Gunstock Expansion Plans

[BroadHopper]

Google and Sunapee and Wachusets' privatizing did not go well through the years. Some years they ask for forgiveness and some years they made out very well and the state did not profit from it. Plus the demands the fat corporation asks for the landowners are a bit much so I don't want to get into this here. In other states and federal property when a company goes belly up the municipalities are usually held responsible for cleaning up the abandoned property.

So, Silber, Sylvia's grandiose idea may not have a silver lining. They probably don't give a s$$t as they pass it on to the next generation.

I heard that their puppet Peter Ness came barrelling in and tries to bark orders in the resort. The rank and file are getting furious. Peter is just a mediocre lawyer on the wagon thinking he knows everything because he has a PSIA certificate.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Google and Sunapee and Wachusets' privatizing did not go well through the years. Some years they ask for forgiveness and some years they made out very well and the state did not profit from it. Plus the demands the fat corporation asks for the landowners are a bit much so I don't want to get into this here. In other states and federal property when a company goes belly up the municipalities are usually held responsible for cleaning up the abandoned property.

So, Silber, Sylvia's grandiose idea may not have a silver lining. They probably don't give a s$$t as they pass it on to the next generation.

I heard that their puppet Peter Ness came barrelling in and tries to bark orders in the resort. The rank and file are getting furious. Peter is just a mediocre lawyer on the wagon thinking he knows everything because he has a PSIA certificate.

Most investment professionals would say that there is ALWAYS a good price at which to sell an investment--in other words, there is definitely some number and set of conditions that a for-profit operator could offer where the citizens come out ahead.

But that does not mean that we will get that number, and there are a couple of reasons why it's unlikely. First, the for-profit operator needs to build in profit to get a return on their investment. That might be 20% of the amount invested off the top every year. So the first 20% of financial improvement goes to the money guys, not the people. Of course, it's REALLY tough to improve a good operation by more than 20%, so....Second, even if we accept the above, we need to remember that the for-profit finance guys are MUCH more sophisticated than the government guys on our side of the bargaining table. So even if we think we have a good deal, we are likely missing a few finer points, as BroadHopper notes was the case at other areas.

So I'd keep my money on Mr Day...

[Woodsy]

This is absurd! When the entire management team quits, that is a crystal clear NO CONFIDENCE vote in the Commissioners!

Gunstock was well run and turned a profit and thus was used as a cash cow for Belknap County. So lets screw that formula up!

Unfortunately, the commissioners are not elected, but appointed. One of our elected Representatives actually mentioned Soros? Seriously? So the only way to correct this boondoggle is to vote out our idiotic State Representatives that voted these morons in.

Woodsy

[Major]

I realize the press and public opinion has been vilifying the county Delegation and in particular Reps Sylvia and Silber. I do not know Michael Sylvia but I know Norm Silber. Firstly, he is a GREAT attorney. Very sharp and effective. Secondly, he is a man of integrity. Yes, he is conservative and not shy about it. People have a hard time separating the person from his political positions. Bottom line is that he is a good man who wants what is best for his constituents. (BTW, he does NOT want to privatize Gunstock. My suspicion is that he didn't sign the pledge because he won't be bullied into it.)

Anyway, all of this could have been avoided if the Commissioners and the full time staff were more cooperative and transparent when the new Delegation took over. At that time, the Delegation's request for a comprehensive audit was met with resistance. This was quickly followed by the expansion plans and the outrageous bonuses the full time staff awarded themselves. Like it or not, when it comes to Gunstock, the Commissioners and the full time staff are public servants and answer to the county Delegation. It is the Delegation's right to audit the Gunstock operation and the Commissioners and full time staff did not help themselves by their resistance. They should have realized they are public servants and the key to any successful government endeavor is openness and transparency. By refusing to cooperate they projected the appearance that they had something to hide.

Like I said, had the Commissioners and the full time staff fully cooperated at the beginning, most of this could have been avoided. However, the way it stands now, it appears their lack of cooperation may have been necessary. We will see when the audit results are made public. In the meantime, I caution against making any judgments until all the facts are publicly revealed.

[John Mercier]

So Silber is going to vote to release the notes and email that deals with the overspending of dollars that were not legally appropriated? Because I was under the understanding that He and Sylvia were keeping this secret.

Also... why would you think it in the best interests of the constituents not to seek private investment and more revenue into the operation?

[Major]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

So Silber is going to vote to release the notes and email that deals with the overspending of dollars that were not legally appropriated? Because I was under the understanding that He and Sylvia were keeping this secret.

I don't know. We only discussed the underlying reasons for the present dispute. Both sides are accusing the other side of overspending on attorneys, so I am not sure if they are being difficult for the sake of being difficult. Trust me, that happens in disputes and especially in litigation.

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Also... why would you think it in the best interests of the constituents not to seek private investment and more revenue into the operation?

What I meant about the privatizing Gunstock issue was that Norm was not in favor of selling Gunstock to a third-party, which had been an accusation against him. I should have said he is not in favor of selling Gunstock. I am not sure what he thinks about privatizing services. My guess is that if it makes business sense and results in increased revenue that he would be for it. You would have to ask him.

[John Mercier]

So he really isn't open on the emails... and suggesting that both sides are acting like ''babies'' doesn't really adhere to the level of elected officials.


Gunstock being sold was never really being discussed... as Gunstock can not be sold due to the means that it was gifted to the county.
Privatization of services is the only privatization that is on the table.

[LongBay]

Originally Posted by Major

I don't know. We only discussed the underlying reasons for the present dispute. Both sides are accusing the other side of overspending on attorneys, so I am not sure if they are being difficult for the sake of being difficult. Trust me, that happens in disputes and especially in litigation.

What I meant about the privatizing Gunstock issue was that Norm was not in favor of selling Gunstock to a third-party, which had been an accusation against him. I should have said he is not in favor of selling Gunstock. I am not sure what he thinks about privatizing services. My guess is that if it makes business sense and results in increased revenue that he would be for it. You would have to ask him.

When I asked him he said he wanted it privatized.

[LongBay]

An article that pretty much describes how we got here and how it probably won’t get any better.

https://unofficialnetworks.com/2022/...ment-resigned/

[samosetguy]

You won't see me at Gunstock for a long time. Who wants to get on a chair lift at a resort filled with dysfunctional leadership and disgruntled employees? My level of confidence that critical maintenance is happening is pretty low. The focus needs to be on whatever moronic politicians appointed these Commissioners. Gotta love when the government tries to run anything.

[StevenGilford]

Originally Posted by Major

I realize the press and public opinion has been vilifying the county Delegation and in particular Reps Sylvia and Silber. I do not know Michael Sylvia but I know Norm Silber. Firstly, he is a GREAT attorney. Very sharp and effective. Secondly, he is a man of integrity. Yes, he is conservative and not shy about it. People have a hard time separating the person from his political positions. Bottom line is that he is a good man who wants what is best for his constituents. (BTW, he does NOT want to privatize Gunstock. My suspicion is that he didn't sign the pledge because he won't be bullied into it.)

Norm wrote a whole article about how privatizing Gunstock is his dream...

https://granitegrok.com/blog/2021/10/i-have-a-dream

I understand that for everybody there is a person vs. politics aspect, but I don't understand why people blindly defend the politics side because they like them as a person.

And note, when "selling gunstock" is discussed, it is always in the context of the operations as the land cannot be sold. So when he and others say "of course we aren't considering selling Gunstock" they are being extremely disingenuous.

[John Mercier]

Even more disingenuous as we would need to find a private party willing to take the risk of paying the county even more than the current formula.

[Cobaltdeadhead]

Not sure how anyone can take Norm seriously when he says George Soros is funding opposition to he and Sylvia's desires for the place.

That's crazy town right there. No way Soros has even heard of Gunstock nevermind cares about it.

[Major]

I can only relate to you my experiences with Norm. I asked him directly if he wanted to sell Gunstock and he said no. This was after the Granite State Grok article. Perhaps he changed his mind. Perhaps he was thinking of his constituents. I don't know. During the course of our discussions, he never mentioned George Soros, so I'm not sure where that comment came from.

I read the Grok article and didn't disagree with a word he said. The private sector should own and manage Gunstock. Maybe the reason why Gunstock is recently successful is because it is managed like a private entity although ultimately accountable to the tax payers. However, there were a number of years in which Gunstock lost a lot of money. At least back then, as a Belknap county resident, I could get a discount ski pass. Now I get nothing.

[StevenGilford]

Norm's Shadowy Groups and George Soros conspiracy theory:

"And it is worthy to note that the principal political consultant to the shadowy group trying to interfere with proper legal oversight of Gunstock, granted to the Gunstock Area Commission by the General Court in 1959, has ties to organizations believed to be funded in large measure by George Soros."

https://www.wmur.com/article/stateme...staff/40681060

[Major]

Maybe it's true. Who knows? There are many instances that something that is farfetched at the time were proven to be true. Also, there are many instances of something that is false but promoted as being true that were ultimately proven to be false. Do you know for sure that "the principal political consultant to the shadowy group trying to interfere with proper legal oversight of Gunstock . . . has ties to organizations believed to be funded in large measure by George Soros." Who is the consultant and who has funded him/her?

Regardless of this rabbit hole, my original post was that all of this could have been avoided if the Commissioners and the full time staff of Gunstock were more cooperative and transparent at the beginning of the new relationship with the county delegation. Their reluctance to an audit fueled the distrust that we are now witnessing.

[John Mercier]

So Norm is completely open to releasing those legal counsel e*mails so as to avoid and ''distrust'' and focus on ''cooperation and transparency''?

[Major]

Again, nothing to do with the genesis of the initial distrust. The delegation asked for billing documents and was blown off. Happens all the time in conflict (litigation) -- why should I be cooperative if the other side isn't being cooperative. I am assuming the delegation isn't cooperating because the Commissioners and full time staff aren't cooperating.

The tone was set by the initial request. The Commissioners and the full time staff thought they had no accountability to anyone, including the delegation.

[John Mercier]

Because we are judging them on their actions... and not the actions of the others.

My honesty and integrity is a matter of my actions, not the opposite party.
So Silber is showing a lack of honesty and integrity.

And you are confusion elected county commissioners with appointed Gunstock Area Commissioners.

The County Commissioners seeking the information are not the GAC that the delegation has only general oversight of.

[StevenGilford]

Originally Posted by Major

my original post was that all of this could have been avoided if the Commissioners and the full time staff of Gunstock were more cooperative and transparent at the beginning of the new relationship with the county delegation.

And this all could have been avoided if the Delegation had appointed suitably qualified and experienced Commissioners who could control their temper, speak civilly to the management team, and refrain from creating a toxic work environment.

[Major]

I guess the full time employees are the first ever to work for a demanding boss or a demanding board of directors who demanded accountability and transparency. I didn't realize they were such snowflakes.

[John Mercier]

The delegation works for us... where is the transparency?

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Major

I guess the full time employees are the first ever to work for a demanding boss or a demanding board of directors who demanded accountability and transparency. I didn't realize they were such snowflakes.

Since Day and Co had the stones to bet their livelihoods on the stand-off, maybe a different metaphor than snowflake is in order?

[Major]

Yes, the delegation is accountable to the taxpayers. However, the delegation appoints the commissioners who in turn appoint the full time personnel. Maybe the issue is that with a delegation demanding accountability, the full time staff were worried that they would be unable to award themselves big fat bonuses with "management" breathing down their neck. I would further add that these bonuses were awarded to the top level management only. They weren't too concerned about individuals who do the day-to-day work that makes Gunstock great during the season. (I have a relative who has a very important job that is key to the success of Gunstock during the winter and he like his peers were snubbed.) The top management were concerned only about themselves.

[John Mercier]

As I stated... the Delegation is not being questioned about the GAC... that battle is more than lost.

The Delegation is being questioned by the County Commissioners... which they do not appoint... on legal expenditures that they did not have the authority to make.

So Silber is like that Gunstock Management team that doesn't want any oversight... but it doesn't work that way.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Major

Yes, the delegation is accountable to the taxpayers. However, the delegation appoints the commissioners who in turn appoint the full time personnel. Maybe the issue is that with a delegation demanding accountability, the full time staff were worried that they would be unable to award themselves big fat bonuses with "management" breathing down their neck. I would further add that these bonuses were awarded to the top level management only. They weren't too concerned about individuals who do the day-to-day work that makes Gunstock great during the season. (I have a relative who has a very important job that is key to the success of Gunstock during the winter and he like his peers were snubbed.) The top management were concerned only about themselves.

It's funny that you continually cast aspersions on the management team with no evidence ("Maybe the issue is..."), yet you ignore the long public, factual record of bad behavior by Silber, Sylvia, and their cronies. It's as if you think none of us have been following the story for months...

[John Mercier]

A think the major concern is that the County Commission will hold firm.
Without revealing the emails, I believe the legal firm was working for Silber and Sylvia and not we, the taxpayers.

The two of them should pick up the $30K...

[BroadHopper]

Well, the game plan is to bypass the free staters in a legal way. So far the AG allows the majority of the Belknap Commission to overrule the Silber/Sylvia even tho they have the lead seat.

So far, Belknap Commission voted out Strang, Ness resigned, and Day is back! We still have a way until the November elections. The Delegates led by Sylvia will put up a fight, but I think the Commission has enough power to overrule. Especially with the NH AG and Gov. Sununu on their side.

A good number of season pass sales were refunded. Soulfest sued Gunstock and hopefully, Day can make amends. Soulfest has also expressed they will not return. Almost a month of park revenue was also lost. Valued employees who have found another job may not return. Consider this a challenge, not failure.

What's next? Well, the Democratic Party has been meeting weekly to solidify its party. The Republicans are splintered and need help. There are plenty of independents that can switch for the Primary and choose non-free staters to run. This and the November election will choose the direction.

I think voters learned a lesson. Choose candidates wisely and vote!

[Major]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

It's funny that you continually cast aspersions on the management team with no evidence ("Maybe the issue is..."), yet you ignore the long public, factual record of bad behavior by Silber, Sylvia, and their cronies. It's as if you think none of us have been following the story for months...

Do you deny that the management team awarded themselves big bonuses without seeking any approval? That's a fact, I think. As I stated, I am close with a long term employee. The management isn't as wonderful as news and social media projects. They are difficult to work for and do not value low level employees. That's a fact, although it isn't published.

The point of my comments is that this is not a black and white situation. The news and social media has chosen a side and has decided to pillory the other side. The "factual record of bad behavior by Silber, Sylvia" is a result of the media's bias reporting. There is nuance in this situation. You have decided which side you are on. Just know that it isn't as clear cut as you think. (I'm reminded about statements made on this Forum about Russian collusion back in the day.)

[John Mercier]

They spent $50K with no authority to do so.
The County Commission covered up the original $20K; but wants more information on the other $30k.

Bad behavior by the Management does not cover for bad behavior by Sylvia/Silber.

That would be like arguing that cheating at the Academy is acceptable because you saw someone else cheat.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Major

Do you deny that the management team awarded themselves big bonuses without seeking any approval? That's a fact, I think. As I stated, I am close with a long term employee. The management isn't as wonderful as news and social media projects. They are difficult to work for and do not value low level employees. That's a fact, although it isn't published.

The point of my comments is that this is not a black and white situation. The news and social media has chosen a side and has decided to pillory the other side. The "factual record of bad behavior by Silber, Sylvia" is a result of the media's bias reporting. There is nuance in this situation. You have decided which side you are on. Just know that it isn't as clear cut as you think. (I'm reminded about statements made on this Forum about Russian collusion back in the day.)

I have not written anything about bonuses--if you have a newspaper article or minutes of a meeting or any sort of substantiation that money was spent improperly, other than an anonymous person supposedly in the know, please share. Otherwise you should not assert malfeasance.

Similarly, unless you can point to specific reporting that is wrong, you should not criticize LDS et al. They appear to have provided great coverage here

[StevenGilford]

Originally Posted by Major

Do you deny that the management team awarded themselves big bonuses without seeking any approval? That's a fact, I think.

It's not a fact. It was voted and approved by the Gunstock Area Commissioners.

"He added that this year’s fiscal budget allowed for performance bonuses, contingent upon the results of the financial audit and he would be asking for a vote to release those funds."

"Motion: Commissioner Gallagher made a motion to approve the release of
allocated funds for recommended bonuses based on the completion
of the independent financial audit.

Second: Commissioner Dumais.

Discussion: Commissioner Gallagher commented that the audit now validates
that Gunstock will be returning close to $250,000 to Belknap
Country because of the good work that was done this year. He said
this is a significant increase to the $175,000 that Gunstock would
normally send to the county and should be recognized.

Vote: All in favor. Chair Kiedaisch voted as proxy for Commissioner
McLear."

https://www.gunstock.com/upload/phot...9.21-draft.pdf


Edit: ready for the next moving of the goalposts "they shouldn't have done that with taxpayer money" or "why did the senior staff get the big bonuses and the rest of the staff got scraps"

Seriously, if you get your information from Norm you really have to question all of it, he is not a trustworthy individual.

Edit: oh I see that we have already been quoting GraniteGrok, Norm's favorite website "oh this is too much to pay a county employee wah wahh". Show me any other county employees that run a Net Profitable business that has increased revenues by millions of dollars!

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by StevenGilford

And this all could have been avoided if the Delegation had appointed suitably qualified and experienced Commissioners who could control their temper, speak civilly to the management team, and refrain from creating a toxic work environment.

Even worse, they hounded two(?) excellent commissioners off the Board

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by StevenGilford

And note, when "selling gunstock" is discussed, it is always in the context of the operations as the land cannot be sold. So when he and others say "of course we aren't considering selling Gunstock" they are being extremely disingenuous.

It's disingenuous to suggest a entering into a lease with a private operator is "selling Gunstock." While the ski operations have always been managed by the county, food & beverage operations were leased to a private operator (most recently Centerplate) for a long time. No one has suggested that Gunstock was partially sold, or bought back, because of that lease.

[John Mercier]

No private entity has been willing to propose, never mind prove financial stability, to enter such a lease. Discussion has always centered on activities not directly tied to the slopes.

So a private hotel and restaurant would be in the scope of the current privatization... but for reasons not transmitted to the public... was considered privatization run amok.

It may have been with further study that the proposal was not financially or legally viable... but it never got to that stage.

So they would need to transmit what the privatization plan is...
Is it all or nothing? Because in that case, they should be working to tell Centerplate that either they lease the entire area or get out... but it seems that they are willing to privatize pieces - so why not these pieces?

I can hypothesize, but not know for sure.

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

Google and Sunapee and Wachusets' privatizing did not go well through the years. Some years they ask for forgiveness and some years they made out very well and the state did not profit from it.

That is incorrect.

Wachusett and Sunapee were constantly having issues prior to moving to private operators (Sunapee in particular), resulting in taxpayer bail outs.

Wachusett has been run by the Crowley family's company for decades and is considered one of the most successful ski areas in the country.

Mt. Sunapee was run by the Mueller family's company for two decades and quickly grew into one of the most successful ski areas in the state. Lease payments were made to the state every year.

It is hard to defend some of Vail's decisions in recent years (I personally refused to patronize any of their areas last season due to their draconian vaccine mandates). Nevertheless, they have continued to make lease payments to the state every year. The Sunapee lease payments subsidize Cannon. Without the annual lease payments or taxpayer bailouts, Cannon would likely default on its debt.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by rocket21

That is incorrect.

Wachusett and Sunapee were constantly having issues prior to moving to private operators (Sunapee in particular), resulting in taxpayer bail outs.

Wachusett has been run by the Crowley family's company for decades and is considered one of the most successful ski areas in the country.

Mt. Sunapee was run by the Mueller family's company for two decades and quickly grew into one of the most successful ski areas in the state. Lease payments were made to the state every year.

It is hard to defend some of Vail's decisions in recent years (I personally refused to patronize any of their areas last season due to their draconian vaccine mandates). Nevertheless, they have continued to make lease payments to the state every year. The Sunapee lease payments subsidize Cannon. Without the annual lease payments or taxpayer bailouts, Cannon would likely default on its debt.

It's really hard--basically impossible--for private citizens to know if they are getting a good deal with any of these arrangements. I ski Wachusett regularly, and agree it's a great hill from a customer perspective. I don't doubt that Sunapee subsidizes Cannon.

But the thing that we do not know is how much quality/revenue is due to the private company compared to the amount of profit (or loss) they are taking from citizens/skiers--it's a complex question. That's why we need professionals/technocrats leading these issues, not extremists who can't even manage their legal bills or keep a well respected management team on the job

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

It's really hard--basically impossible--for private citizens to know if they are getting a good deal with any of these arrangements. I ski Wachusett regularly, and agree it's a great hill from a customer perspective. I don't doubt that Sunapee subsidizes Cannon.

But the thing that we do not know is how much quality/revenue is due to the private company compared to the amount of profit (or loss) they are taking from citizens/skiers--it's a complex question. That's why we need professionals/technocrats leading these issues, not extremists who can't even manage their legal bills or keep a well respected management team on the job

A good deal for the consumer should not be the scope of the delegation.
The delegation should be working for the taxpayers that vote them in... that is whom they represent.
That means they only need to determine if the leasing deal is the best they can get for each part...

The lease from Sunapee did go to Cannon. It was part of the deal being that the park system is self-funded.

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

It's really hard--basically impossible--for private citizens to know if they are getting a good deal with any of these arrangements. I ski Wachusett regularly, and agree it's a great hill from a customer perspective. I don't doubt that Sunapee subsidizes Cannon.

But the thing that we do not know is how much quality/revenue is due to the private company compared to the amount of profit (or loss) they are taking from citizens/skiers--it's a complex question. That's why we need professionals/technocrats leading these issues, not extremists who can't even manage their legal bills or keep a well respected management team on the job

It's not quite that complex. In the case of Mt. Sunapee, it's structured as a fixed amount, plus a percentage of revenue. The state also has the right to look at the operator's books. The lease was developed by the state and elected officials (some who could probably still assist).

Not only did the state get a guaranteed revenue stream, but it no longer has the risk associated with bad winters and capital investments. Perhaps more importantly, the ski area was no longer tax exempt (meaning the towns, county, and state collect property taxes on the millions of dollars of lifts, buildings, snowmaking equipment, etc. installed by the operator).

The state lease arrangement has more oversight than government management. Mt. Sunapee's operator would never get away with putting a mid-mountain hotel on undeveloped public property in their master plan.

[John Mercier]

Do you have a link? As the State Park is still tax exempt. The buildings and improvements are like any lease/rental... when it is over the landowner assumes ownership of all improvements. There may be local or county property tax payments on the private property around the area that is owned and developed by the corporation... and the new lease suggests more land will be added to the State Park.

The State pays five years of transition property taxes for newly acquired park property... but after that nothing.

So I think the State would love a huge capital development of a ''mid-mountain'' hotel if it increased their lease revenue and meant a future capital asset when the lease came to an end.

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Do you have a link? As the State Park is still tax exempt. The buildings and improvements are like any lease/rental... when it is over the landowner assumes ownership of all improvements. There may be local or county property tax payments on the private property around the area that is owned and developed by the corporation... and the new lease suggests more land will be added to the State Park.

The State pays five years of transition property taxes for newly acquired park property... but after that nothing.

From the 2015 Master Development Plan:
"Mount Sunapee has paid the Town of Newbury approximately $2,225,000 in local property taxes, and has paid the Town of Goshen approximately $245,000 in local property taxes in the 16 years of the lease. Prior to the 1998 lease agreement, the Towns of Newbury and Goshen received no local property tax payments from the ski area"
"Mount Sunapee has paid the State of New Hampshire approximately $1,855,000 in Rooms and Meals taxes since 1998, and stimulated substantial additional Rooms & Meals tax revenues from the Sunapee region for the benefit of the State’s General Fund. Mount Sunapee has paid the State of New Hampshire approximately $1,257,000 in Business Profits Taxes"

[FlyingScot]

Hi rocket,

These are interesting, but they are only half of the equation. You need to compare these numbers to the profit the government would have earned if it was operating Sunapee itself. And of course, there are a huge number of details that may make either set of figures misleading...

Not asking you to to that here, as the real question is Gunstock and how a for-profit operator would compare to the current team/structure. Cheers

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

These are interesting, but they are only half of the equation. You need to compare these numbers to the profit the government would have earned if it was operating Sunapee itself. And of course, there are a huge number of details that may make either set of figures misleading...

The state was often losing money on a P&L basis (which is distorted due to state accounting excluding some huge expenses from ski area books, such as depreciation and interest), as it still does at Cannon in bad years. Not only that, but the state struggled to provide the capital needed to modernize Sunapee and Cannon.

In the end, the Muellers invested heavily in Sunapee (new lifts, new lodge, massive snowmaking improvements), and the lease payments helped to provide capital (along with general fund dollars) for Cannon improvements. Cannon is still lagging, with an aging lift fleet and visible accumulated depreciation.

[John Mercier]

The Muellers had 600 acres of private land to develop once they won a decision that allowed them to connect it to the ski area by use of more of the state park.

That isn't something readily available to a leasee of Gunstock.

They would need the right to develop the county land... as per the master plan of the previous GAC.

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

The Muellers had 600 acres of private land to develop once they won a decision that allowed them to connect it to the ski area by use of more of the state park.

That isn't something readily available to a leasee of Gunstock.

They would need the right to develop the county land... as per the master plan of the previous GAC.

They were originally proposing to expand eastward within the state park, but were halted by a well-organized opposition group. The private land they acquired to expand into on the west is the Goshen portion of the property tax figures previously listed.

Presumably if Gunstock ever when to bid for a lease, the topic of expansion would need to be covered (e.g. Alpine Ridge, Eastside).

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by rocket21

It's not quite that complex. In the case of Mt. Sunapee, it's structured as a fixed amount, plus a percentage of revenue. The state also has the right to look at the operator's books. The lease was developed by the state and elected officials (some who could probably still assist).

Not only did the state get a guaranteed revenue stream, but it no longer has the risk associated with bad winters and capital investments. Perhaps more importantly, the ski area was no longer tax exempt (meaning the towns, county, and state collect property taxes on the millions of dollars of lifts, buildings, snowmaking equipment, etc. installed by the operator).

The state lease arrangement has more oversight than government management. Mt. Sunapee's operator would never get away with putting a mid-mountain hotel on undeveloped public property in their master plan.

I agree with your qualitative description. But (and this was the point of my previous post), you have not included any numbers. Without the numbers, and a bunch of additional analysis, it's impossible to know if the deal is better or worse. I'm pretty sure the two of us would agree on that.

If we were leaving the analysis to experienced, rational professionals--former ski area and hospitality CEOs, bankers, etc--I'd be comfortable that they would evaluate this stuff appropriately, starting as you have above.

But the people on the commission today have shown themselves to be irrational and dogmatic. They appear to be eager to privatize for the sake of privatization--this is a recipe for giving money away to to the for-profit operators.

[rocket21]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

I agree with your qualitative description. But (and this was the point of my previous post), you have not included any numbers. Without the numbers, and a bunch of additional analysis, it's impossible to know if the deal is better or worse. I'm pretty sure the two of us would agree on that.

$150K/year at the start of the lease (1998), adjusted thereafter for inflation, plus 3% of revenue. The original RFP and lease are on various state web sites.

[ITD]

What a mess. This audit should be completed, if it shows improprieties the bad actors should be prosecuted. If it shows that the mountain is well run, which I suspect will be the case, this commission should be fired. A commissioner wanting employee's phone numbers is a little wacked if you ask me.

[fatlazyless]

Want to avoid the ugly politics of skiing Gunstock..... https://www.wolfeboronh.us/abenaki-ski-area ... ...
.... the way home town skiing should be! ...... price $20. .... $8-Wolfeboro residents ..... and it has a wonderful ROPE TOW that challenges you on the ride up.