The Breeze

The Bridge Presents

For Youth,
By Youth

June 2016

supports
The Breeze!
9 Langdon Street

A Celebration of the Old Meeting House

Fifty years since its revival commemorated

his past May, the Old Meeting

House in East Montpelier
celebrated 50 years as an active
congregation for members of the
Central Vermont community. Although,
it should be noted, the churchs history
goes significantly further back than
1966, and even dates to the time when
East Montpelier and Montpelier existed
as one town.
When the then-called East Montpelier
Center White Church was constructed
in 1823, its location was reasoned by
a strong belief that the population of
the town would become centered in
that area. Indeed, there were fertile
agricultural fields surrounding the
spot, attracting early settlers like Parley
Davis, who had owned and donated
the section of land on which the Old
Meeting House itself would be built.

by Nathan Grutchfield
However, the ensuing years demonstrated
this prediction to be wrong, as an
increasing amount of people began
to settle near the river rather than in
the farmland. The Old Meeting House
struggled to sustain congregation,
having to compete with newly built
churches next to the river. What was
then just one town, Montpelier, became
divided in budget-spending interests
among the different demographics, and
in 1848, the population center by the
river petitioned the legislature to split
Montpelier into two towns, a wish that
the legislature soon granted.

House hosts bustling community events,

including weekly worships. But at this
point in the mid-1800s, and lasting until
the mid-1900s, there was so little in
the way of congregation at the site
that letters from the Church Committee
to families in the surrounding area in
late 1965 seemed desperate in their
request for more members to participate
in the churchs sessions. This was at the
beginning of the churchs gathering on
a full-time basis, which would prove
to an enormously defining point in the
history of the now-termed Old Meeting
House of East Montpelier Center.

Meanwhile, the White Church, or, as it

was also called, the Center Church, was
a site of only occasional gatherings.
To compare, anyone familiar with the
Old Meeting House in the present-day
is well-aware of the high degree of
frequency by which the Old Meeting

Between 1966 and 1975 a total of 69

new members joined the Old Meeting
House, to add to around 40 who were
charter members. In 1970 electricity
was installed, and around the same
time the churchs Sunday School saw an
increasing number of youth participants

which inspired plans to build a new

community building that was approved
in 1975.
The church had some economic
difficulties early on, and also saw
a decrease in active participation in
the late seventies that led to serious
considerations to close the church. Yet
through it all, the Old Meeting House
persevered to reach far better times,
growing into a sizable institution of the
East Montpelier, and Central Vermont,
communities.
Current minister Elissa Johnk reflects
on what the 50-year anniversary is
celebrating exactly, by saying, [the
Old Meeting House] has grown, and
grown rather spectacularly not just in
numbers, but I think in its understanding
of its place in the community the Old

Continued on Page 3

The Law Office of Amy K. Butler,

Esquire, PLLC
Bankruptcy Family Law
Estate Planning
64 Main St., Ste. 26, Montpelier
802-371-0077
akbutler@amykbutlerlaw.com

THE BREEZE

P A G E 2 J U N E 2 0 1 6

The Breeze: A Rewarding Tradition

by Lindsey Grutchfield

oughly a year ago, as the first issue of The Breeze went to print, I was
exhausted and elated. Putting together a student-driven paper, even with
excellent guidance from the staff at The Bridge, was a daunting task.
With that said, it was also one of the most rewarding things I have created.
The Breeze is special because it is put together nearly entirely by the youth of
the Montpelier area. They have written, edited, organized and fundraised for
just about the entirety of what you now hold in your hands. It's something to be
proud of.
From the beginning, I hoped that The Breeze would become something of an
annual tradition. Thanks to the talents of a wonderful group of young people
(including those of my very own brother, Nathan Grutchfield), it has. And so, I
have with pleasure the privilege of introducing the second issue of The Breeze.

Lindsey Grutchfield

Thoughts on Berlin Pond:

Montpeliers Primary Source of Drinking Water
by Anders Shenholme

s is quite apparent, the recreational use of Berlin Pond has been highly
controversial ever since the Vermont Supreme Court revoked Montpeliers control over the small water body in 2012. Now, with a charter
change that would give Montpelier power over its water source still yet to be
passed, Berlin has collaborated with the Department of Fish and Wildlife in
an attempt to build a boat access into the pond. This access that would almost
certainly increase the rate of recreation in the pond is seen as an immediate
threat to Montpeliers water supply and because of this, the city of Montpelier is
considering filing an injunction to prevent the construction. A legal injunction
would come with costs, but could definitely be a step in the right direction for
decreasing the amount of recreation in Berlin Pond.
Currently, the easiest way for boaters to access the pond is by trespassing, an
activity that has been reported to leave property damage and litter in its wake.
Having an access on the pond will allow boaters an easy entrance to the pond that
does not require trespassing, and will almost certainly cut down on the amount
of illegal activity that comes with this method of entry. Of course, having this
access will very likely increase the recreational use of Berlin Pond, seeing as it
would offer a straightforward, legal way to access the pond, and would put more
strain on Montpeliers water supply because of this. By taking legal action to stop
progress on the access, Montpelier can move forward on keeping people away
from its water source in the immediate future, but not without consequences to
Berlin citizens nearby the pond.
Another factor to consider is the financial commitments of both parties in this
conf lict. First, filing an injunction would cost the city of Montpelier at least

Essay

$20,000 in legal fees according to Montpelier City Council member Anne Watson. This would be a considerable financial cost, but for cleaner water, it seems
to be a reasonable expense. On the other side, Berlin and the Department of Fish
and Wildlife have spent an estimated $20,000 on their survey of the land surrounding Berlin Pond. While this also seems to be a noticeable amount of tax
dollars, when the full cost of construction is weighed with the fact that the access
may be rendered entirely useless by a future ban on recreation, it is clear that
stopping progress now will save money.
Additionally, allowing construction of the access to go through and then banning
the use of the water body that it serves will cause much confusion around its
usage. People that arent aware of the laws may see the access as an invitation to
use the pond for recreation and people who are caught on the pond may use it as
an excuse to justify their actions. By preventing the access from being built, this
potential challenge to enforcement will never come to be.
Legal action against Berlin to stop the Berlin Pond boat access will both prevent
an increase in recreation while it is still legal and a odd situation around the use
of the pond by the time that recreation is banned. While Montpelier filing an injunction to prevent construction of the access to Berlin Pond would likely upset
some Berlin citizens and require a financial commitment on Montpeliers part,
it seems that it is definitely a step in the right direction for securing Berlin Pond
as a recreation-free water supply.
(Note the author is a Montpelier High School student of teacher Heather
McLane)

On Chickens

by Hannah Eschelbach

They smell bad. They screech during test time. Inescapably loud.

Sometimes they escape and chase innocent, frightened freshmen. They will eat the garden if
you let them roam around. With all the murals on the walls and people playing guitars right
there in the hallways, this is a weird enough school without chickens.
I say this is a weird school because prior to this, I attended Spaulding High School in Barre
a monolith of a building surrounded by parking lots. There was no back garden to escape
into. There was no greenhouse. Even with its superiority for sheer number and diversity of
courses offered to Montpelier High School, Spaulding, as far as I can think of, had no science classes where you would actually go outside and look at live animals.
They're Rhode Island Reds. Their feathers a blend of reddish-brown and gold, with bald
patches since they won't quit pecking each other. They look at you, permanently offended,
with their dark round eyes. They don't know how to walk humbly; they prance and strut.
They'll step on your feet and peck at your clothes, squawking and flapping their wings.
Some of my classmates are afraid of them...well, chickens ARE the closest living relative of
the Tyrannosaurus Rex.
I, however, am not. Loose threads and buttons on clothes are mistaken for food. They
swarm around you because they think you'll drop something for them to eat. They'll fight
each other sometimes, over food. But they hardly peck ME at all. When it's time for me to
collect the eggs, the hens usually move over and let me take them out of the nesting boxes.
This is a good thing, since the teachers will buy the eggs after I've sanitized them. In turn,
I give the hens the food and water that they think about every waking second. The teacher's
egg money pays me for my efforts.
I love those chickens. They're a job, sure, but they're also soft and fluffy and adorable. Even
if I didn't get paid I'd still visit them every day. My other not-having-gone-to-a-city-school
classmates just ignore them, or throw to the hens the pieces of their lunches that they themselves don't want to eat. I get weird looks when I come inside with hay on my shoes and
carrying a bucket of eggs. They don't get it.

Hannah Eschelbach tends the chickens at Montpelier

High School this spring. Photo by Michael Jermyn.

THE BREEZE

JUNE 2016 PAGE 3

A Celebration of the Old Meeting House

Continued from Page 1

Meeting House works hard harder than any congregation Ive seen to make sure we live
into our inclusiveness statement, honoring all people as neighbors no exceptions. Indeed, in
recent years the church has been involved with activities such as a youth mission trip to Boston,
the studying of what it means to be an Open and Affirming Church*, as well as the marriage of
Johnk and her wife, commemorated by the planting of a serviceberry tree in the garden at the Old
Meeting House.
The lengthy journey that the Old Meeting House has undergone to reach this day of celebration,
persisting through bleak years in the midst of unfortunate logistical situations, has been
unquestionably filled with important lessons regarding the sustainability of an institution within
a community. One such moral suggests that by promoting positive messages of acceptance to its
surrounding area, the Old Meeting House has consequently done well for itself, attracting people
from surrounding towns with this well-developed outreach method.
In any case, on Saturday, May 21, the Old Meeting House celebrated its history with an evening of
entertainment, music, and fine dining, followed by a worship service the following day. It was a
notable weekend for the church, to say the least, and one in which members, new and old, reflected
on the past 50 years as well as anticipated what future gatherings will hold. More information
regarding the celebration may be found at www.oldmeetinghouse.org by clicking on the 50 Years
of Following the Star tab.
*An Open and Affirming Church is a designation given to churches incorporating the full
inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.

No Wonder We're Cranky!

"Period Tax" Unfair to Menstruating Women
by Sam Murray, Callie Dalley, Kaitlyn OReilly and Izzy Banse

eminine hygiene products have been taxed since

1973, making anyone with a period pay extra for
their monthly necessities. Following a successful campaign in 2000, the tax was lowered considerably, but women still pay tax on tampons and pads.
This is unfair and way too expensive. Its ridiculous
that something as simply necessary as tampons are
taxed, while other items, like condoms, arent.
Low-income women in particular feel the effects of
the tax. In Vermont, feminine hygiene products are
taxed under the general sales tax, which is 6 percent.
This is a regressive tax, so people with lower incomes have larger percentages of their income taken
when they buy products. Tampons and other feminine
products are necessities for anyone with a period,
so it seems a little silly that they are taxed like this.
Women with low incomes can't help it when they get
their period, and if they cant afford the necessities
they need, it is unhygienic and often costs them more
money to clean themselves up and replace the clothes
theyve ruined. This whole concept is immoral and
something should be done about it.
Many other states have passed laws repealing the tax,
and there is wide agreement that the tax is unfair. We
put out a survey in our school and discovered that
more than half of the recipients knew about the tax,
and almost 76.7 percent of them thought the tax was
unreasonable. This general agreement of the public is
even more of a reason to do something about it.
Women with their periods are paying taxes for these
feminine hygiene products, even though there is no
way they can help this from happening to them. These
people cannot help the fact that they need feminine
hygiene products to help their personal needs; and
eliminating the tax would help the female population

Opinion

save money in the long run as well. A woman in Vermont, can spend around $4.20 on the tax on feminine
hygiene products, which added up over the course of
a year, is a huge number. In total, all the women in
Vermont can spend up to $989,100 a year on the tax
of feminine products! This is only for those residents
who have their period though, as according to the
United States Census, the population of people who
menstruate in Vermont is roughly 235,500. With that
many people menstruating, a lot of money is being
paid in taxes. All in all, there's a ton of tax revenue
in hand.
Although we may wish to remove the tax on feminine
hygiene products, we have experienced many obstacles in trying to find a solution to this outrageous
tax. The removal of this tax would cause a deficit of
anywhere between $200,000 and $989,100 in the general fund. This would oust important funding from
Human Services, the Vermont Teachers Retirement
Fund and many other crucial funds. Another hurdle
occurred when looking into expanding the availability
of feminine hygiene products to low income women,
in regards to programs like Reach Up , Medicaid, and
food banks. We found that Medicaid does, in fact,
provide a limited amount of funding for feminine hygiene products to those who require them. Reach Up
only covers families, and the amount of products kept
at a food bank is dependent upon donations. These
complications left us with limited options.
Given the obstacles to removing the tax on feminine

hygiene products, the best solution is for all food

shelves to have a stock of feminine hygiene products.
There are two ways this solution could be completed.
The first way would be to raise awareness. Raising
awareness has helped bring attention to diseases such
as Breast Cancer and ALS, so we think that raising
awareness would help make this solution become the
new way of doing things. With that in mind, donating
feminine hygiene products to the food shelves would
give people the products they need. Alternatively,
the second way to fulfill this solution is to circulate
a petition for a portion of the tax money generated
from tampon sales to go to food banks. According to
the State of Vermont, food shelves in Vermont are not
supported with the state taxes which would help their
organizations. This would benefit women because
even if people do not donate, then the food shelves
will always have a small chunk of money to help them
keep a stock of feminine hygiene products. Raising
awareness and having a petition for a portion of the
tax money going to food banks, should occur because
anyone who needs these products should have the
ability to receive feminine hygiene products. Also, we
can not choose to have our periods. They are natural
and a part of life, and we should not be charged for
them. Some states consider agriculture supplies as
a necessity. That is outrageous because 40 states tax
a natural cycle but dont tax agriculture equipment?
In conclusion, according to, Time Magazine more
states tax tampons than candy in America, and that
is not acceptable. We as human beings having our
periods, should not be taxed, and if we are, then we
should have an available place to receive the products
we need.
(Note the authors are Montpelier High School students. Their teacher is Heather McLane)

The Breeze would not be possible without the

support of the following community members:

Backers:
Ian Baldwin
Mary Ellen Barrett
Frederick G. and Mary D.
Bashara
Wayne F. Burke
Amy Butler
Ann Cann
Nancy Case
Central Vermont Chamber of
Commerce
Wavell Cowan
Kathryn Davis

Phil Dodd
Roberta Harold and
Wayne Fawbush
Larry and Barbara Floersch
Marcia Garlisi
Patricia Giavara
Lindsey Grutchfield
Merrick Grutchfield
Meg Hammond
Sandra Howell
Lindel and Norm James
David F. Kelley
Nedene Martin

Tom McKone
Heather McLane
Michelle (no last name given)
Ann OBrien
Bess OBrien
Sara Neller
Donny and Janna Osman
Guy Page, Page
Communications
Dick Powell
Jeff Potter
Anthony Redington
Brian Ricca

Josephine Romano
Rotary Club of Montpelier,
Charitable Foundation
Ron Sarquiz
Leigh Seddon
Ivan Shadis
Michelle Singer
Ann Stanton
John Wagner
Mark Welch
In-kind contributers:
Margaret Blanchard
Joyce Kahn

THE BREEZE

PAGE 4 JUNE 2016

What Does Money Have to do with Music?

by Hannah Eschelbach

ven if more money doesn't equal more power,

there's still the idea that the rich are more cultured and more easily immersed in what are
known as 'high-class' activities. The reason for this
isn't that they are all snobs, it's just that they can afford
to be thus immersed.

Opinion

This is evident especially in the music styles of the 'rich' and 'poor.' The penniless turn up their noses at opera and the monocle-wearers look down their
noses at rock. Real rock n' roll is meant to capture the grittiness of life, to be
sometimes painfully realistic. Classical music ensnares a mythical quality not
found in reality, telling fantastical stories. When you've got enough money that
you don't need to worry about surviving, you're bored and enjoy something more
grandiose. When you're broke, you like hearing about other people with the same
complaints as you.
Do you have to be a certain income level to listen to certain styles of music? I,
a wrong-side-of-the-tracks-dweller, adore both Tchaikovsky and Mick Jagger.
I like listening to stories some days and I like having my problems validated
through music other days. Even though I am charitably described as broke, I
spent some years in the Green Mountain Youth Symphony, a sort of youngerversion of the Vermont Philharmonic, playing clarinet. Maybe I didn't really
understand the work of the classical artists, but I still enjoyed it, and at the time
I could afford to. I had financial aid and a very nice, wooden clarinet that I got
on scholarship (wooden clarinets were a big deal at the time-most students still

The Fun of Summer

You can go on a waterslide
And you can glide
On a waterslide
You can ask your family
If they want to have a water balloon fight.

even now.

had plastic ones.) But I am still lower-class, and showing off became my downfall. I played my very nice,
beautiful, expensive wooden clarinet in a pep band at
a football game, silently bragging to those plastic-wind
players, and then it started to rain. The instrument was
destroyed. I still have it; I can't bear to throw it away,

I ended up having to play a plastic clarinet in my semi-professional orchestra, in

addition to the newly hiked-up tuition and audition fees. My stress, and the awful
grade-school level instrument, resulted in me eventually leaving the orchestra.
It was then when I turned to playing rock-n-roll guitar more than clarient, where
it was acceptable to perform all by yourself with just one cheap instrument and
one voice, and not have to pay a lot to be alongside a bunch of other shiny instruments.
So am I still allowed to enjoy classical music? I still do. It's not terrible for a
broke person to read Charles Dickens or the immortal bard. If we can still take
meaning away from the stories and identify with the characters and enjoy the
language, that's good enough. So I say that if a sound provokes an emotion from
you, it doesn't matter if you are too broke to get your wooden clarinet fixed or if
you wear top hats and like Led Zeppelin (and yes, I know that no one really wears
top hats anymore.) Whether the song is played on a $200 or $2000 clarinet, it is
still an expression of a feeling, that anyone is capable of liking.

Seasons In Poetry
by Hazel Singer, age 6
East Montpelier Elementary School

The Fun of Winter

If you have a hot tub
You can go in your hot tub
And you can make a snow fort
And you can make a giant snowball for
you to eat.

Thank You for Reading The Breeze!