Inside the Golden Bubble: Public plane for private gain?

Beechcraft Baron, Wikipedia image.

Beechcraft Baron, Wikipedia image.

Editor’s note: Inside the Golden Bubble is a political column.

The Shumlin administration has asked the Vermont Agency of Transportation to upgrade the state’s 51-year-old flying machine — a four-seat 1962 Cessna 182 — with a 2013 model, six passenger Beechcraft Baron.

The cost to taxpayers? $1.2 million through a 10-year lease-to-own arrangement in which the state would pay $117,600 annually, not including the cost of flying the aircraft at a rate of $250 an hour. Total bill? About $155,000 a year.

Not many people even knew the state had a plane, and Gov. Peter Shumlin was among them until late last summer, according to his staff. But when the governor, who reluctantly deigned to campaign against his Republican rival state Sen. Randy Brock after Labor Day, realized it was at his disposal he decided to avail himself of the state’s wings to make his two jobs — governing and hitting the trail — a little easier. After all, Vermont is a tough state to get around in: Without a plane, even the governor can’t get there from here without long miles on the road.

Sue Allen issued a statement to reporters on Tuesday explaining the governor’s rationale: “Having dealt for a year and a half with the logistics of getting the governor to events and planning attendance and travel time, we decided to use the plane a few times when it made sense to do so.”

Trouble is, the plane has a few mechanical issues, according to Shumlin, including a door that likes to flap open. Maintenance of a plane nearly the same age as the governor isn’t easy. And so, the idea was hatched: Why not buy a new aircraft? And why not a state of the art piston-engine prop plane preferred by CEOs everywhere. The state, after all, the administration reasoned, needs to upgrade anyway. The Cessna is older than the Beatles and state employees who use it for airport inspections, emergency management, river management and other prosaic purposes are potentially putting themselves in harm’s way. Not to mention the governor.

But even Sen. Dick Mazza, D-Grand Isle/Chittenden, a bosom buddy of the governor’s, was appalled when the administration came into his committee — Senate Transportation — and made the pitch at a time when the state faces the worst budget crunch since the onset of the Great Recession.

Still, it was all going according to plan earlier this month until Paul Heintz, the political columnist for Seven Days, caught wind of the governor’s aviation aspirations. Heintz, as is his wont, dogged the issue two weeks in a row and discovered the governor hadn’t reimbursed the state for some of his campaign travel last fall as he flitted from one Vermont town to another on the taxpayer’s dime.

After Heintz’s most recent revelations, Jack Lindley, the chairman of the Vermont GOP, cried foul. The watchdog of the Republican Party in Vermont was roused from a post-election slumber to bark vociferously at the powers that be (i.e., the Democrats).

In a statement to reporters, Lindley accuses the governor of seeking to use the plane as his new vehicle of choice, now that Shumlin is chair of the Democratic Governors Association, for jaunts to Washington, D.C.

“I think the governor discovered the plane and glommed onto it,” Lindley said in an interview. “He thought it would be such a good idea to find a plane to carry him in great luxury.”

The Shumlin administration won’t say whether that’s the governor’s intent.

Lindley says it’s inappropriate for the governor to set aside money for a new state plane at a time when the state is looking at gas, fuel, property tax increases to shore up the state budget.

“It’s bizarre activity on the part of the governor and his administration and it’s not being very kind to hardworking Vermonters, asking us to pay for luxuries for him,” Lindley said in an interview. “It’s a typical plane used by small businesses to transport CEOs, and it’s fairly fast and efficient and it’s just something that’s used in private sector, not generally speaking in government, which has a limited role in which to use airplanes.”

Lindley said Vermont doesn’t have a governor’s mansion, either. (Shumlin’s proposal for better gubernatorial accommodations — a four-bedroom apartment in the state’s Redstone Building last year — was withdrawn quickly when it became apparent that it would be politically unpopular.)

The GOP chair also accuses Chris Cole, a policy analyst for the Vermont Agency of Transportation, of “falsely claiming” to reporters, Heintz in particular, that the Beechcraft is limited to a 400-mile flying range.

Cole denies that charge, says he doesn’t know anything about the limits of the Beechcraft’s range, and in turn accuses Heintz of misquoting him.

The 400-mile range information, however, was right on a fact sheet from the Agency of Transportation handed out to lawmakers on Feb. 8.

The actual range of the Beechcraft Baron is about 1,500 miles. The distance between Montpelier and Washington, D.C.? 544 miles, according to the Google.

Cole has said the new plane would be used for its old purposes — aerial surveys, mapping and photography.

But Lindley says that the new high-speed, low-wing aircraft would be difficult for state agencies to use for the ostensible purpose of observing forests and taking pictures. The 1962 Cessna, by comparison, is a relatively slow and “practical aircraft,” he says.

“The information given by Chris Cole was inaccurate and was borderline mischievous on his part,” Lindley said. “I thought our state employees would rise to better level than sustaining the governor’s desire to travel at taxpayers’ expense.”

Instead of addressing Lindley’s allegations with regard to the new plane, the Shumlin administration staff has been busily justifying the use of the old one.

Here’s their explanation:

The Governor has used the state plane five times in 2 ½ years, each time on official state business. On one occasion (Sept. 27) he ended his day at the Middlebury airport and was driven to a campaign house party and then home; he did not use the plane for that event, and once the Governor’s office realized it received a single block invoice for travel that day, it asked for the incremental cost of ending the day in Middlebury and asked the campaign to reimburse the $65.80 cost of returning the plane to its home base in Berlin. We have also asked that any future use be billed by leg so that it can be reviewed.  The Agency of Transportation has concerns about the safety of this aging plane and will handle repairs and/or the lease of a replacement as it sees best for the state.

FYI, like all agencies that use the plane, we reimburse AOT for our trips:
1.            Aug. 30, 2012 to Bennington for the opening of Route 9 ($394.80)
2.            Sept. 1, 2012 to Rutland for the State Fair ($253.80)
3.            Sept. 27, 2012 to Newport for a press event at Jay Peak resort; Caledonia Airport for a press event at Burke Mountain.  Drop off in Middlebury*  ($332.76; campaign will reimburse $65.80)
4.            Oct. 5, 2012 to Brattleboro for a meeting and public event with U.S. Transportation Sec. LaHood ($344.04)
5.            Oct. 25, 2012 to Bennington for tour of the Green Mountain Express, Bennington Housing Project, Global Z business ($345.92)

The Cessna, by the way, has been grounded for maintenance. It needs $86,000 worth of repairs. The market value of the plane is $80,000.

Meanwhile, the governor has put off plans to buy the Beechcraft this year.

Editor’s note: This story was updated at 6:16 a.m. Correction: The plane is a piston-engine prop plane, not a jet as originally reported.

Anne Galloway

Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harrassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. Comments should be 1000 characters or fewer. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

We personally review and moderate every comment that is posted here. This takes a lot of time; please consider donating to keep the conversation productive and informative.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation. If you have questions or concerns about our commenting platform, please review our Commenting FAQ.

Privacy policy

    Can one imagine the carnage on I-91 or I-89 if the speed of autos increases unmitigated? Use the Vermont plane to protect Vermonters who still love their children. New Hampshire uses their plane to track the traffic and found people doing 90 – 100 mph on the interstates. Insane speeds will only increase if nothing is done. The majority of high speed accidents results in fatalities and the majority of drivers who choose to drive at those speeds are not professional race car drivers.

  • Jeff Laughlin

    A slow over-wing aircraft is much more suitable to aerial surveys.

  • Duncan Kilmartin


    A quick Google search of the Cessna 182, including a 1962 version, is very revealing on its history, costs, etc. For far less than $150,000, the cost of one year of the lease-purchase of the twin Bonanza, we could have a mid 1980’s Cessna 182 in “perfect” shape, with far more equipment and “after market” child proof doors to safeguard our Governor against inadvertent ejections if he finds it necessary to sit in the front seat instead of behind the pilot. Of course, its a little tough for the door to open, by itself or with significant help from a human agency, with an airspeed over 100 knots…but then of course “Al Gore invented the internet”.

    You ought to ask Chris Cole for the details on the $88,000 overhaul. See if includes childproof locks. Maybe the twin Bonanza includes them for “free”.

  • Don Peterson

    Once more Peter Shumlin seems arrogant and out of touch. I think he’s forgotten who he works for.

    Note to Peter: Dont go to the Kentucky Derby this year. Its out of your airplanes range…

    • Timothy MacLam

      Gov. Shumlin has the money to buy his own plane and pay a pilot if that is how His Highness wishes to travel. Perhaps he could get a deal from the same friends who sold him land in the Montpelier area. When he leaves office he could lease it back to the state with some kind of backroom deal before he goes.

  • Ed Clark

    The State should buy the new plane and give the old one to Angry Jack Lindley. He needs to get out more.

  • Steven Farnham

    Don’t know why anyone would want to fly around Vermont, and not be able to see what’s below them, which would be the case with a low-wing aircraft. And if it’s not flying around Vermont, why are Vermonters buying it? For out-of-state activities, aren’t first-class commercial seats good enough for the governor? Has anyone calculated what it would cost to move the governor around on commercial flights, and compared that to the annual cost of buying a new airplane “for the state”?

  • Peter Liston

    Some outstanding questions:

    1) What are all of the essential government tasks that require an airplane?

    2) How often is an airplane required for these tasks?

    3) What kind of aircraft is required to accomplish these tasks?

    4) What is the best way to procure the services of this aircraft? Can the task be efficently outsourced? Or do we need to purchase a plane? What kind do we purchase? New or used? Buy or lease?

    It seems that many folks are tied up in the drama of Shumlin using the plane (Shumlin does seem to attract this kind of drama). But the essential issues are being overlooked.

  • Rob Bast

    Vermont’s Governor should have a plane at her/his disposal. It seems a reasonable way to help manage travel demands. At the same time, we are a small state, still, and the state’s only plane has to be versatile, serving as well the same functions it is supposed to serve now, including aerial survey and search. A new high wing six passenger single engine plane which might be a good balance of needs is available for half of the cost cited in the article. The Governor has fair argument for replacing a piece of aged equipment and should he come back with a revised proposal, he would deserve a fresh response.

  • kevin ellis

    It seems Vermont – again – is caught in a time warp. It wants to become a modern state with a modern economy – modern health care, improved schools, dealing with poverty, farms that don’t pollute etc. But our politics remain stuck in the 1950s myth of of the Beckoning Country. Of course the governor needs a plane, just like most governors. His job – in part – is to get places, to meet with constituents. Seems to me we want him at events in Washington, DC or Middlebury or and elsewhere. That is his job. If a plane can get him there faster than driving down Route 7 yet again, he should use it.

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Inside the Golden Bubble: Public plane for private gain?"