Op/Ed

Letter to the editor: Vermont Gas should pay for church easement

The Middlebury selectboard recently approved an easement across the Middlebury town green to be conveyed to Vermont Gas Systems so they can use it to build out additional fossil fuel infrastructure. The selectboard granted this easement for a single dollar. Giving things away for a dollar for which we could get more money to apply toward reducing our carbon footprint is not in the town’s best interest. This is not a vote against St. Stephen’s. It is a vote for Vermont Gas to pay a fair market value for the easement that we could apply toward reaching our climate emissions reduction goals.

It is reasonable to conduct a vote to help us think carefully about our policy with regard to easements for fossil fuel utilities and impact on public trees when crossing the town green. This is not the same as other utilities with lines already buried on town property. The cost of the vote is less than $1,000 according to our Town Clerk and the easement is very likely worth much more than that. While Vermont Gas doesn’t have to choose to put the pipeline in, it would be an unwise business decision not to. They stand to make hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years from such a line, much more than the investment to get it installed including an easement cost to which both parties could agree. They could be recognized for their contribution toward helping the town potentially target these funds toward lowering carbon emissions. You’ll want to vote no on the Vermont Gas easement vote on Oct 1, 2024.

Laura Asermily

Middlebury

Share this story:

More News
Op/Ed

Editorial: Vermont adopted its bias-free policing policy for good reasons

“Costella’s decision to summon Border Patrol directly violates Vermont’s Fair and Impartia … (read more)

Op/Ed

Ways of Seeing: Raise your voice at the ballot box

“Every decision about leadership counts.”

Op/Ed

Editorial: Kudos for passage of CHIP

“Adequate housing is an essential priority of any community striving for a viable economic … (read more)

Share this story: