[phineastcat]

"He's probably crazy to be trying it in Vermont though," is an understatement. The largest city in Vermont, Burlington, only has a population of ~40,000. He's proposing a city half the size of Burlington in the middle of fucking nowhere.

Vermonters are VERY resistant to people trying to change their landscape or way of life, and as you might expect, they (myself included) are not thrilled with this plan.

[JoeAltmaier]

So if its nowhere, what's the resistance about? Vermonters want to do whatever the hell they want on their own land. But not this guy? He's got to do what Vermonters want? I never figured out what that's all about.

[randombit]

> Vermonters want to do whatever the hell they want on their own land.

Within the constraints of zoning, which are very strict both at the state level (Act 250 would certainly come into play for a development this large) and often at the town level also (don't know about Sharon). Vermont's zoning is partially oriented towards keeping as much green space and working farmland available as possible... maybe there are places where you can just buy up hundreds of acres farmland and turn it into strip malls and high density housing but Vermont is thankfully not one of them.

As another example of what you cannot do with your land in Vermont - you cannot put up a billboard on it. There was a case recently where a mural painted on a barn wall within sight of the highway was declared a roadside ad and had to be removed. You don't realize how just ugly and tacky billboards are until you live in a place without them for a few years...

[chrisdbaldwin]

>You don't realize how just ugly and tacky billboards are until you live in a place without them for a few years...

I recently visited San Francisco and was appalled by the billboards. There's something very jarring about seeing internet memes on a billboard.[1]

[1] http://i0.wp.com/digiday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/bill...

[wavefunction]

I wonder too if HipChat compensated the original artist.

I would guess not.

[deadowl]

It's several towns. What he's doing will disrupt the local economy by inflating prices on the real estate market. New people won't be able to afford to move to town because their pockets aren't billionaire deep. The people who moved out won't come back. Once the local economy is disrupted enough by the pressure on the real estate market, the residents that never planned on leaving won't be able to afford to stay. Then they'll sell their land, and that will feed back into the cycle until the town is either in depression. That will open the door for this billionaire to import enough new residents and hijack the local political processes. Monopoliznig the local real estate market is what will lower the barriers.

[dghughes]

My tiny Canadian province doesn't allow billboards and yes they are very obvious to me when I travel.

[snsr]

Vermonters also care about the environmental, social and fiscal consequences of major development projects in the state.

http://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/permit-handbook/sheet...

I imagine most resistance to this scheme is based in pragmatism. What's being discussed is essentially a paternalistic, religious company town. There is no way that a development of this size will be in any way self-sustaining; it will have significant impacts on the local infrastructure, culture and environment.

[cschmidt]

Vermonters seem resistant to change, no matter what. They like thinks just the way they have always been.

[kbenson]

> They like thinks just the way they have always been.

Such a meta typo. So often, when people want things the same way they've always been[1], that means they want people to think the same way they always have[1], which they don't (because the new generation never does).

1: "always" generally being a short 10-20 year period the person vaguely remembers from their youth, but fondly, because they didn't have much responsibility as they were young and didn't actually have to pay much attention to anything outside their limited social circle.

[fish2000]

The hazy miasma visions of a perfect past can legitimatize themselves, in some, with far far less than 10 to 20 years. Some can do it in a span of weeks – q.v. “Where I Was From,” the memoir by Joan Didion (which specifically is about California, but is quite relevant to these topics to anyone most anywhere in the USA).

[dragonwriter]

> Vermonters seem resistant to change, no matter what.

Vermont was the first state to adopt same sex marriage by statute without a court-issued mandate, so I think "resistant to change" and "like things just the way they have always been" seems likely to be an overly simplistic view of their culture.

[morgante]

This is very far from true.

Politically, Vermont went from being staunchly Republican to being staunchly Democratic. They're also much more open to changing norms, like embracing gay rights.

[st3v3r]

You have to admit there's a huge difference between one or two people on a plot of land doing something, vs getting a plot of land and trying to bring 20,000 people onto it.

[cylinder]

I thought you people are all about freedom, independence, and property rights.

[susurrus]

You were thinking about our Live Free or Die neighbors in New Hampshire.

[sevensor]

I think you can take consolation in the fact that it's going to be very hard to convince 20,000 people to pull up stakes and move to the middle of nowhere to tend crops and extract mineral resources. Or even to convince the church hierarchy to dispatch 20,000 Mormons to the middle of nowhere, assuming they could do that. (I don't know enough about Mormons to say whether this is possible.)

[calebhicks]

This venture has nothing to do with the Mormon (LDS) Church other than the fact this guy is a member.

The leadership of the Church will not acknowledge or encourage the project in any official capacity, and will definitely not 'dispatch' members to live there.

The only exception being if there are actually 20k people, there may be a single pair of missionaries assigned to visit every now and then.

[clavalle]

>This venture has nothing to do with the Mormon (LDS) Church other than the fact this guy is a member.

That's the story, but in the same breath he says:

'A plat, says Hall, will be subject to state and regional laws, but will also be overseen by a board and heirachries of leaders with, it appears, strong Mormon Family values.'

That's not exactly nothing.

[closed]

> convince the church hierarchy to dispatch 20,000 Mormons to the middle of nowhere, assuming they could do that.

It's interesting, Mormonism originally encouraged its members to move to a central place, but around 1950 then prophet (i.e. leader) David O. McKay told people it was fine to remain at home [1]. There are some interesting pockets out there as a result of this "gathering attitude", though, like (AFAIK) a fairly substantial group of Polynesian Mormons in and around Independence, Missouri (a key area in Mormon theology)[2].

[1] https://www.lds.org/manual/presidents-of-the-church-student-...

(search the term "where they live" in the article)

[2] https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/06/saints-in-independence?la...

[brianbarker]

It may not be that hard. Mormons believe jesus is coming again and will arrive at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam-ondi-Ahman. Some people have been buying land there for this reason.

Joseph's Smith's communal utopia, finally realized? Oh yeah, there are people who will go for this.

Edit: As for farming, yes mormons will be fine with it. Google "mormon food storage" and you'll be amazed. They are taught to be ready for disasters at all times.