Wind: 3 mph
To The Editor:
"Signs, signs, everywhere signs!" This 1970s hit song by Tesla comes to mind each time I travel on Route 100B as well as when I read the latest discourse on the proposed quarry in Rochester.
On the former, I suggest removing the, "Keep 100B Quarry Free" signs. I support our first amendment right to express ourselves, but it's time to remove these one-sided expressions of disapproval. We get it! Some people don't want the quarry to exist. The final decision won't be made based on the number of white squares set up along this scenic byway. Good thing these signs aren't considered "sandwich boards," huh?
Regarding the Rochester quarry, my understanding is the proposal is working its way through the local and state criterion that covers such things. Lawyers, engineers, various technical witnesses are the norm so that each side has, at least, the appearance of having equal representation and understanding of the laws and rules that govern these matters. Letters, like the one I read in last week's Valley Reporter issue, are counterproductive and inflammatory. It is reckless and irresponsible to take a small piece of what has become a complex issue and somehow paint the applicant (in this case Kingsbury Construction) as some behemoth, unfeeling and uncaring entity that has come into little rural Vermont to tread slipshod over the locals and forever ruin their way of life.
Kingsbury Construction is a family owned and operated company founded and based in Waitsfield. The Kingsburys are among the many names in The Valley that have multi-generational roots here. Kingsbury Construction (KC) has been a good neighbor, giving a great deal to the community. KC isn't going to run and hide in some obscure faraway corner of the world so that it won't have to adhere to any mandates that may be imposed as conditions for approval. At least five KC employees are from the Rochester region (Hancock and Granville). In terms of economic gain, wouldn't Rochester's grand list be well served with the tax addition of a commercial business?
Testimony from individuals that are party to an ongoing legal process should to be confined to the appropriate ruling forum. In this environment, at least, everyone has a chance for rebuttal and the entire picture can be realistically, fairly and honestly painted as opposed to an editorial letter taking a snapshot in time and using it for self-serving gain.