John Fike

    Town of Colchester

    Property / Tax Specialist

     The Town of Colchester is seeking qualified applicants for the full time position of Property / Tax Specialist. Qualified applicants must be highly motivated, detailed oriented, organized and possess strong math skills. Applicants must be able to work independently and with others. Strong customer service skills are a requirement. Duties will include work in the Clerk/Treasurer’s office and Assessor’s Department including recording of vital records, tax bill generation and collection, tax exemptions, property inspections, property data compilation, analysis and reporting.

    Submit town application, cover letter and resume to Sherry LaBarge, Human Resource Manager, P.O. Box 55, Colchester, VT 05446 or email to October 29, 2014 or open until filled.  For a full job description and application go to   E.O.E


    The next VALA Bi-Monthly Meeting will be held Wednesday, January 7th, 2015 at the Randolph Town Hall in Randolph, Vermont. 



    20 Attendees responded to the survey

    Some of the survey respondents did not answer all the question options and in those cases the total responses does not equal 100%. There were 21 responses (21%)

    Question #1  The 8:30 AM sign in time and 9:00 AM Meeting starting time:

    Met your expectations  19 -95%       Did not meet your expectations: 1 – 5%
    Comments: Would depend on where the meeting was held.

    Question #2  The month of September for the annual meeting is a:

    Convenient month 19 – 95%      Is not a Convenient Month: 1 – 5%
    Comments: Wish our annual meeting was not in the same month as our committee meeting. Too many miles.


    Question #3  Did you use the VALA website to get directions to Bethel White Church?

    Yes: 9 – 43%      No: 12 – 57%
    Comments: None

    Question #4  Did you use Comp 60 to download or read the directions?

    Yes: 6 – 29%   No: 15 – 71%
    Comments: None


    Question #5  Did the directions to the Bethel White Church:

    Meet your expectations: 15 -71%       Did not meet your expectations: 2 -9%
    Comments: I knew where it was.

    Need actual address to key into GPS.

    Live in the area.

    It was ok for me but I got there early and didn’t check to see how it was later.

    Fortunately I knew my way, but sign boards were very small and unreadable.

    I didn’t need directions.


    Questions #6  Did the parking at the Bethel White Church:

    Meet your expectations: 16 – 76%      Did not meet your expectations: 5 – 24%
    Comments:   Limited parking.

    Only because I found a spot, it was tight.

    Tight if more showed up.

    Too crowded for such a large group. I parked at Louise’s house.

    Too many cars not enough room.

    We were one of the first people there.


    Question #7  Did the physical facility:

    Meet your expectations: 10 – 48%      Did not meet your expectations: 11 – 52%
    Comments: Tight if more attended. It was very cold until the afternoon. If more participants it would have been too crowded. Seating was a little weird – cramped with chairs turned around.

    It was a bit tight.

    Too crowded. Was short of space with the turnout.

    Inappropriate for annual meeting, especially if we are trying to entice membership. Also no room if we ever get vendors.

    A little small.


    Question #8  Did the restrooms:

    Meet your expectations: 13 – 62%      Did not meet your expectations: 8 – 38%
    Comments: Could have more than two restrooms.


    Very tiny, uncomfortable, had to wait in line, toilets didn’t flush fast enough for the next person.

    A little small.


    Question #9  Did the lunch:

    Meet your expectations: 15 – 71%      Did not meet your expectations: 5 – 24%
    Comments: Was great! It was ok (very good potato salad) but nothing special. Enjoyable and tasty.

    Food was good and fine for committee meetings but should have more variety at annual meeting. Plus didn’t like having soup served in a drinking cup.

    Great soup.


    Question #10  Did the available refreshments:

    Meet your expectations: 19 – 90%      Did not meet your expectations: 2 – 10%
    Comments: Maybe offer more drinks, they ran out early.

    Should have had better varieties.

    Very nice to have drinks of soda.


    Question #11  Did the available snacks: 

    Meet your expectations: 19 – 91%      Did not meet your expectations: 1 – 5%
    Comments: Yum!


    Question #12  Overall, did the agenda:

    Meet your expectations: 16 – 76%      Did not meet your expectations: 3 – 14%
    Comments: Games good, but too much – more time on relevant topics.

    Less games/quizzes; instead do Lister stuff/information/education.

    Less game time – fun-but 1/2 amount or split games throughout the meeting-more time on Lister information.

    Fast moving, different format…really enjoyed it.

    Honestly why didn’t we cover entire morning agenda?


    Question #13  Would you like the gift bags:

    To continue: 12 – 57%     Do not continue: 2 – 10%      Not sure: 7 – 33%
    Comments: Very nice, but not necessary. A lot of work.

    Played several games in a row, seemed like a time waster.

    Good gesture if not too much work.

    It was a very generous and thoughtful gesture. Not relevant to our town. A new Lister session forum might be good.


    Questions #14  Would you like the pre-registration drawing for free membership to:

    Continue: 17 – 81%      Do not continue: 1 – 5% Not sure: 3 – 14%
    Comments:        Not really necessary.


    Question #15  Would you like the Calcutta game to:

    To continue: 15 – 71%      Do not continue: 3 – 14%      Not sure: 3 – 14%
    Comments: Maybe a bit shorter-or spread out between meetings.

    The game was fun, but we should have stuck to the agenda.


    Question #16  Were you able to hear the speakers:

    Yes: 18 – 86%      No: 3 – 14%
    Comments: I sat up front. Not a very good sound system. I didn’t go to the meeting downstairs because of the steepness of the stairs.


    Question #17  Did the breakout sessions you attended:

    Meet your expectations: 10 – 48%      Did not meet your expectations: 6 – 29%
    Comments: Needed general speakers for the whole group.

    Prefer one speaker keeping everyone together in common space. Access to cellar to dangerous for ADA, etc. Tablet Presentation-no handouts.  We didn’t get any and we were purchasing one.

    Good information, the meeting room in the basement was very tight. Although the initial benefit would be good (higher attendance), I’m afraid that VLCT issues would over shadow VALA issues.


    Question #18  Did the information packet material:

    Meet your expectations: 21 – 100%     Did not meet your expectations: 0%
    Comments: Good info, practical. A handout would be good next time for note taking. 


    Questions #19  Would you like the Board of Directors to continue to work with VLCT to explore having the VALA and VLCT annual meetings at the same time and location.

    Yes: 8 – 38%      No: 6 – 29%      Not sure: 7 – 33%
    Comments: I think we as VALA should continue to have our own meeting. There is a lot going on and I think it would get lost if we did not have our own meeting.


    Question #20  Overall, how would you rate your 2014 VALA Annual Meeting Experience?

    Excellent: 2 – 9%      Very Good: 7 – 33%      Good: 6 – 29%      Fair: 6 -29%     Poor: 0%
    Comments: It was fun. I enjoyed the Calcutta Game, I do think it would make more sense to have the Lister Forum before lunch.  A lot of people ended up leaving and there were many great questions being asked.

    Appreciate everyone’s work for the meeting.

    Good way to get to know some of the other Listers that we don’t see all the time.

    Would have liked more time for Lister Forum – perhaps some of the game time. Less time on trivia – good for fill in if needed.

    I like more Lister information/education/guest speakers.

    It was too hard to mingle and talk to other towns-too crowded.

    Combining with town clerks seems like a good option-would like to have more open forum time.

    We need a different location and we need vendors like the town clerks have at their annual meeting. Please let’s meet in a more professional atmosphere and let’s get vendors for mapping, appraisal firms, VLCT, NEMRC and other CAMA dealers.  Would help defray costs. 


    Seventeen attendees responded to question #21, but 2 responses did not rate location. We used 15 as our calculating response value. 

    Fifteen attendees responded to question #21 of rating the location for the 2015 Annual Meeting.

    Rate the following potential sites for the 2015 Annual Meeting with the number 1 for your first choice, and the number 5 for your last choice.

    Bethel – White Church:   (1)  1 – 6.5%          (2)  1 – 6.5%             (3)  4 – 27%          (4)  2 – 13%          (5)  7 – 47%

    Killington – Grand Hotel: (1) 3 – 20%          (2)  2 – 13%               (3)  1 – 7%          (4)  6 – 40%          (5)  3 – 20%

    Rutland – Holiday Inn:   (1) 0 – 0%          (2)  3 – 20%               (3)  5 – 33%          (4)  4 – 27%          (5)  3 – 20%

    Randolph – VT Tech: (1) 5 – 33%          (2)  8 – 54%               (3)  0 – 0%          (4)  2 – 13%          (5)  0 – 0%

    Fairlee – Lake Morey: (1) 7 – 47%          (2)  1 – 6.5%              (3)  5 – 33%          (4)  1 – 6.5%          (5)  1 – 6.5%

    Looking at the location results:

    Randolph VT Tech equaled 87% for first and second choice.

    Fairlee Lake Morey equaled 55.5% for first and second choice.

    Killington Grand Hotel equaled 33% for first and second choice.

    Rutland Holiday Inn equaled 20% for first and second choice.

    Bethel White Church equaled 13% for first and second choice.

  • #949 (no title)
  • Current Use – Tax Department
  • HOME
  • HOME
  • Lister of the Year Award
  • About VALA
  • By-Law & Constitution
  • Board of Directors
  • Committees
  • Membership Application
  • Educational Opportunities
  • Lister of the Year
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact