Vermont is open for business: Don't count on it

Vermont Business Magazine, Apr 01, 1997 by Keelan, Donald B

They came by the score, 82 of them, children between the ages of four and 10, to hear, see and feel the Vermont Institute of Natural Science educational program on "Creepers and Leapers." They met in the new home of Arlington's Martha Canfield Memorial Free Library. The setting was perfect.

A year earlier, several Vermont State bureaucrats threatened the existence of this remarkable community resource.

Vermont's Economic Development Commission would have us believe "Vermont is open for business." If a business looking to enter or expand within Vermont must endure what occurred in the development of the new library building in Arlington, it might want to reconsider.

Running Vermont's permit and approval process is an arduous undertaking. What follows is how several state agencies put in place their ill-conceived development regulations -- which were eventually overcome by a handful of volunteers who were determined to build a new library to serve their hometowns of Arlington, Sandgate and Sunderland. I was one of those volunteers.

For nearly two decades the trustees of the Library debated the construction of a new facility to replace their charming, inefficient 150-year-old non-conforming building.

In the spring of 1994 the Library's Trustees decided it was time to build. Little did they realize the difficulties that lay ahead of them.

A suggestion was made to the Library Board to look at a publicly owned acre and a half site contiguous to Arlington's elementary and high schools. The site had much to commend it in location, accessibility and infrastructure. The Board of School Directors welcomed the idea of a library on their campus featuring state of the an features, equipment and location. The existing library was 3/4 of a mile away -- consequently seldom used by the students.

Two town votes, held in rapid succession, approved the school directors' long term lease and the requisite zoning change, while a strong plurality approved the action of the School Board and rezoning. As the State process to acquire the school site moved along, albeit ever so slowly, the approval process nightmare began. The agencies that became involved included the Education Department, the State Attorney General's office, the Department of Libraries, the Division of Labor and Industry, the Architectural Compliance Review Commission, and the Vermont State Senate. The State Environmental Board was not involved. Each agency had its own agenda. Agendas that were imponderable.

The question that had been put before the State Education Department by the library was could the school district lease the site to the library for 99 years at $1 per annum? It took five months before a positive response was handed down from Montpelier.

The 99-year lease term with the school district would become one of the three strikes against the library in its quest to obtain Library Construction Funds under the Federal Title II statute -- US Department of Education program that allows the states to administer federal funds for new library construction. In 1995 the State of Vermont received $126,000 for this purpose and the Arlington library's trustees requested $75,000 of that sum. The Department of Libraries and the State Attorney General's office played hard ball.

To these bureaucrats, the 99-year lease was too short a time period; a 200-year lease would be required if the library was to be approved for the grant. Furthermore, if the library ceased to exist during the first 50 years of the grant/lease (which would represent approximately 10 percent of the total project value), the building would become the state's property, not the school's. The final strike came when the state was informed that construction would begin the day after the nearby elementary school closed for summer recess. Heavy equipment would be gone by the time the children and faculty returned in late August and the construction could proceed inside during the long Vermont winter, thereby encouraging lower bids. This common sense approach was lost on the two state agencies. They insisted construction should not commence until the US Department of Education signed off, presumably in the fall of 1995.

No agency is entitled to 90 percent of the decision making by providing only 10 percent of the funding. The two agencies were told that the library could not acquiesce to their requirements. The reaction to our response was expected: the Library would not receive any federal funds, a result later viewed as a blessing.

More formidable were the negative impacts of many of Vermont's Division of Labor and Industry requirements. This agency covers a number of building related areas -- fire, electrical and American Disabilities Act regulations among others. It is also the issuing agency for building permits. The Division required the library provide for a $140,000 fire sprinkler system before a building permit would be issued. The library's consultants determined that the system was not required. The local bureaucrats from Labor and Industry advised us to, "visit the Smithsonian, Windsor Castle or the Louvre to see how they were handling fire protection." "No thanks," was our response. Construction of the library commenced without the permit. The Department retaliated by ordering the Central Vermont Public Service Corporation, the regional electric company, to withhold power to the site. The independent utility company rejected the directive and the library took to the offensive. The trustees' attorney prepared a "Writ of Mandamus" (show cause order) and sent a letter to Governor Dean asking why his agents were so determined to prevent construction of Arlington's new library.