If Vail Succeeds Will We Have Three Times the Number of Visitors?
I love our community. I’m receiving a lot of thoughtful analysis on a number of topics. Case in point is an analysis a reader did on the potential impact Vail may have on visitors. The reader’s analysis shows that if Vail achieves the same “density” of skiers per acre of resort as they do at their Colorado resorts, our skier visits will increase two to three times from what they are now. Keep in mind that specific numbers are often hard to get, and are often estimates, as many resorts don’t provide the exact number of visitors each year.
Nevertheless, it’s an interesting way to look at things.
Below is the email followed by the analysis.
What is the future of Park City? Vail Resorts holds the key. Vail does not disclose their future projections for volume of skiers or revenues for their properties. However, it is easy to make some projections for Park City/Canyons, based upon the recent volumes of skiers Vail hosted at Breckenridge, Vail, and Beaver Creek, in skiers per acre. Vail are experts at running their resorts at the capacities they have in Colorado. The attached spreadsheet shows what that would look like at Park City/Canyons resort. Vail has seen the huge upside for tons more skiers at PC/Canyons. Traffic Congestion? Absolutely! Long Lift lines? Yes Please! Crowded slopes? But of course. Parking nightmares? Always. Almost all employees are non living wage jobs? Naturally.
If you own a restaurant/bar, a service business, or are a realtor in Park City you might think this is a good thing, right.
Welcome to the new Park City.
in Park City
Uh… Park City… We Have a Problem
Much like a rocket designed by NASA, Park City has been on autopilot. We came out of the Great Recession and the tax dollars flowed in, both sales and property taxes. Park City seems to be a desirable place to be. Excellent.
Vail, once again, proving they are the “smartest guys in the room,” did what Vail does. They did deals enabling them to have the largest ski resort in North America… right here in Park City.
If I were to forecast, I’d wager that January’s Sundance Film Festival will be THE BIGGEST EVER.
Yet, if you talk to people on lift chairs, Bob Ross is starting to paint a slightly different picture.
A friend recounted an experience yesterday where she overheard a family talking about how they never should have come here. They “should just go back to Steamboat.” The friend, like any real Parkite wanted to understand what was wrong with her city, so she asked. The response was that they went to the PCMR side of Park City resort and it was so incredibly crowded that they never wanted to come back.
It’s just not visitors. Another friend commented on the 40 minute lift lines at PCMR over the past few days. He lamented on what Vail’s Epic Pass had done to our skiing. He said that before Vail there were only so many people who would spend $1,200 on a season’s pass. Therefore, a random Tuesday in December wouldn’t be crowded. Now, with an Epic pass costing $560 it brings in so many more people.
Another local commented that they never even try to go to the PCMR side anymore because there is no parking. It’s just not worth driving in and finding no parking, or riding an hour-plus on a bus to ski.
Personally over the past few days I’ve been on lift chairs with a few people from New York City. What’s either the first or second statement out of their mouths? How expensive it is. Just to be clear, Park City has always been expensive but I’ve never heard people at Deer Valley complain. Usually, they seem to be willing to overlook the cost.
So, what is happening? Is it just an anomaly due to “good snow” (after a few bad years) bringing people out of the woodwork? Have we succeeded in creating Peak Park City, where our success is starting to kill us? Is Vail too good at what they do? Have we rested on our laurels?
I’m not really sure.
What I do know is that we don’t have the best snow, longest season, or longest runs.
We have a brand …
… and the thing about brands is that they can fall out of favor quickly. Anecdotal evidence is often suspect, but it may be an indicator that we could be on our way down that path.
Snow Seems to Bring Out the Best in People
It’s days like today, with blowing snow, zero visibility, slushy streets, and the snow plows seemingly already settled down for their long-winter naps, that provide an opportunity for the best to come out in people. While many people argue Park City isn’t the same place it was 15 years ago, it’s nice to see and hear about the random acts of kindness that remind us that while somewhere between 1/3 and 2/3 of homes are owned by second home owners, people still do care.
There’s the story of the family down the street, whose snow blower broke down, but an anonymous neighbor plowed their driveway while they were at work. There’s the numerous instances of random people stopping and pushing cars that are stuck in the muck. There’s the countless people I have seen on the slopes, who stop and check on a fallen skier or bring down a pole or glove when someone has wiped out.
I guess there’s something about the vulnerability of snow that brings out the best in people. A true snow day seems to remind us that we all need help once in a while. It’s beautiful in more ways than one.
in Weather
Forecast for The Rest of the Winter Season
According to Weather Channel and NOAA forecasts, weather January to March is shaping up with average precipitation for us, with slightly higher than normal temperatures. So, should forecasts hold, we should at least get a decent snow year, albeit perhaps a slightly shorter season.
Unfortunately, it may not be the huge winter many were hoping for.
That said, this week looks stellar!
in Schools
School Board Looking at Ways to Increase Bus Ridership Is A Great Start
During this week’s Park City School Board meeting, the board was discussing policies related to discipline on buses. During that conversation they discussed whether this policy decision should be lumped in with other policy considerations to increase bus ridership. They specifically mentioned discussing a current rule that requires families to pay a couple hundred dollar fee to ride the school bus, if the family lives within close proximity to school.
I have written before about a resident who has been working with the school board to try and have this policy changed, so that more students could ride our school buses for free. It makes sense for a number of reasons:
- If we can have fewer parents driving to schools, it helps alleviate traffic bottlenecks around our schools
- School buses are generally safer for kids than private cars
- Many school buses have a lot of empty seats on them currently. It makes sense to utilize that space, if possible
- It sort of “fits” with the concept of our free public bus system
It’s really encouraging that the school board is both looking to increase ridership and that they are open to discussing the policy for kids who live close to schools. Just seeing the traffic backed up around Jeremy Ranch Elementary School during the last snow storm, made me both fear for our kids’ safety and reminded me that if we could even take just a few cars off the road, it would be an improvement.
Kudos to the school board for following through and I truly hope they find a way to fill the buses.
in Community
Save People Save Wildlife
We received information from a new group in the area called Save People Save Wildlife. It’s very informative and talks about an effort to increase our wildlife fencing to protect drivers as well as moose, deer, cat, and elk friends.
So, I wanted to share it, below:
Hi, I just wanted to introduce myself. I’m Jenny Terry and I’m a part of a new group forming called, ” Save People Save Wildlife”. We have a facebook page up and running . Park City residents are sick of seeing so many moose,deer and other wildlife being killed on the i80 from Summit Park to HWY 40. There is a 8 mile gap of no wildlife fencing. We are talking to UDOT and DWR to fix the problem. Also, we have issues with the DWR and their conduct of relocating moose out of the Park City area. They are not following code and taking moose, relocating them and they are dying. All of our research, articles, reports, news clips, pictures and maps are all on the facebook page. Please, I’m trying to raise awareness of this issue. We people and our wildlife safe. We are going to focus on educating Park City Residents to be more moose safe so the moose don’t have to be relocated. https://www.facebook.com/savepeoplesavewildlife/ Please look at the facebook page and click “like” to show your support. Thank you!
I also wanted to note that The Salt Lake Tribune reported on Dec 15th the Utah Transportation Commission is taking public comment on how to allocate $190 million of extra funds.
1-75 mil for widening I15
2-34 mil for 9000 So.
3-26 mil for 5600 West
4-52 mil for misc projects
Public comment is now being accepted.
We are hoping to get funds allocated for our wildlife fencing needs in Park City.
in Schools
I May Have Been Wrong On School Board Policy Changes
Last week, I wrote on changes the Park City School Board were considering to their process for making policies. Currently, the board has a stated requirement that a bevy of people will participate in their policy decisions. These people include everyone from school board members, to the public, to teachers, to staff. The changes desired by the school board will limit that committee to board members and administrators. I felt that cutting people like teachers out of the process could be extremely detrimental to creating good policies in certain circumstances.
However, after this week’s school board meeting, I wonder if I could be wrong about that. In a lead up to their discussion about changing decision makers on policies, they were discussing a number of specific policies they would like to put into place. For each policy, they discussed whether they should have a sub committee involved to craft a better policy. For instance, they talked about school bus policies and which people from our community should be involved in making a policy regarding poor behavior on buses. Should a subcommittee include administrators involved with transportation? Should it involve parents of children who are bused? Who are the right people to be involved given the specific case. In effect, should a sub committee be formed to make the perfect policy with people who have the best knowledge over the subject matter.
I say yes.
From discussions happening during the most recent school board meeting, it sounds like the current policy committee, supposedly made up of a diverse group of people, isn’t really cutting mustard. If the school board was able to form a perfect committee of perfect people to discuss every policy, every time, I think that would be preferable. That said, the teacher’s union, according to comments during the meeting, is concerned that these sub committees are not mandatory. So, it would be possible for the board and administrators to pass most policies unilaterally and only for committees at specific times. The school board stated that they were more than willing to work with the teacher’s union to find good language that would define when a sub committee would be put in place.
In my view, sub committees of experts is a great idea. If there is a change to a no-idling policy at schools, include environmental experts on a sub committee. If there is a change to school start times, bring in experts on children’s sleep patterns. It sounds great… if they can pull it off.
And therein lies the rub. If the school board changes the policy committee to include only school board members and administrators, but brings in experts, community members, teachers, or whoever is the best to help define policies in our community, at least 70% of the time, then this change will be a huge win. Better policies will be made for our kids.
However, if in future years, most policy decisions have reverted to being made by a select group of board members and administrators, it will be huge loss.
Personally, I think the school board have made a very high hurdle for themselves. I think it’s very similar to when the Summit County Council decided that they would determine whether each and every tenant in the Boyer Tech Park fit the description of being a “tech company.” In the heat of public discourse, they welcomed that responsibility; however, eventually the reality of making decisions about every tenant set in. They got out of that business as fast as they could.
Entropy suggests that the same thing will happen with the school board. The board has a chance to prove me wrong. Forever, they can ensure that the right people are involved on sub committees for every policy decisions. They can invest the time and effort in courting those people. They will have to be willing to wait on those people to hash out a decision. They will need to be willing to go with the sub committee’s recommendation, especially when it doesn’t jibe with their own world view.
They’ve set themselves (or their new policy committee) up for an almost impossible task: assemble the perfect group for almost every situation. However, if they achieve it, we will all be better off.
I hope the board finds a way to make it work… and a way that will continue to work in perpetuity. If they do, my initial comments on the matter will most certainly be proved wrong. Our decisions about policies will be made using better information.
If not, and the board “forgets” that the general rule is to form subcommittees of experts, our worst fears will be realized. We will have lost an important process where a balanced group of decision makers such as teachers, staff, and community members, make some of the most significant decisions regarding our kids. In its place will be an insular group of decision makers that may not reflect either our community or our students.
That would be a huge loss.
The Biggest Mountain Accord Conflict of Interest is Yet To Come
Let me preface this post by saying it’s mostly speculation. Still, if you are concerned with the Mountain Accord, you may want to continue reading.
The Mountain Accord launched a few years ago to charges that it was really a transportation plan, shrouded in an environmental veil. The Mountain Accord folks pivoted and made sure that the “focus” was environmental. Yet, some interesting things have happened over the past few months. Let’s throw out some dots and see if they connect….
First, the Mountain Accord is now funded under the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED). Previously it was funded by UTA (Utah Transit Authority). GOED are the folks charged with making sure Utah’s economy continues to hum.
Second, about a month ago the UTA Vice-Chairman, along with two other board members, resigned after it was disclosed that 2 UTA board members, 5 Utah legislators, and a GOED representative had travelled to Switzerland to meet with Stadler Rail, who makes railway systems (including those that work in mountain terrain). The Deseret News reported, “The lawmakers recently defended the trip, saying they play a role in building relationships with people who can help Utah grow economically.”
Third, this trip actually seems to have been productive. Stadler Rail agreed to put a temporary manufacturing plant in Tooele, to build parts for it’s TexRail system for use in Texas.
So far, so good. It sounds like Utah Legislators and the Governor’s Office are trying to bring new companies to Utah. I suppose you can’t argue with that.
Yet, now it seems that the state government is pushing for a permanent manufacturing facility in Utah. The Governor’s Press Release dates, “If Stadler Rail selects Utah for its permanent location, the company may earn up to 25 percent of the new state taxes it will pay over the 15-year life of the agreement in the form of a post-performance incentive. As part of the proposed contract with Stadler Rail, the GOED Board of Directors has approved a post-performance incentive not to exceed $10,068,900. This amount includes both an Economic Development Tax Increment Finance (EDTIF) tax credit rebate and an Industrial Assistance Fund (IAF) grant of $500,000. The first half of the IAF grant is for necessary rail-related upgrades, with the other half of the funding available for facility upgrades upon permanent selection of the Utah location. Once Stadler Rail enters a contract with the state, it will be able to earn a portion of the total tax credit rebate each year that it meets the criteria of the contract.”
Why would Stadler put a manufacturing plant in Utah? It’s North American customers are in New Jersey (New Jersey Transit), Austin Texas, Denton Texas, and Fort Worth Texas. It’s North American HQ is in aforementioned New Jersey. If it’s other customers are in Texas, why here? Why Utah? Because the next big rail project in North America will likely be up Little CottonWood Canyon.
So you put that all together and you get that the Mountain Accord is now funded by GOED, whose purpose is to increase economic activity, who has been courting Stadler Rail to build a manufacturing plant here, has succeeded in getting a temporary manufacturing plant built, wants a permanent plant here, and will likely need a train up Little Cottonwood Canyon to get it.
I think that would be the definition of conflict of interest… Is a train the most environmental way to go? Is a bus better? What damage to the canyon will take place to put in track? What animals habitats will be destroyed? How many more visitors will trample our mountains? No matter what the right thing to do is… we have to have a train up the canyon to get a new manufacturing plant here. I wonder if the environmental groups who flipped and supported the Mountain Accord are happy now. It appears the train is coming boys. I hope you got everything you wanted out of the Faustian bargain…’cause it appears there is no stopping it now.
Today’s Shower Thought
Today is the day we find out whether Park City drivers remember how to drive in the snow.
New Mountain Accord Information Continues to Paint Negative Picture
It seems like the Mountain Accord is just so huge, with so many angles, that it just doesn’t let people get out of their own way. Yep, another case of potential conflicts of interest has appeared surrounding Mountain Accord.
A reader sent in an article from KUTV (Channel 2) about a 2013 Snowbird sponsored trip where three mayors and two Utah County Council Members were flown on a private jet to Switzerland. KUTV asks the question we all want to know:
Who paid for Utah elected officials involved with Mountain Accord to go on private jet?
Essentially the trip appears to have been a fact finding mission on the Mountain Accord. Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams said, “We looked to make major decisions, generational decisions on the future of the Wasatch.” So, they didn’t really do much on that trip? Next question… So, who’s jet did the fly on? Ian Cumming’s jet… who would later take a significant portion in Snowbird.
So, let’s summarize. Critical people within the Mountain Accord process, which will decide the future of the Wasatch, took a private jet from Salt Lake to Geneva to, I guess, learn more about Switzerland’s mountains. Each participant says that either their local government, political donations, or they themselves paid for the trip. Of course, my favorite quote from the article is: “‘Who paid? I’m not sure who actually participated,’ said Utah County commissioner Larry Ellertson, who participated in the trip.”
This whole Mountain Accord process frankly stinks.
Imagine that you worked in Accounting at Park City Municipal and you were trying to decide on a new computer system for the city. One of the potential software vendors offers to fly you out via their private G4 (jet) to San Diego to visit their headquarters for a week . Is there any conflict of interest? People involved with Mountain Accord would likely say “No. What are you even talking about?”
The final question I’ll ask is, do you know what it costs to fly a private jet? I didn’t, so I looked it up. That’s about $9,000 per hour, if you were to rent it. So, we’ll call that fair value. The flight to Geneva is about 11 hours… or 22 hours round trip. That’s basically $200,000 of value, divided amongst those riding. I’m sure that those costs were reimbursed from each of the mayors and council persons. Otherwise, it would look like local government officials were working hand in hand with, and receiving benefits from, the future owner of Snowbird… in order to determine the future of the Wasatch. That would never happen, would it?
I know Park City and Summit County think they are doing the right thing by maintaining a seat at the Mountain Accord table. The more I learn, the more I wonder if certain city and county officials are going to end up on the wrong side of history.
h/t to the individual who sent this article in
Parkrag
We believe in citizen journalism. We believe there are stories to tell that can help to shape our community for the better. We believe tomorrow's Park City can be better than today's.