Proposed $5 entrance fee for Mt Washington Summit Building

[peakbagger]

There is an article in the Tuesday Berlin Sun regarding a recent meeting of the Mt Washington Commission. Its behind a paywall but usually will show up in the Conway paper in a few days. One of the big assumed sources of funding for the wastewater system is probably gone due to change in federal rules. They are going to the state and asking for more capital dollars (that conceivably would need to be paid back with summit operations?) They also had an architect look at the summit building and minor changes can substantially increase occupancy. The other big item is the owner of the cog did a shot across the bow on the summit operations in general claiming the costs are not apportioned correctly and the proposed fee would impact the Cogs operations and profitability. He brought up that the Autoroad pays $1 rent for the parking lots in exchange for allowing certain usage of the road by the state. He also claims the telecom is being charged below market rates. Interesting he advocates that the summit not rebuild the Yankee building (that houses and supports telecom operations) and that the summit operations concentrates on meeting the demand of tourists that visit summit.

The Yankee building was investigated a few years ago and the report was effectively that the building is obsolete and could not continue to support existing operations. Therefore if its not replaced then someone has to rebuild it or the operations supported by it will have to be scaled back. To date they have been paying the lions share of the power upgrade and I believe the bond payments as well as the substantially enlarged state summit operations.

No doubt there will be ongoing discussion on how to apportion costs for the summit users. Telecom gear doesnt need a wastewater system and the summit building but needs the auto road. The cog and the autoroad does not need the Yankee building. The obs needs access to the summit building, wastewater and power yet they are non profit. Even if a plan is worked out to satisfy one party no doubt the other parties will be unhappy and no doubt litigation could occur.

 

[peakbagger]

The Berlin and Conway papers have an article regarding a meeting of the Mt Washington Commission. They state has decided that its not time to charge an admission fee. So its delay the inevitable for another year.

 

[Andrew]

Nice staff announcement, new food service/retail operations manager. She has worked there since she was a teen and is a descendant of the Lowe family (of Randolph). Glad the park manager could announce her selection in this fashion.

 

[Mike P.]

Nice staff announcement, new food service/retail operations manager. She has worked there since she was a teen and is a descendant of the Lowe family (of Randolph). Glad the park manager could announce her selection in this fashion.

That is good news and nice to know in a world that seems less personal everyday that a long term employee with a White Mountain family pedigree is keeping the family tradition.

 

[peakbagger]

Thanks for confirming Christa is a Lowe, I thought so but wasnt sure. My guess is Christa has seen the writing on the wall that the Lowes Store complex is not the future. Of late the entire parking lot had been blocked off with no parking signs.

As for the entrance fee. I see it as delaying the inevitable, the septic system still needs to be redesigned and replaced and some sort of "fair" funding mechanism needs to be developed. It makes far more sense to build up a capital reserve fund up front prior to the expenditure but My guess is its easier to fund it as crisis.

 

[Andrew]

That is good news and nice to know in a world that seems less personal everyday that a long term employee with a White Mountain family pedigree is keeping the family tradition.

A nice thing I saw working in NH State Parks was yes, someone could work their way up through the ranks with dedication and hard work.

I think the fee would have been too difficult to manage there, and inappropriate for the location with a facility for the public that serves mainly as shelter and relief in a decidedly harsh setting. I worked at a NH state park for years with a 'Checkpoint Charlie' toll booth limiting entry and requiring a service charge before you reach the trailhead parking and toilets. We were instructed to not give maps or let people park and use the toilets unless they paid the service charge, since the philosophy was that the toilets were one of the services you needed to be paying for. We really struggled with this as staff because it was mean-spirited and quite inappropriate, and only led to cars spinning around the tollbooth and stopping down the park driveway for less than modest relief, and was just really bad PR. So staff decided to put a time framework on the service charge requirement, and serve the public need more appropriately by saying along the lines of "...well we have a per person service charge to use the park, but if you need to just stretch your legs and relieve yourself in the restrooms, you can use the park for 15 minutes or so without paying....". This most often led to the persons usually deciding to stay a little longer and coming back to the booth to pay for a little walk that was short of the big hike we were supposedly charging for the use of the facilities/resource.
In the case of Mt. Wash it would be sad to see the public seeking relief denied entry at the Sherman Adams building due to a fee requirement. The whole point of the aggressive retail/food service operation is to help float the operational costs of the park along with the communications leases with one goal to keep the facility open to the public without a fee. Now you have 2 businesses relying heavily on the facilities to support their customers experience, with only one of them participating on the financial agreement, but this heavy use and its impact is largely driven by those businesses. The problem is obvious, and the attitude of some is concerning. I would think a business owner should feel irresponsible if they have not provided basic toilet facilities to their customers throughout the experience the business owner is providing, whether through a partnership with the owner of a facility they are arriving at, or provide it with your own resources.
I have not followed every detail in these discussions between the players, but my guess is that one of them is saying/thinking …well then the hikers should be paying too…but I don’t see this at all as the same as businesses bringing visitors and the business having to step up and pay. The world is full of imperfect funding models, just think of the Pittman – Robertson Act Pittman–Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act - Wikipedia. We all figured the whole reason Presby proposed his hotel was only to make it seem more palatable for him to eventually build a new summit building with hotel as a lessor evil.

 

[TCD]

I worked at a NH state park for years with a 'Checkpoint Charlie' toll booth limiting entry and requiring a service charge before you reach the trailhead parking and toilets. We were instructed to not give maps or let people park and use the toilets unless they paid the service charge, since the philosophy was that the toilets were one of the services you needed to be paying for. We really struggled with this as staff because it was mean-spirited and quite inappropriate, and only led to cars spinning around the tollbooth and stopping down the park driveway for less than modest relief...

In answer to an earlier question, this is exactly the behavior that I expect such fees to incentivize. It's good that the new "poop fee" is not happening, at least for now. REALLY dumb idea.

 

[JToll]

I view the summit of Mt Washington more like the I-93 rest areas in Hooksett as opposed to a state park. In Hooksett the bathrooms are free, but I can pay for food if I want.

 

[skiguy]

Interesting twist in the fiscal flow of funding. https://www.wmur.com/article/execut...an-for-cog-railway-line-improvements/36345543

 

[CaptCaper]

Interesting twist in the fiscal flow of funding. https://www.wmur.com/article/execut...an-for-cog-railway-line-improvements/36345543

Good to see them getting the loan from the railways funding. The Cog needed it. If anyone spent time down below in the maintence sheds,etc just a few years ago you'd know the dire shape they were in. They've put lot's of money into rebuilding last few years to improve safety and public enjoyment. So I see why NH's finest voted to give them help in form of a loan for this improvement.
Let's face it the Cog has been here and well be here way past our life expectancy and it is a major attraction with jobs so good for them.

 

[Andrew]

Good to see them getting the loan from the railways funding. The Cog needed it. If anyone spent time down below in the maintence sheds,etc just a few years ago you'd know the dire shape they were in. They've put lot's of money into rebuilding last few years to improve safety and public enjoyment. So I see why NH's finest voted to give them help in form of a loan for this improvement.
Let's face it the Cog has been here and well be here way past our life expectancy and it is a major attraction with jobs so good for them.

Agreed. When younger I mooned and disliked the Cog as an intrusion on nature, but as my perspective on the world widened I came to appreciate it's place in the mountains and our history (and a love of trains to boot). This type of project is what the funds are meant for and it's good to see them utilized. If the trains are going to run, they should run keeping the public safe as possible, and the better rails can help support interests at the summit if all cooperate.

On another note I had been wondering what NH's Governor had planned for the latest Federal aid package to the state and heard in the news last night that state parks was mentioned. https://www.wmur.com/article/new-hampshire-coronavirus-update-may-6-2021/36353718 (article mostly about 2020 $, but new $ mentioned further down).

Maybe some will get allocated for infrastructure improvements at the summit and other state parks, and hopefully not wasted on consultants and more management plans that the majority of wind up on shelves to gather dust with the content not acted upon.

 

[peakbagger]

I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, the Cog and its competitor the autoroad (along with the majority of NH's tourist industry took it hard last year). On the other hand this is rewarding the "bad boy" member of the Mt Washington Commission who has been causing rancor with the rest of the organizations on the summit and reportedly had/has been in violation of a binding agreement to support the obs. This is not a new project, its been on the cog's agenda for several years and is one of many components that the cog needs to put in place to substantially increase ridership to the summit. Sure there is safety aspect but its not something that cropped up recently, its a consequence of running more equipment over the same tracks . The cog is not a non profit, its a family owned profit making business. Yes there is trickle of some portion of the profits to the staff in the guise of seasonal tourist jobs but that applies to any tourism business. So this means taking public money from a state "slush fund" and subsidizing one profit making tourism business over other ones. Does the autoroad arguably just as historical get a state grant to upgrade their road to make it safer?. To me it sets a bad precedent. Set the cog up as non profit and I am all for it as non profits operate on a different business model with far more transparency. I would rather see the state pump money into the summit facilities to benefit all users.

 

[Andrew]

I assumed the funds were specific accumulated funds for railroad improvement projects, and earmarked as such, so not necessarily to the detriment of non railroad state supported projects, and maybe originally accrued through some transportation related fee or 'tax'? Only an assumption without taking the time to research what is probably more complicated than I wish to unravel.

Sometimes I wonder how much we subsidize public routes of travel more for the benefit of private business' and to the detriment of the general public due to degradation of the roadways from overuse by trucks (costly car repairs). Of course in this case it is not a public way. I just think they should be using the trains to help solve some of the problems they have helped create at the summit, like with toilet cars or something. And you know this state is good at rewarding bad behavior (I didn't want to say that but had to).

 

[CaptCaper]

I'm sure the money will help make it better for all in the long run. After all isn't it stupid to ruin the journey to the summit for the public riding the cog and once they visit there? If you look at all the old pictures of the Cog they were King on the summit. Probably still are despite some trying to take them down.

Hikers don't pay anything at the summit or to be on the mountain so they have it easy per usual.

 

[CaptCaper]

I assumed the funds were specific accumulated funds for railroad improvement projects, and earmarked as such, so not necessarily to the detriment of non railroad state supported projects, and maybe originally accrued through some transportation related fee or 'tax'? Only an assumption without taking the time to research what is probably more complicated than I wish to unravel.

Sometimes I wonder how much we subsidize public routes of travel more for the benefit of private business' and to the detriment of the general public due to degradation of the roadways from overuse by trucks (costly car repairs). Of course in this case it is not a public way. I just think they should be using the trains to help solve some of the problems they have helped create at the summit, like with toilet cars or something. And you know this state is good at rewarding bad behavior (I didn't want to say that but had to).

Don't forget they are a seasonal business and it's dam hard to keep the track's,etc in shape off season with weather and the mountain fighting them.

Give them time to build toliet car's. (the Cog) they've come along way. They are building new coaches now which is needed. Has any hiker here really gone down to the Barn and see what they are doing? I doubt it. See the new track repair car? New setup for cleaning along the tracks? See the new coaches being built? Time is on their side. They'll be here long after we will be and will deal with all trying to kill them or take them down many notches.

I've been to the summit probably more than anyone on this forum. And my opinion is there are a ton more hikers there over the season then most lead on to. The Cog and Autoroad don't open until 9 and close at 5pm at the summit. Hikers are there earlier and later then those business's. And hit the summit year round.

I've had to let a few friends go in the hiking community. Always complaing about ATV's,Cog,Snowmachines,etc. Cant make them happy about anything other then hiking. Depressing to be around. Totally drinking AMC coolaid. Not fun to hike with. I snowmachine,hike,atv,boat,fish,camp year round. I told them I'm an all around guy and not anal about any one thing. With that I ended it with them.

 

[skiguy]

Wow....local above tree line Craft Beer at the Hotel can’t be far away.

 

[rocket21]

I think it's important to note that the Cog is receiving financing, not funding. It is a secured loan. The state is lending the Cog $1.2 million for a 20 year term at prime plus 1%. By the end of the loan term, the state in theory gets back all of the $1.2 million plus interest plus the 1% fee. Dramatically different than if they were getting a straight out cash infusion from state coffers (such as what happens at Cannon Mountain ski area).

The benefit for the Cog is getting more favorable loan terms as compared to going to a local bank.

 

[Andrew]

I agree CaptCaper regarding the Cog. Sorry if my writing can be poor at times. I know the track foreman and know how innovative and hard working these folks are. I'm looking forward to getting a chance myself to get a look at the shops when invited now that I have some time on my hands. The Cog is certainly a NH institution at this point and of major historical and identity significance to this state with international recognition. Heck you can see a very well produced story on PBS about it with Fritz Weatherbee bringing me to tears.

added:
Didn't mean to imply they are lacking or behind in not providing any infrastructure to date with something like a toilet car. I was celebrating that the track upgrade helps to bring such a possibility forward if everyone cooperates.

I have never been an AMC member myself and had always had concern about their grip on the White Mtns. But over the years have also come to accept their importance in the Whites and historical significance.

 

[skiguy]

I think it's important to note that the Cog is receiving financing, not funding. It is a secured loan. The state is lending the Cog $1.2 million for a 20 year term at prime plus 1%. By the end of the loan term, the state in theory gets back all of the $1.2 million plus interest plus the 1% fee. Dramatically different than if they were getting a straight out cash infusion from state coffers (such as what happens at Cannon Mountain ski area).

The benefit for the Cog is getting more favorable loan terms as compared to going to a local bank.

This certainly puts perspective into this fiscal situation. Well said.