DR Power Equipment is part of Country Home Products, which was founded in Vergennes in 1985 and locally owned until it sold to Wisconsin-based Generac in 2015. DR makes and sells equipment for yard work.
Generac is moving most of DR Power Equipment’s jobs out of Vergennes. Art Aiello, the public relations manager for Generac, said in an email that the company’s shipping and repair operations are moving to Wisconsin. Twenty-six employees will be affected, though they’re being offered other jobs in the company.
“Those who choose to leave the company will be given severance packages,” Aiello wrote. The move, meant to take place in the second quarter of 2019, “is intended to better position DR Power Equipment for future growth,” he wrote. “DR Power is also adding a number of jobs throughout 2018 and into 2019.” He did not specify where.
According to Vermont Business Magazine, Country Home Products had 200 workers as of June 2018, making it Addison County’s fifth-largest employer. In addition to DR Power Equipment, Country Home Products includes Neuton Power Equipment, which makes electric-powered yard tools.
Country Home Products closed a Winooski facility last year as Generac moved manufacturing operations to Wisconsin. In that instance, 67 Vermonters lost their jobs.
Employers are required to inform the Vermont Department of Labor in advance of mass layoffs, but Labor Commissioner Lindsay Kurrle said Friday morning that Country Home Products hasn’t notified the department about any cuts.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
For the record, this company was awarded over $700,000 in state tax “incentives” in 1999.
You mean, 19 years ago? 19 years later, that may have been a very good investment. Do you have info on how many jobs were created in the company between 1999 and 2018? How much corporate earnings increased? How much corporate taxes were paid? How much property taxes were paid in Vergennes and Winooski? How much personal income taxes were paid by the employees? How much property taxes were paid by those employees? Maybe that investment wouldn’t have made a dime’s worth of difference, but is there any data on that?
knowyourassumptions: What you seem unwilling to accept is that there is no way to answer any of your questions. Auditors require evidence. The VEGI program is predicated on a subjective “but for” assertion that is based on private board room decisions that cannot be verified.
BTW – While I have access to information about job creation, it is considered proprietary so cannot share it Vermonters. Does that bother you?
Not sure what the the purpose was in your posting the naked comment, *For the record this company was awarded over $700,000 in state tax *incentives* in 1999.*? It seems to be a disapproving remark, but devoid of any context or explanation for why you disapprove.
Are you suggesting that this thing that happened 19 years ago was illegal or improper? This was government policy. If the company was not required to provide evidence that the tax incentive created jobs or added economic benefit, that sounds like the Legislatures fault.
The incentives were awarded 19 years ago. They may or may not have created economic benefit that would not have otherwise occurred. But in the meantime, 17 years later, an out of state company bought CHP and has consolidated operations. Nothing illegal or improper there? Was the company never supposed to change hands, or never reduce payroll, because of what happened 19 years ago?
If youre saying companies should never get tax incentives, just say that.
If you dont like what happened, it seems that your ire should be directed at the Legislature, which in 1999 was run by Dems (and has been for most of the time since).
knowyourassumptions: Once again, you have ignored my questions.
Useless.
But you, Doug, aren’t answering their pretty straightforward questions either. I am more often on your side (an understatement), but in this case, your statement with no context was disingenuous.
This company is giving the 26 people (13% of their VT workforce) 6 months notice, offering them other jobs in their company, and strengthening their overall business in the meantime. You are typically reasonable in the face of inane argument, but in this case, without actually making a contextual argument, I don’t know what you’re trying to accomplish.
“in this case, your statement with no context was disingenuous”
why is a fact disingenuous?
the context is clear; no objective process can ascertain if the “incentive” was necessary
BTW – why do you (like “knowyourassumptions”) feel the need to hide behind the anonymity provided by SevenDays?
Your no context fact in your first post added absolutely nothing.
And why would you to lash out at someone who says hes a supporter, just because he questioned one of your posts? Hes playing by the rules of this site. If you choose to post on this site you should stop your habit of criticizing other people here for playing by the rules.
Thank you.
knowyourassumptions:
You say “no context” but continue to ignore the point. These types of “incentives” cannot be objectively evaluated for their return on investment.
“Are you suggesting that this thing that happened 19 years ago was illegal or improper?”
Exaggerate much? I said no such thing.
“If the company was not required to provide evidence that the tax incentive created jobs or added economic benefit, that sounds like the Legislatures fault.”
First, companies are required to create the jobs (which can be verified), but VEPC is not permitted to tell taxpayers how many or at what wages. My comment asked if it bothered you that I can’t tell you that information. I did not criticize the company for that. Another misrepresentation.
Your comments about the fact that the “incentives” were awarded 19 years ago also misses the point. These programs should always be compared to alternative types of public investments. For example, laying fiber for broadband has a much longer life than 19 years. Building affordable housing serves an immediate need, creates jobs, AND the asset is there for 100 years. And so on.
As for whether the state should spend millions on such “incentive” programs, I repeat what I said earlier (I can’t get evidence that they create jobs that wouldn’t have been created otherwise) and I direct you to a recent report from my office that (among other things) provides information from prominent researchers about their findings in the matter.
https://auditor.vermont.gov/sites/auditor/…
And finally, I will not stop asking those – like you, who post anonymously to use your real names. Just because it’s a rule on the site doesn’t mean I can’t argue that readers should know who is posting (lots of people agree with me btw).
And lots of people DONT agree with you.
Way to end on a Trumpian note.
Doug, thanks for your most recent comment, which was informative and rational when it comes to the issue at hand.