring but maybe the Mike and or the Select Board can answer these questions this evening.
Tonight Tues Jan 10, 2017, Town Hall downstairs meeting room 7:30 pm.

[Bubba]

Already planned to be there...with questions.

[Sergio2232]

are they going to give the money back to killington tax payers if their "investment" pays off?

[yiddle on da fiddle]

Killingtontown..." Next Meeting....jan 11th...cancelled.

[da Pimp]

Most interesting. I understand the concept of sharing in a mutually beneficial project, but the townspeople were never involved in the decisions to:

Hold the event
Agree or not with the date that fell across an already busy holiday period (usually)
Have inputs into how much money was actually spent, which affects profit/loss
Have the right to share in any short or long term profits
Partner with a private corporation whose short and long term goals are to promote their branding, generate future business opportunities, boast about themselves back in Utah, or hope for a short term home run on that weekend

So to ask the taxpayers to contribute after the event was over and done seems odd. Since about 98% of the majority Killington taxpayers would NOT benefit financially from that event and maybe 2% being the business/rental property owners who might benefit, why can't that small minority who might have profited come up with $100,000 out of their real or future perceived profits over the holiday period.

Then you have to factor in the difference between the financial uptick of that Thanksgiving without the world cup, versus what it was with the world cup. With a lot of snowmaking on the hill anyways per Killington's commitment to have a lot of trails open and the good forecast plus real snow that arrived, I bet Thanksgiving would have been pretty decent enough for business and rental property owners without the world cup. So exactly how much MORE did the world cup generate?

If POWDR wants an investment by the town into the future, give the town the opportunity to buy into a stake in the village project. As in "Help us now, benefit later". Because bringing in a lot more traffic all year long will benefit the town in the long term. Oops, I meant to say help the businesses and property renters.

[Bubba]

Interesting meeting, good presentation from Mike, good questions for Select Board and Mike/Jeff and not enough hard data to answer the key question about incremental revenue vs. incremental cost. Alternative suggestion from the audience caused some discussion. To be continued, I'm sure, but the $100K will be in the budget subject to vote of the electorate. Getting answer to the key question will be the determining factor for many.

[GlacierBoy]

So what is the key question??

[ME2VTSkier]

...and what was the alternative suggestion?

[Bubba]

The key question was stated in my post. The alternative suggestion is difficult if not impossible to implement in time for the March annual Town Meeting and budget vote and, in fact, had been voted down by town residents several years ago when first brought up.

[ndscaper]

The key question was stated in my post. The alternative suggestion is difficult if not impossible to implement in time for the March annual Town Meeting and budget vote and, in fact, had been voted down by town residents several years ago when first brought up.

The alternative suggestion was to consider repealing the sales tax portion of the 1% options tax. After querying the Select Board for a comparison of the receipts of that portion of the 1% vs. how much the town has budgeted for Economic Development and Tourism (EDT) spending the quick analysis by Chris Bianchi showed that receipts were roughly $400k and directly identifiable EDT expenses were around $360k.
The second part of the proposal was to eliminate town EDT spending and have the Resort and businesses carry on the EDT function directly without town financial involvement.
This way the Resort gets significant revenue enhancement to do what they will with - no need for the town to fork over $100k because the Resort would get somewhere in the vicinity of 3/4 million - 400k plus the 35% that now goes to the state.
This was shot down as untenable given the budget deadlines. Somehow I think it could be done if the will was there. It took about 5 minutes for Bianchi to do the rough calculations. To adjust the budget accordingly would not take that much longer. Although it would be tough to make a budget without knowing the result of a repeal vote.
In another troubling occurrence the Select Board voted to set aside the $100k without answering the question posed by many in the audience of whether the $100k would be separately warned and voted on as opposed to being buried as a line item in the budget.
There was serious cutting and massaging of the budget and even at that the board was left looking at a 4 cent increase in the property tax. Cuts included putting off the River Road bridge repair for which the town has a state grant for. The grant could potentially expire if the work is not done soon.
Of the 4 cent property tax increase now facing the board about 1.25 cents is the 100k "Strategic Investment" (assuming 80k for each 1 cent).

As to the history of the 1% repeal:

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 4:51 pm
Killington to hold off on tax repeal idea

Select Board chairman Chris Bianchi also announced that the resort will hold off on asking the Select Board to put a question on the March ballot that would ask voters to repeal a portion of the town’s 1 percent local options tax. Bianchi echoed an editorial by Killington and Pico president Mike Solimano in last week’s edition of The Mountain Times. The resort needs “more consensus from the town before they make any moves like that. They withdrew their request for this year,” Bianchi told the Select Board. In his op-ed, Solimano said he wants the town’s full support before making any decision on the tax but, in the meantime, asked that the town get behind changing the Killington Chamber of Commerce into the Killington/Pico Area Association and restructuring the way the town and resort fund marketing and events. The resort and town would have a seat at the table of the KPAA. Supporting the KPAA is also a top economic development priority for the town in 2015, according to a presentation made by Killington town manager Seth Webb on Tuesday, Dec. 16.

************************************************************

From last week's Mountain Times

Opinion

December 18, 2014

Killington resort updates tax repeal request
By Mike Solimano, President and GM of Killington Resort/Pico Mountain

Since I first proposed repealing the sales portion of the 1 percent option tax last fall, I have had countless positive, encouraging conversations with local officials, residents and business owners about how this measure is important for us all. There has also been much debate regarding the best means to bring about the policy changes the resort needs to properly invest in significant new infrastructure.

In addition to my many productive conversations, I have also listened to many local residents and business owners as they expressed concerns about the ultimate impacts of the repeal. I understand these concerns so I have decided the resort should delay asking the Selectmen to put the 1 percent option tax repeal on the ballot for this March’s Town Meeting Day.

While I do not agree with every objection or doubt raised, taking more time to fully explain the resort’s plan to the community is in everyone’s best interest. We will look ahead to next fall or the following Town Meeting Day to address the option tax. This time allows us to share information with all parties involved, begin phase two of our summer growth plan with expanded mountain bike operations and new on-site attractions and let the Killington Pico Area Association (KPAA) start to gain traction.

The KPAA is a critical piece of the overhaul plan, and we want to give the organization time to prove itself by clarifying its mission and demonstrating an ability to support marketing efforts of the town and region. The only way to properly do this is to give the KPAA time to establish a working system of governance. A strong and vibrant KPAA will help the community define its summer marketing agenda.

We are already seeding the future of the KPAA with our extended Merchant Pass program, and have attracted participating businesses as far away as Rutland and Quechee. To date we have sold over 300 passes (with over 50 purchased from the extended region), and we still have one meeting remaining where we anticipate selling many more.

To encourage participation, we have lifted all restrictions on Merchant Passes for the second year in a row, which means unlimited access to Killington and Pico every day of the season. The resort’s contributions from sales of Merchant Passes provide the KPAA with critical baseline funding, and we are pleased with the current pace of program growth.

Killington Resort still views tax modification as an essential component of successful summer growth, but we will not push ahead without the support of our community. The trust between the town of Killington, its residents and the resort is essential to our continued success and the growth we all desire.

[Big Bob]

Letter from Mike in the Mountain times:
http://mountaintimes.info/killington-re ... g-success/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RENO]

Letter from Mike in the Mountain times:
http://mountaintimes.info/killington-re ... g-success/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't get this statement below. If not a profit, then what is the point? Why would the taxpayers invest $100,000 into a losing venture? If K is just looking to offset the cost without a chance in hell for a profit then, again, what is the point? They incurred 1.2 million dollars in net costs. So there was no profit whatsoever? Again, what is the point? Is there an expectation that there will be a profit at some point in the future?

Our goal in hosting a future World Cup event is not to make a profit or even break even, it is just to reduce our substantial production costs to make it sustainable for years to come.

[yiddle on da fiddle]

Never..EVER....confuse an issue by interjecting facts.

[Bubba]

If you look at it as a marketing expense, it has value in brand recognition and brand value for the resort, the community, the state of Vermont and all of New England skiing. That's why the state and Vermont Ski are contributing in addition to others.

[SkiDork]

If you look at it as a marketing expense, it has value in brand recognition and brand value for the resort, the community, the state of Vermont and all of New England skiing. That's why the state and Vermont Ski are contributing in addition to others.

But can that value be quantified somehow? Any marketing guru's out there?