vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

10.09.2007

Farming out

There are still i's to be dotted and t's to be crossed, but Progressive Rep. David Zuckerman and wife Rachel Nevitt are planning to buy farmland in Hinesburg through the Vermont Land Trust, and move their city farm to the country.

The first thing Zuckerman, who is chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, assures those he tells the news to is that no, he's not moving out of Burlington for a few years. There is not a house on the Hinesburg property at the moment, he says. So he plans to continue representing Old North Enders in the Legislature. Rep. Bill Lippert of Hinesburg need not fear that he has competition next fall.

Zuckerman and his wife run Full Moon Farm on rented land in Burlington's Intervale, though they are taking a semi-hiatus this year. Next year's tilling will still be done at the Intervale. Then the plan is to farm Hinesburg soil in 2009, he says.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 12:56 PM |

Comments:

I love Dave, but riddle-me-this:

How does a small time vegitable farmer afford to take a 'semi-hiatus' ??

There must be something other than carrot money fueling the Zuckerman family coffers.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:25 PM, October 09, 2007

Who cares?

Is it always the case that we must evaluate people on what they have?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:51 PM, October 09, 2007

Now that Zuckerman and his leftist pals have polluted the Intervale I see they are moving on to "greener" pastures.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:56 PM, October 09, 2007

It's a lie to say that they "polluted" the Intervale.

The place was a dump (literally) that the farmers of the Intervale have done an amazing job of cleaning up and turning into something productive and healthy.

Sorry, you'll have to go back to smearing Ralph Wright because it's asinine to smear the folks who have cleaned up that piece of land.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:36 PM, October 09, 2007

Zuckerman for Congress!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:55 PM, October 09, 2007

The Zuckerman family coffers? Can you say "Trustfunder"?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:36 PM, October 09, 2007

David's income is his business. I've known him for years since we served together on the Burlington Elecric Commission in the 90s. He is as committed to the well being of this community as anyone I've ever known. And although I'm not a farmer, I have great respect for those who are. What kind of Vermonters would put down a guy (and his family) who works the land? That's just sad.

And if you don't think serving in the legislature is hard work (and underpaid), then why don't some of you guys who are so quick to criticize get off your butts and try it yourself.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:31 PM, October 09, 2007

Again, I do like David a lot -- but I do think that the ecconomic status of our elected leaders is relevant.

Just like Rich Tarrant's megabucks were relevant to that campaign ... and like Jim Douglas's family money is relevant to his campaigns.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:58 PM, October 09, 2007

Yes, let's stop the double-standardism, please. If Tarrant's resources are relevant to his political life, so are trust-funder, flatlander, farmer Dave's.

Bernie ran against Tarrant's wealth.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:48 PM, October 09, 2007

Farmer Dave for Governor!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:08 AM, October 10, 2007

In fairness, Douglas is a flatlander and a trustfunder too.

It isn't a reason to vote against someone ... but it should be a factor in the decision.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:14 AM, October 10, 2007

I wish Zuckerman had run against Welch last go around; a lost opportunity. He should run for Guv in 2010.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:17 AM, October 10, 2007

He should run in '08

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:09 AM, October 10, 2007

He'd loose.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:59 AM, October 10, 2007

Hi all-

Just to set the record straight...our "semi-hiatus" was from the part of our business that sells shares as a CSA. We still grew 2 acres of vegetables and sold them at the farmers market every week. While producing less, we had no crew and most expenses were lower. So we farmed what we needed to get by this summer and have some time for our child (just under 2) and my ailing father in law (who died in June).

So if you all want to jump to conclusions then that is fine, just thought I would send you out the rest of the scenario.

Dave Zuckerman

PS. As for running for other offices...I appreciate all the thoughts. For now, I like where I am and the balance I have created.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:04 PM, October 10, 2007

Can you say, "I'm a young "has-been?"

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:00 PM, October 10, 2007

That was uncalled for.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:07 PM, October 10, 2007

It certainly was uncalled for. Unfortunately, it's typical of those who hide behind the anonymity of a blog.

As to the attempt to equate David's situation with Rich Tarrant, it is absurd on its face.

Tarrant is worth hundreds of millions of dollars and was trying to buy his was into the U.S. Senate for goodness sake (he spent $7m of his own money). As everyone knows, it's virtually a lifetime job since incumbents rarely get booted. [And note that IDX received over $7m in tax credits even though Tarrant admitted after the fact that he had no intention of moving the company.]

As far as I can tell, David raised and spent under $1,000 in 2004 (latest data available) to get elected to the State House. And these are only two year terms and incumbents lose all the time.

Do those seem remotely comparable?

And while I agree that the economic status of candidates is (sometimes) relevant, I'm curious why no one seems particularly interested in the other 149 members of the VT Legislature.

And I'm curious how many of the bloggers on this site have ever sought elective office and/or served on local boards. For such an opinionated group, you would think they would want to serve and try to change all the awful things those pesky "Leftists" are doing to our state.

I used to think listening to debates in legislative committee rooms was (sometimes) tedious and uninformed. They've got nothing on these blogs.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:53 PM, October 10, 2007

First off, congratulations Dave. Best wishes with your new home. The House of Reps will be a lessor place without you. I look forward to seeing you in the state senate one day soon.

Doug, I think you're a hell of a good guy, but I disagree with many of your points.

Nobody "equated" Tarrant with Zuckerman. I simply stated that if one's financial situation is fair game for one pol, it should be fair game for all pols.

Yes, I'm interested in knowing the economic back ground of EVERY elected official.

I'm interested in the fact that the Chair of the local planning commission makes his living as a landlord. I was interested that Walter Freed made a great deal of his money selling tobacco at his stores.

And if Dave Zuckerman makes all of his money by working the land as an organic farmer, I CERTAINLY want to know that -- because that's a hard thing to do and it would say a lot about who Dave is. On the other hand, if he made millions from the Exxon/Mobile stocks that he sold last year (just an example) ... that's something that the voters have a right to know about.

I want to know where our elected leaders get their money from ... which side is their bread buttered on??

I don't ask the question to be offensive. I ask the question because it's important to be informed about our elected leaders and where their loyalties are.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:47 PM, October 10, 2007

Points well taken and I generally agree.

However, with one exception, the examples cited refer to the official's work rather than the source of any non-work related family assets (e.g., landlord, purveyor of tobacco). Dave is a farmer but some of the bloggers assumed (with no evidence as usual) that he is a "trustfunder".

If we go beyond a person's work or profession, it might get a little tricky.

For example, it's self-evident that a successful business person like Tarrant will be subject to scrutiny because big business has a lot of potential baggage (like the VEPC tax credits and his seat on the FAHC board when the Hospital bought products & services from IDX).

But what if a local or state official's money came from a spouse's inheritance? Or was money held in trust for kids / grandkids?

If we believe voters have a right to know (tough to say otherwise), we should require full disclosure. To my knowledge, we don't.

If I'm not mistaken, legislators are expected to abstain from voting if there is a real or perceived conflict of interest. Of course, this assumes the official's will be honest in all cases and (like golfers in theory) call the "penalty" on themselves. Is that sufficient? I don't know.

These are good issues and perhaps there should be more discussion.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:02 PM, October 10, 2007

Thanks Doug. I think more disclosure in these cases is better than less.

Vermont does not require anything of our legislators in terms of disclosure. Vermonters generally know their local reps pretty well (if they choose to).

As the population grows, we'll see the need for more disclosure laws. I'd like to see them sooner than later.

I do believe that the legislative rules regarding conflict of interest are a joke. They need to be re-written. The honor system adequate.

Thanks for entertaining the thoughts of an anonymous fool like me.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:09 PM, October 10, 2007

Let me see now - Rich Tarrent put himself through school, founded a successful company that employed thousands of Vermonters, not to mention the millions paid into Vermont revenues; on the other hand, Bernie Sanders, a lifelong slacker, draft-dodger, welfare abuser, and first-class demagogue that seems to never have been gainfully employed in his life never has to answer to anyone, in Hoffer's pea-brain, but Tarrent carries "baggage"!!! What a perfect testimony to leftist ethics and morals.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:47 PM, October 10, 2007

Bubba's the perfect spokesperson for nutjobs everywhere.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:45 PM, October 10, 2007

C'mon Bubba keeps it interesting and, by the way, makes a valid point. We need to view everyone's contributions consistently.

Tarrent is an incredibly successful guy that has real world experience that he offered to the State. In the private sector businesses would jump all over that opportunity. In VT we decisively reject it. Go figure how we think.

Bernie seems to have had less impact. There is nothing I know that he has really done in Washington that has been his initiative. He is very good at jumping on the popular bandwagons. How much mileage has he gotten out of the same old speech about we should take from the rich(thru more taxes) and give to the poor(thru gov't sponsored social programs). I wish he would as actively support the concept "give the man a fish and he will eat today. Teach a man to fish and he can eat everyday." I wish he would focus on solving the core issues not just talking about them.

The point is, from my perspective, there should be more transparency to all politicians background and there should be some minimum standards of skill and ability required. In VT we regulate minimum requirements for cosmotologists, auctioneers and tattoo artists but we don't really set standards for the people that effect our lives the most. If they are nice guys and say the "right and easy things" they can be elected qualified or not.

...ahh the American way!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:51 PM, October 10, 2007

Has Tarrant returned the 7 million dollars in tax breaks we gave him to start IDX? If not, why not? That's not self-made, it's Vermont made.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:53 AM, October 11, 2007

Did VT get more than its $7 million back in corporate income taxes, individual taxes on the payroll of IDS employees, property taxes, IDX dollars spent in the local economy....I suspect so and some.

It didn't happen because he was given a free ride. He took an opportunity and had the vision to turn it into a tremendous success. Thank Rich T for taking the risk...

Montpelier could use some of your vision.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:01 AM, October 11, 2007

"And while I agree that the economic status of candidates is (sometimes) relevant, I'm curious why no one seems particularly interested in the other 149 members of the VT Legislature."

Don't know why you would say this. We are interested. How do you know we're not?

"And I'm curious how many of the bloggers on this site have ever sought elective office and/or served on local boards. For such an opinionated group, you would think they would want to serve and try to change all the awful things those pesky "Leftists" are doing to our state."

Why do you assume we're not? Another unfounded assumption.

I used to think listening to debates in legislative committee rooms was (sometimes) tedious and uninformed. They've got nothing on these blogs.

Blah, blah, blah. "It's okay for me to criticize conservatives, but don't criticize Leftists."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:23 AM, October 11, 2007

The only way VT could get a net benefit from the $7 million given to IDX is if the company would not have expanded without the credits (the famous "but for" requirement). In this case, after he got the credits Tarrant said he had no intention of moving anyway. Therefore, the $7 million produced nothing we wouldn't have gotten anyway. This is a serious flaw in the tax credit program.

Noboby's knocking Tarrant's success as a business man. The ONLY issue is whether it's appropriate to spend taxpayer money this way.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:45 AM, October 11, 2007

"The ONLY issue is whether it's appropriate to spend taxpayer money this way."

It's thinking like this that got us in this problem to begin with. Keep it up.

I wish we would partner with more companies as substantial and successful (from both sides of the deal) as IDX was. That is how a responsible gov't builds a sustainable tax base and ultimately is able to reduce its burden on the individual (at the evil Corporation's expense).

As an aside, do you pay any attention to the things VEDA invests in? What is the return on that strategy? Just a question...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:19 AM, October 11, 2007

I think Bubba is really Rob Roper, or Jim Barnett,
or Jason Gibbs,
or Neale Lunderville!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:24 AM, October 11, 2007

We didn't "partner" with IDX. The company was successful and the state just gave them money for no return to the taxpayer (they didn't do anything they wouldn't have done anyway). You think is was a good investment?

As for VEDA, they produce an annual report with figures on jobs created / retained but it's not based on research after the loans; only on the figures submitted by the applicants before the loan. Therefore, the data is not reliable.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:29 AM, October 11, 2007

I think Bubba is an insightful guy.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:29 AM, October 11, 2007

Whether it's right or wrong for a candidate's wealth or income to be relevant is now beside the point. Tarrant was knocked for being wealthy.

If another candidate who never sought local office before running for statewide office spends his time spouting off on the radio all day telling Vermonters how to live, then it is equally relevant that he can do this by living off family wealth.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:56 AM, October 11, 2007

"Tarrant was knocked for being wealthy."

That wasn't his sole reason for his loss and not even one of the biggest reasons. He may have come off as buying votes, but only because he went through the motions. And frankly, to a real Vermonter, this is basically a slap in the face. We're not ones for taking charity and we surely don't like being bought.

But still, Tarrant's money was not the biggest issue. He was knocked for having the most negative and borderline slanderous campaign that Vermnont has ever seen. He was knocked because as a CEO, he represented corporate America which stinks of dishonesty. And he was knocked because he and IDX had their hands in the FAHC scandal(s) and that was basically a proof point that he actually did represent corporate America.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:11 AM, October 11, 2007

He also was knocked because he didn't really live here. His small second home in Colchester was hardly his primary residence in contrast to the $8,000,000 home in Florida where he also voted until this "opportunity" arose to run for office here. Shades of Dick Cheney who suddenly became a resident of Wyoming after years in Houston because he saw this as politically expedient.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:13 PM, October 11, 2007

In Vermont it is crime to have any money at all! Welfare for all.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:18 PM, October 11, 2007

Let's restrict running for office to people who live in this state. That's a reasonable thing, I think.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:23 PM, October 11, 2007

More than anything, liberal slackers HATE people like Tarrant who accumulate wealth through hard work and a belief in the free enterprise system. They believe that they are entitled to everything Rich earned - because Bernie told them so. After all, it's the system that has treated them unfairly - so they will continue to sit around picking their noses, writing grant applications or raise organic tofu , maybe picket rodeos or air shows, and feel that they are the victims of social injustice.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:23 PM, October 11, 2007

"Let's restrict running for office to people who live in this state."

I would have to agree.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:51 PM, October 11, 2007

Who is running for office from out of state?

Randy Brock of Florida?
Rich Tarrant of Florida?
Jack McMullen of Mass?

When Jim Douglas first ran for office, he held a Mass drivers licence.

Who else? All other candidates I know of are full time residents of Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:24 PM, October 11, 2007

A. "But still, Tarrant's money was not the biggest issue. He was knocked for having the most negative and borderline slanderous campaign that Vermnont has ever seen. He was knocked because as a CEO, he represented corporate America which stinks of dishonesty. And he was knocked because he and IDX had their hands in the FAHC scandal(s) and that was basically a proof point that he actually did represent corporate America."

First, negative is in the eyes of the beholder. What you call negative campaigning, many would call just saying the truth about Bernie's inneffectiveness as a U.S. Rep for 15 years. You may like Bernie, and that's fine, but it's undeniably true that he accomplished relatively little for most of his 15 years as a House member. In addition, many of us think that all Bernie does every time he opens his mouth is negative campaigning, even when he's not running for office.

Second, Tarrant does not and never did represent "corporate America." That's what you say, and that's negative campaigning right there.

Third, it shows how you think when you say that "corporate America stinks of dishonesty." For every corporate scandal that makes the paper, thousands and thousands of businesses are run honestly every day by honest people who are just trying to do their jobs, run their companies, and make a living. Tarrant represented only IDX, not corporate America, and IDX has not been tainted by any scandals of any kind.

B. "Let's restrict running for office to people who live in this state. That's a reasonable thing, I think."

Let's also restrict running for statewide office in Vermont to people who live here for a few years *before* they run. Bernie moved here in the late 60s and almost immediate began running for Governor.

And while we're at it, let's enforce the rule that people who represent districts in the Vermont House and Senate actually live in the districts they run from. Wlech ran for State Senate from Windsor County, but lived in Burlington.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:47 PM, October 11, 2007

And Tarrant lived in Florida ... at least according to his tax receipts.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:22 PM, October 11, 2007

Rich Westman doesn't live in his district either.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:22 PM, October 11, 2007

Does anyone remember the concept of living the "Great American Dream". I thought it was something that made America great. Have a good idea, take a risk, work hard and be successful.

Listening to the bashing of people that have done this (Tarrant, IDX, Walmart, etc)it sounds like this crowd would like to modify it to "Have a good idea, take a risk, work hard, be successful, but not too successful."

I choose to be all I can be not to be part of the crowd.
C'mon you have the same opportunity for greatness. Why do we choose to attack those that have won and not thank them for bring jobs, an expanded tax base and a stronger local economy to us?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:53 PM, October 11, 2007

What's Bernie got to do with anything?

I was just providing more of the story why Tarrant lost.

Tarrant probably also thinks the only reason he lost was his millions. But then that's probably why he lost.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:59 PM, October 11, 2007

FYI: I like Peter Welch personally but have some issues with him. Nevertheless, he did not live in Burlington. He had an apartment here because his wife worked at UVM (sadly, she has since passed away).

Is it unreasonable to think that a guy would try to spend time with his wife? Jeezum. Get your facts straight (and have a heart).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:44 PM, October 11, 2007

I like Peter Welch, too. That doesn't changes the fact: he lived in Burlington.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:43 AM, October 12, 2007

Does that mean that every legislator, R or D, that rents a room (or apt) in Montpelier for the 5-6 months of the session is now LIVING outside his district?

C'mon... let's be reasonable!

As for Peter Welch, no one ever loved his wife more than Peter loved his - he was dedicated to her and helped to care for her during her 10 yr battle with cancer. Her job was at UVM and they had a condo here but maintained their residence in Windsor County.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:46 AM, October 12, 2007

"Who is running for office from out of state?

All other candidates I know of are full time residents of Vermont."

Excuse me, but what about "Burlington's" own, Chris Pearson??

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:16 PM, October 12, 2007

Where does Chris Pearson live?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:23 PM, October 12, 2007

He lived on Green Street and now lives on Brookes ave. Both in Burlington and both in the district.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:44 PM, October 12, 2007

Campbell for Governor

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:45 AM, October 16, 2007

Dunne for Governor!