I don't agree with you and you obviously think I have something against skiers, I don't and don't know why you think I do. I am against shady if not ultimately criminal practices that do damage to local businesses, regions and individuals. Skiers especially those who elect to buy into housing are ultimately impacted by projects that fail due to byzantine financial manipulation. In any Ponzi scheme there are winners and in Jay Peaks and Burke's case, at least a portion of the upgrade to the facilities were reportedly funded by diverting funds from EB5 investors of other projects. Sure the skiers get a free ride for a few years with improved facilities, but if the financials don't pencil out its not sustainable, eventually the resort turns into a Saddleback or Evergreen Valley. The skiers can always go to another area but the folks who bought into the failed scheme and the locals who live here by choice or by lack of any opportunities don't have that luxury.
In the case of the Balsams, the scope of the project is much larger than the current footprint of the current resort. It will impact forever "sensitive wild areas" with a substantial increase in footprint and with expected subsidiary development it will change the surrounding area . I personally think its a potentially major improvement to the area, but only if the underlying financials are such that its not a boom and then bust. At first Les Otten came into the area and represented that he had the financing in place and had to act quickly or the opportunity would go away. Numerous state agencies, non profits like the AMC, American Rivers and SPNHF all did their best to let the project proceed despite significant concerns. As deadline after deadline about start of construction has been missed, the veracity of Otten's claims are legitimately being questioned. Minor little details like the inadvertently revealed past and future substantial subsidy by Northern Pass and the out right arm twisting by Les Otten of local political boards to change their stance against NP, which should have no linkage with the Balsams, also calls into question how solid the financing in. The recent reveal that the project will die without significant escrowed deposits for what are essentially time share vacations from prospective owners is another indication that the financials are not solid as represented. The intentional delay of filing for a key state permit due to cost is also indicative that things are less secure then represented.
Thus the linkage of two large ski resort projects in what is traditionally the areas of interest to some on the board based on redevelopment of what effectively were failed/marginal ski areas financed by suspect financing at best and potentially fraudulent in Jays and Burkes case is in my mind legitimate.
