Gunstock Expansion Plans

[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).