Killington Select Board faux pas

Mountain Times 

june 30, 016

Dear Editor,

At the Killington select board meeting, Tuesday, June 21, Ms. Kathryn Bellis whose husband was killed in an accident involving Craig Mosher’s bull July 31, 2015, was allowed to speak at the meeting during citizens input. What she said was for the most part a direct quote, from the letter that appeared in the The Mountain Times and Rutland Herald.

After the meeting concluded, I approached the Chairwoman and asked why Ms. Bellis was allowed to read her speech, which was included in the minutes of the meeting.

Her reply was that Ms. Bellis was a resident of Killington and allowed to speak during citizens input.

But, upon checking with the town office I learned that the Bellis family are NOT residents of Killington, Rutland County or the state of Vermont. When the select board allowed that speech to be read at the meeting, it gives the appearance that our town leaders may have served to promote Ms Bellis’ agenda to prosecute Craig Mosher. Not only that, I learned that Ms. Bellis has written letters to several of our towns employees promoting her case against Craig.

While we all feel sympathy for Ms Bellis’ loss of her husband, I would think it would be in the towns best interests to have our select board tend to our towns business, and leave what would be a legal matter to those who are qualified and involved.

Richard Kropp, Killington

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/killington-select-board-faux-pas/#sthash.QDot7Kzg.dpuf

Residents Standing Behind Indicted Bull Owner

Vermont Standard

6/30/16

By Curt Peterson

Standard Correspondent

Killington — Kathryn Barry Bellis, whose husband was killed in a July 31, 2015 accident on Route 4, asked to address the select board at its June 21 meeting.

Jon Michael Bellis, 64, a part-time Killington resident, died when his vehicle struck an 1,800-pound Scottish Highland bull, an animal owned by local businessman Craig Mosher, whose farm and excavating business stretch along Route 4 across from the Val Roc Motel. The bull also died in the accident and Bellis suffered minor injuries. Bellis read from a twopage statement and provided copies of an affidavit Vermont State Trooper Robert Rider which was filed on June 3 as a public document by Rutland County State’s Attorney Rose Kennedy in the grand jury indictment of Mosher, who is being charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the accident.

Referring to the controversy, Bellis said, “all of you and the public only knew that Mr. Mosher had been charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with my husband’s death. It was not until June 3 that you had access to the actual facts.”

And the facts, she said, “are very different from what you and the public were first led to believe.”

The affidavit cites five occasions prior to July 31 on which police were notified a bull was loose near Route 4.

“The fifth report was on July 30, at about the same time of night when my husband was killed,” Bellis said.

On the evening of Bellis’s death, just a quarter hour earlier, a truck driver almost hit Mosher’s bull, which he said was standing in the middle of the dark highway. The driver went to Mosher’s house and woke him up, he told police, but didn’t think the farmer was reacting quickly, so he called the State Police.

“The state police dispatched a trooper who was on his way, but he was too late,” Bellis said. “The next call was at 10:13 by a passing motorist reporting the crash that killed my husband.”

“I was sitting in the dark, surrounded by air bags, covered in broken glass, next to my dead husband whose chest was crushed by the steering wheel, his head crushed by the bull coming through the top of the car.”

On April 19, Mosher’s attorney had claimed the farmer was out looking for his escaped bull when he was told of the crash by police. According to Trooper Rider’s affidavit, Bellis stated, Mosher “told the police he did not look for his pet where he was told by the truck driver to go on Route 4 – instead he chose to go back to sleep.”

“The facts are clear,” Bellis said. “The state police thoroughly investigated the crash. The state’s attorney is doing her job — protecting the public.”

She said it might have been anyone who died because the bull was where it shouldn’t have been, and she hopes her husband’s death will inspire a conversation about accountability and responsibility, and that the conversation will be based on facts, not hearsay. The indictment states Mosher “acted with criminal negligence by having notice that his Scottish Highland bull was loose and failed to contain his bull or alert others to this danger.”

After several seconds of silence, select board chairman Patty McGrath expressed to Bellis the board’s sympathies for the loss of her husband, and thanked her for sharing her information.

At the April 19 select board meeting, resident Vito Rasenas stood and requested the town take some kind of official action condemning the indictment.

“Everyone here knows what Craig Mosher has done for this town over the years,” Rasenas said. “And most people feel he’s been mistreated by the Rutland County prosecutor. I think the select board and the town should do everything we can to support him.”

Rasenas’ call for action inspired suggestions from the large crowd, including holding a public hearing, circulating a petition, and residents writing “stacks of individual letters.” The select board, however, declined to take any official action in April, but promised to explore any appropriate options.

On June 21, resident Diane Rosenblum, who was seated in front of Bellis, turned to her and said, “From the other side — my sympathies go out to you, but Craig Mosher is a much-loved member of this community and many here stand with him. Just so you know.”

Bellis replied, “All I ask is that you consider the facts.”

After the meeting Killington Police Chief Whit Montgomery said, “It’s a tough situation all the way around.”

Mosher had to drag his dead bull off the road with a loader and chains, Montgomery said. The chief had been off-duty when the accident occurred, but was at the scene in plain clothes to assist the state police. He said the Killington police have never received calls about Mosher’s livestock escaping or interfering with traffic, but assumes the reports have gone directly to the state police.

“We have a dog ordinance in Killington,” Montgomery said. “It requires dog owners keep their dogs under control or on their own property. There are stiff graduated fines. But it’s a dog ordinance. There’s no statute regarding livestock.”

Asked if he is aware of any special measures Mosher might have taken to prevent escapes since the accident, Montgomery said no, he is not.

In other business, Town Manager Deb Schwartz gave further information about the effect of tax delinquencies and her strategy for dealing with unpaid levies, which currently amount to over $460,000 including interest and penalties.

“I’ve been researching how other towns deal with tax collections,” she said. “Some don’t allow quarterly payments, don’t provide ten-day grace periods, don’t let taxes get two years arrears.”

She pointed out the town budget is designed assuming all the tax revenue due will be paid during the fiscal year.

“If all the taxes aren’t paid, the town doesn’t have the money to cover the budget,” she said.

McGrath said the quarterly payments idea was an experiment to see if it helped people pay their taxes on time.

“I think it helped,” she said, and cited delinquent taxes of $500,000, $600,000 and even $700,000, although she did not imply the quarterly payments made that much difference.

The recent Stage Race, according to Economic Development Commission liaison Amy Morrison, was a big success. Although participation was down 15 percent, more of the riders were from out of state, meaning they used local lodging and restaurants, and more of them spent the weekend in and out of Killington businesses. She claims the economic gain to the town was$663,000.

“Everyone here knows what Craig Mosher has done for this town over the years. And most people feel he’s been mistreated by the Rutland County prosecutor. I think the select board and the town should do everything we can to support him.”

Killington Resident Vito Rasenas

Monday,    Jul. 11          State vs. Mosher, Craig
at 3:00 PM  in Room 2       363-4-16 Rdcr/Criminal
                            Status Conference
                            Plaintiff, State  (Rosemary M. Kennedy)
                            Defendant, Craig Mosher  (Paul S. Volk)

Victim’s Wife Recalls Fatal Bull Crash In Killington

Vermont Standard

6/3016

By Katy Savage

Standard Staff

Kathryn Barry Bellis remembers every detail of the night of July 31. She and her husband Jon left Woodbridge, Connecticut at 6 p.m. They took Interstate 91 and Route 4 to Killington. It was a Friday and they were about to spend a weekend at their condo, just like every weekend for the past 13 years. Jon had a 3 p.m. tee time on Saturday. Kathryn had plans to go shopping and run errands.

They stopped at Outback Pizza in Ludlow at 8:30 p.m. and shared the “The Big Okemo” (an everything pizza). They had three Diet Cokes and Kathryn hurried her husband along at 9:40 p.m., like always. Her favorite show, “Blue Bloods,” a CBS drama about a family of police officers, was on at 10 p.m.

Jon gave his wife a hug as they got into the car and he said what he always said on Friday nights: “I love my life. I love my wife. I love Vermont. Are we ready to have a good weekend?”

That was the last time he said those words.

Twenty minutes later Kathryn blinked and everything went black. When she opened her eyes, her husband was dead. She couldn’t see him because she was surrounded by airbags, but she knew.

He was killed when his car slammed into a bull that had escaped from its pen on Route 4 in Killington.

“It was a massive beast, an enormous beast in the front of our car,” Kathryn said.

Her husband was in the driver’s seat.

“He said nothing to me. He did not moan, he did not groan,” she said. “Jon would have put his arm out in front of me, he would have said, ‘Hold on,’ but the bull was on us before we could see it,” she said.

They were about to turn onto the road where their condo is.

Bellis’ steering wheel crushed his chest. Jon died of a massive head injury after an 1,800 pound Scottish Highlander belonging to Craig Mosher went over the top of the car and crushed the sunroof.

“I was trying to get my cell phone out but my hands were shaking so much,” Kathryn said. She waited on the side of the road for help.

“I just remember holding my eyes and crossing my arms across my chest and praying to God.

“I expected at any moment for my legs to be broken,” she said.

She thought her spine would be broken, she waited for a head injury.

“I just waited for my life to end,” she said.

But it didn’t.

The one-year anniversary of that night is approaching.

“It’s only now that the public knows what I’ve known since July 31,” she said.

The information she’s known since last July was released to the public June 3. The police affidavit said Mosher was made aware of the loose bull before the accident on July 31 when a milk truck driver pulled into his driveway and woke him up by blowing the truck’s air horn. State Police Trooper Robert Rider wrote that a milk truck driver slammed on his brakes, leaving skid marks on the road, to avoid hitting the Scottish Highlander named Rob the night of July 31. The driver alerted Mosher and called state police just before 10 p.m., just as Jon was likely hugging his wife one last time. Mosher told police he went looking for the bull near a spruce tree. Mosher didn’t see the animal and assumed it was behind his shop. He went back inside and fell asleep, the affidavit said.

“I would like people to consider the facts. That’s what I’ve been forced to face as well as my family, my neighbors, my community,” Kathryn said. “All of us would like there to be accountability for Jon’s untimely death.”

Mosher is being charged with manslaughter. He did not make a “reasonable effort to locate the loose bull when he was advised it was out of its pasture,” the police document said.

The case has made national headlines. Farmers rallied around Mosher at a hearing June 6. Locals showed up in support. Some who knew him didn’t believe the police report. They said that Mosher was not negligent like that.

“I wouldn’t venture any judgment until I heard his side of the story because it certainly doesn’t sound like him. It seemed unbelievable,” Killington resident Vito Rasenas said.

The Vermont Farm Bureau is standing behind Mosher. Farmers are concerned about the consequences of their animals escaping.

But, Rutland County State’s Attorney Rose Kennedy has stood by her decisions, saying she’s interested in protecting the public safety.

Mosher’s attorney did not return a phone message.

To Kathryn this was no accident. It was a tragedy that should have been prevented.

Her attorney Jerry O’Neill, a lawyer with the Burlington firm Gravel and Shea, is asking the public to look at the number of times Mosher’s animals have escaped.

“He made the choice not to restrain his animals and that is, from our perspective, what the case is about,” said O’Neill, a horse owner.

Mosher’s’ two bulls doesn’t make him a farmer, he said.

“These are pets. These aren’t farm animals, “he said.

This case, Kathryn and her lawyer have said, isn’t the same as hitting a moose or other wildlife.

“This is entirely preventable. This is a domestic animal on the road,” O’Neill said.

Kathryn’s life has been destroyed, she said.

Kathryn, 61, met her husband in high school.

“Jon was my best friend, “said Kathryn. They have a daughter who’s 26 and a son who’s 30.

Jon and Kathryn were together, always.

“I haven’t made one single life adult decision without him by my side,” Kathryn said.

They’d been coming to Killington almost every weekend for the past 13 years. They played golf in the summer and skied in the winter. Then went back home to work. Jon worked in the outpatient psychology department at Yale. Kathryn has a medical device company.

“My husband and I found Killington to be a place for rest and relaxation,” said Kathryn.

She still comes every other weekend, driving days now instead of nights. She continues to attend the Church of Our Savior in Killington on Sundays.

“I find my own peace up there,” she said.

While her husband’s death has ignited conversation about animal rights, Kathryn is distributing copies of the police affidavit. That night has been all she’s thought about.

“While this criminal indictment has been noteworthy. It has been my life since July 31,” she said. “He chose to go to bed,” she said. “A responsible man would not do that.”

Monday,    Jul. 11          State vs. Mosher, Craig
at 3:00 PM  in Room 2       363-4-16 Rdcr/Criminal
                            Status Conference
                            Plaintiff, State  (Rosemary M. Kennedy)
                            Defendant, Craig Mosher  (Paul S. Volk)

Killington to review tax collection policy

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER June 29,2016

KILLINGTON — The town manager will take a look at how Killington collects taxes and goes after delinquent payments.

While reviewing Killington’s May financial report with the Select Board last week, Town Manager Deborah Schwartz noted the hole in the town’s budget aligned perfectly with unpaid taxes.

“For revenues, we are under budget by a little over $1 million, 97 percent of which is uncollected tax revenues,” she said.

Schwartz called the numbers “encouragement” for her plans to propose an updated tax collection policy to the Select Board soon. She added that she had begun to take a look at how other Vermont municipalities collect taxes.

“Other towns don’t wait two years for a tax sale, other towns don’t have 10-day grace periods — and we don’t have to be like other towns, I’m not a very good lemming,” Schwartz said.

Select Board Chairwoman Patty McGrath agreed the town’s quarterly payment system might be specifically worth reviewing, and noted Town Clerk Lucrecia Wonsor had said the town’s last payment — in May — was particularly troublesome since it came just as town offices prepared for summer activities.

The town only recently moved to a quarterly system. Before, property owners paid their taxes in two installments: August and November.

“It’s my understanding that we broke up the payments into four to try and decrease the delinquencies. How has that worked?” one resident asked.

McGrath answered that the clerk had reported more people were paying some taxes — while consistently forgetting one installment.

“What the challenge is, for many years, you paid in August, you paid in November. You kind of get that in. And then all of a sudden, (Wonsor) said, people were pretty good about February, but everybody forgot about May,” McGrath said.

Schwartz also noted the May installment came just days before the town was due to make two annual payments to the state.

“Right, we’re relying on everybody paying their taxes on time on May 25 so that five days later we can pay that same money we just collected to the state,” Selectman Chris Bianchi said.

Bianchi also noted that since voters had approved the upcoming year’s tax payment schedule, changes couldn’t be implemented for at least another fiscal year.

“So, it’s like this for awhile,” he said.

lola.duffort

COURT CLEARS WAY FOR FIRST PHASE OF KILLINGTON RESORT EXPANSION

VT Digger

By Mike Polhamus

Killington Grand Hotel is in the background as skiers head out. Killington Resort is planning a major expansion, the first phase of which will include a base lodge and nearly 200 condos and three dozen homes. Wikimedia Commons photo

In a long-awaited decision, Vermont’s Environmental Court has upheld the land use permit for the first phase of a Killington Resort expansion that eventually is to include 2,300 residential units and 200,000 feet of commercial space.

This first phase includes 32 single-family homes and 193 condominiums on what is now a parking lot at the main base area, plus a base lodge and other commercial structures.

The decision last week upholds the Act 250 District 1 Commission’s approval of the plans in 2013.

The court said the development described in the application will actually improve water quality in nearby Roaring Brook and won’t hurt the area’s aesthetics. A landowner in neighboring Mendon had appealed the permit on those grounds, among others.

The ruling, and the permit application, resulted from lengthy and close collaboration with officials at the Agency of Natural Resources, said Chris Roy, an attorney for the project’s principals, who operate under a corporate entity called SP Land Co. LLC.

The development will help Roaring Brook, Roy said, “because what’s there now is a parking lot.” Stormwater now runs unimpeded from the asphalt into the waterway, he said. That can scour exposed ground and contribute to destabilization of stream banks, according to court documents.

Designers have greatly improved practices relating to runoff and stormwater since the parking lot was installed, Roy said, meaning the development will incorporate elements to reduce erosion.

In addition, as the Environmental Court noted, the owners of Killington ski area — operating under a separate corporation called Killington/Pico Ski Resort Partners LLC — intend to build new stormwater treatment systems that will further reduce harm to downstream waters.

The court said some area streams and brooks have become impaired, which it blamed in part on the existing resort development and its aged stormwater treatment system. The court said: “The new proposed treatment system will not only protect against adverse impacts from the proposed developments, but will also reduce the adverse impacts from the pre-existing developments.”

Roaring Brook qualifies as an impaired waterway, meaning it can’t meet clean water standards.

The resort’s plans had been challenged by Stephen Durkee, a Mendon resident who owns several properties in Killington. His lawyer — Nathan Stearns, of White River Junction-based Hershenson, Carter, Scott and McGee — argued before the court that the development would harm his client by polluting Roaring Brook, along which Durkee owns property, as well as increasing traffic and hurting the area’s aesthetics.

Stearns said Thursday he hadn’t found time to read the decision closely enough to comment on its nuances. He did say the case has been underway for years. “We’ve been waiting a long time for the decision,” Stearns said.

The trial that was the basis of this decision ended in late 2014, Roy said.

The court found that dwindling ticket sales at Vermont ski areas, combined with the long stays the resort’s lodging amenities will encourage, mean traffic won’t increase unacceptably.

The court ordered SP Land Co. to pay $20,000 toward a traffic study that will include traffic counts before contractors finish construction on the first phase of the Killington expansion. The study is to serve as a benchmark for future phases of the planned expansion, which critics say may lead to an increase in traffic and other unwanted consequences.

The court in expansive terms rejected, too, the argument that the proposed development would hurt the resort’s aesthetics.

In fact, the court said, “we regard many of the aesthetic impacts from the proposed development to be positive” — bringing, for instance, “an updated and coordinated appearance to the planned Village Core area that will replace the somewhat worn and disjointed parking lots and buildings that currently exist in the main base area.”

The decision is open to appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.

Killington board to meet Wednesday

Rutland Herald

June 28,2016

The Killington Select Board will convene for a special meeting at 9 a.m. Wednesday at the Killington Town Office to approve a $900,000 operating loan and approve the funds to investigate a potential fire station site.

Editorial: Criminal Case Worries Vermont Farmers

The Vally News

June 24, 2016

Vermont has certainly changed greatly in the past 40 years, but it has not completely left behind its agrarian roots. Thus, a pending criminal charge against the owner of an 1,800-pound Scottish Highland bull that got loose and caused a fatal car crash last summer on Route 4 in Killington is causing great consternation among farmers and other animal owners.

Craig Mosher, 61, is facing a charge of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the crash, which took the life of Jon Bellis, a Connecticut resident who owned a condo in the area. Bellis’ wife was injured in the collision, in which the bull also died. Mosher has pleaded not guilty to what is believed to be the first criminal charge lodged in Vermont against the owner of an animal that wandered off.

That this is highly unusual can be inferred from the fact that, instead of filing the charge herself, Rutland County State’s Attorney Rose Kennedy took the case before a grand jury. This is rare in Vermont except when a case is particularly complex or is likely to be controversial; this one seems almost certain to be both.

According to police affidavits, Mosher’s two bulls had gotten away from his property and roamed along Route 4 several times in the weeks before the collision and he had been alerted earlier on the night of the fatal crash that one of them was free. Mosher told police that he looked for the animal on his property, was unable to find him, went inside and fell asleep. The prosecution’s burden will be to prove that in so doing, Mosher acted recklessly or with criminal negligence and that those actions directly caused Bellis’ death.

Not surprisingly, farmers fear the precedent that a conviction would set, and many attended a hearing in the case earlier this month. “There are so many ways an animal can get out of a pen; there are so many things that can happen,” says Joe Tisbert, a Cambridge farmer and president of the Vermont Farm Bureau. “And if it’s criminally prosecuted, people are really afraid of what will happen to them.” Besides the criminal penalty, farmers fear that their insurance rates will rise sharply.

Their concern is legitimate. It’s the rare owner of a large animal who has not been forced to go looking for it on occasion when it wandered off through a downed fence or otherwise got loose from its pasture or barn. Nor are escaped animals always readily located and taken home, especially in the dark.

Jerome O’Neil, a Burlington lawyer who is representing the Bellis family, contends that the facts of the case have been distorted and farmers have nothing to fear. “Vermont farmers who take even minimal care of their animals have no need to fear criminal prosecution,” he told Seven Days earlier this month, while also noting that the animals involved were pets, not farm animals. “. . . It has nothing to do with farmers and their responsibilities toward their animals and the public.” 

This is assuredly cold comfort to owners of large animals such as horses or sheep who are not farmers, or at least not full-time farmers. There are plenty of people in that category of “pet-owner.” Nor is it likely to reassure farmers to any great degree, since it is hardly unheard of for farm animals to get loose and roam Vermont highways. Seven Days cited a handful of instances just since 2013.

It may turn out that once the facts are fully explored in the courtroom, they will prove unique, as the prosecutor has suggested, or at least unusual enough to justify the criminal charge. But otherwise, it seems to us the civil courts provide the proper venue for litigating cases in which animals and humans collide in tragic fashion, particularly in a rural state with a rich agricultural tradition.

Rural Vermont questions criminal charges against Mosher

Mountain Times

June 23, 2016

Dear Editor,
In response to the state of Vermont’s criminal charges of involuntary manslaughter, a criminal charge that could carry up to a 15-year prison sentence, against Craig Mosher, the owner of a Scottish Highlander bull that escaped its pasture when a tree caused a fence failure, leading to a tragic car crash and the death of Jon Bellis, as well as injuries to his wife, on July 31, 2015, Rural Vermont has issued the following statement:
First and foremost, Rural Vermont wishes to express its deepest condolences to the family of Mr. Jon Bellis for their tragic and unexpected loss. As an advocacy organization representing the interests of Vermont’s community of family farmers and citizens dedicated to preserving traditional Vermont values of community-based agriculture and the food system it supports, however, Rural Vermont is very concerned with the criminal charges against Mr. Mosher. These charges do not appear to involve facts that would support a finding of intentional wrongdoing or recklessly dangerous livestock practices.
Rural Vermont recognizes that every Vermonter who cares for animals on their property—whether they’re a farmer or not—has a solemn responsibility to both protect the wellbeing of his or her animals and to prevent those animals from endangering the surrounding community by maintaining good fencing and using sound farming practices. At the same time, we also recognize that accidents happen, that animals can and do act of their own accord, and that sometimes the reason an animal has escaped or where it is cannot be immediately discovered.
For centuries, domestic animals have been a part of Vermont’s working landscape, woven into our state’s cultural traditions and rural economy. Vermont is still an agricultural state with a continuing tradition of farms existing within their communities, near roads and residences. Even as industrialized agriculture has led to the consolidation of farms, countless Vermont farmers have remained committed to feeding themselves and their communities with pastured animals by utilizing rotational grazing, practices which have proven benefits to local economies, our environment, and human and animal health.
Prosecuting farmers for the acts of their animals, without evidence of intentional wrongdoing or recklessly dangerous practices, sends the wrong message to Vermonters and creates the threat of increased liability that will have a chilling effect on farmers and the practice of agriculture, especially the type of pasture-based agriculture that the state should be supporting and promoting.
Justice is not served by criminalizing mistakes or oversights, particularly when farm animals with minds and wills of their own are involved, or as in this case, when the accident was caused by an act of nature.
While Rural Vermont respects the authority of the Rutland County State’s Attorney, we will be closely monitoring this case and speaking out where necessary to represent the rights and concerns of farmers in Vermont.
Andrew Bahrenburg on behalf of Rural Vermont

- See more at: http://mountaintimes.info/rural-vermont-criminal-charges-against-mosher/#sthash.ALndcM7h.dpuf

Ski village Act 250 permit affirmed

Rutland Herald

By LOLA DUFFORT

STAFF WRITER | June 24,2016 Print Article

KILLINGTON — An environmental court judge gave the green light Tuesday to the first phase of a long-anticipated ski village at the base of Killington Ski Resort.

Judge Thomas Durkin’s 86-page decision affirming, with conditions, the Act 250 permit sought by SP Land Company, the ski village’s developer, was not the first — nor will it be last — of the project’s permitting hurdles.

But Chris Roy, the developer’s Burlington-based lawyer, called Durkin’s decision a milestone.

“This was probably the most important decision because it dealt with so many aspects of the project, and Act 250 is really designed to take a hard look at large, complex projects,” Roy said. “It looked at water quality, it looked at traffic, it looked at aesthetics, and really the court came down favorably on all of those key issues. And we think that sort of sets the tone for what should happen going forward.”

The Act 250 permit was first issued in October 2013 and appealed by SP Land Co., which took issue with several conditions tied to the permit. Stephen Durkee, a Mendon resident who owns commercial, residential and undeveloped property in Killington, cross-appealed, citing stormwater, aesthetic and traffic concerns with the project.

Durkin included certain conditions in his ruling. SP Land must conduct a traffic study to monitor traffic before and after people take up residency in any phase one development, and must contribute $20,000 towards corridor study to be completed by regional planning commissions evaluating potential impacts of the next phases of the project. SP Land will also need to lower Killington Road’s speed limit around the project to 25 mph.

Durkin’s decision also removed a district commission’s earlier condition on the project to put a sprinkler system in each residential unit — a condition SP Land Co. strongly objected to.

Roy said he and his client were still reviewing Durkin’s conditions, but that none appeared too burdensome.

“None of the conditions are negative to a point that they wouldn’t be able to proceed with the project, so, we’re happy to have the permit in place and those conditions,” he said.

The project ultimately envisions creating, in phases, 2,300 residential units, a 77,000-square-foot skier services building, 32 new residential lots and about 200,000 square feet of retail space over the next 20 to 30 years.

Phase I of the project, which this Act 250 proceeding concerns, includes the village’s core and a 32-unit subdivision just north of it. The core includes plans for 193 housing units, 31,622 square feet of commercial space, 7,000 square feet of replacement skier service areas within two new base lodge buildings, the relocation of a portion of Killington and East Mountain roads, additional parking areas, and a village green.

Parties could motion to amend Durkin’s Tuesday decision, and also appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.

Durkee has also appealed the town of Killington’s site-plan approval for the project. That appeal raises similar concerns to those in the Act 250 appeal, and will also be reviewed by Durkin.

“Our hope and expectation would be that that would proceed a little bit more quickly and come out the same way,” Roy said.

Durkee’s White River Junction-based attorney, Nathan Stearns, said Thursday he hadn’t yet had time to review the decision and could not comment about his client’s plans.

lola.duffort

@rutlandherald.com

Crash victim’s widow makes her case

Rutland Herald

By Lola Duffort

STAFF WRITER | June 23,2016

• 
  

KILLINGTON — Jon Bellis’ widow took the floor at the town’s Select Board meeting Tuesday night to tell Killington “the actual facts” regarding her husband’s death this past summer.

“My sole purpose tonight, my sole purpose, my only purpose, is to share the actual facts of what happened that night, and happened in the weeks preceding the crash,” Kathryn Barry Bellis, a Connecticut resident, told Select Board members and a small group of assembled community members.

Barry Bellis and her husband were driving west on Route 4 the night of July 31, 2015, to their Killington condominium when they struck an escaped 1,800-pound Scottish Highland bull that belonged to Killington resident Craig Mosher.

Bellis, 62, died on scene; his wife suffered minor injuries. Mosher has since been charged with involuntary manslaughter and, if convicted, could be sentenced to a maximum of 15 years in prison.

The decision to charge Mosher has been met with outrage by the Vermont farming community, who worry about the precedent the case could set.

It has also deeply upset many in the Killington community, where Mosher is widely regarded to be an upstanding citizen. Speaking Tuesday night, Barry Bellis said the state’s attorney’s decision to bring the case to a grand jury led the public to learn of the charges before they had the chance to learn facts of the case.

“And the actual facts are quite different about what you and public were first led to believe about the crash that killed my wonderful husband Jon,” she said.

Grand jury proceedings are secret, but documents filed by State’s Attorney Rose Kennedy in Rutland criminal court afterward — June 3 — said Vermont State Police had been called five times in the months preceding the crash about Mosher’s bulls escaping and wandering onto the road.

“There’s no way of knowing how many other times these bulls were out and not reported to police,” Barry Bellis said.

The fifth report came the night before the crash, she said, “the same time, the same place, that my husband was killed.”

What happened to her husband was inevitable, she argued.

“If my husband had not been killed on July 31st, someone else would have died at some point from a collision with a bull standing on Route 4,” she said.

Mosher’s attorney, Paul Volk, contested in an interview with Vermont Public Radio that the state had provided good evidence Mosher’s animals had been the cause of prior calls to police.



“There’s nothing in the discovery that’s been provided that indicates that the bull that was involved in this accident was a bull that was previously supposed to have been out,” he said.

Barry Bellis also recounted how a milk truck driver had nearly struck the bull less than hour before she and her husband did.

Jeffrey Herrick told police he stood on his brakes to avoid the bull, and then drove to Mosher’s home to warn him his animal had escaped. Worrying Mosher wasn’t acting quickly enough — according to court documents filed by Kennedy — Herrick also called police, who were on their way when another motorist called to report the crash.

Mosher told police that night he searched for his bull on his property after Herrick warned him, couldn’t find him, and went back home.

“He chose to go back to sleep,” Barry Bellis said Tuesday night. “He went back to sleep, without knowing where his bull was. The choices that this bull owner made are why my husband is dead.”

Near the end of her speech, Barry Bellis recounted what her husband had told her as they were leaving a pizza restaurant in Ludlow, a favorite spot, just half an hour before he died. It was something he had said many times before.

“He hugged me, and he always said: ‘I love my life, I love my wife. I love Vermont. Are we ready to have a great weekend?’” she said.

Speaking quietly and haltingly, Killington Select Board Chairwoman Patty McGrath briefly responded to Barry Bellis’ testimony.

“Mrs. Bellis, you have our deepest sympathies,” she said. “I want to thank you for coming, and I know that it was very difficult. We appreciate it.”

But visibly agitated, Killington resident Diane Rosenblum responded in turn.

“While we sympathize with you tremendously, Craig Mosher is a very much loved man in this community and many of the people in this community are standing by him,” Rosenblum said, raising her voice as Barry Bellis tried to interject.

“So you should know that, regardless of your statement,” Rosenblum said. “So I just want to put that out as citizen’s input. And I’m sure you’ve seen all the letters in the paper supporting him. That’s all I have to say.”

Barry Bellis had originally asked the board to read her statement during the meeting. McGrath said Wednesday the board declined to do so because it “wasn’t part of town business,” but had told Barry Bellis she was entitled, as a property owner, to speak during the citizen’s input part of the meeting.

The Select Board has declined to take any official action regarding the Mosher case, but writing as a private citizen, McGrath herself has joined the chorus of letters pouring into local papers decrying the decision to charge Mosher.

McGrath said Wednesday she stood by her letter, in which she expressed anxiety about the ramifications the potentially precedent-setting case could have.

She also said that Barry Bellis’ had been well within her rights to present the facts “as presented” by Kennedy.

“In all honesty, what the state’s attorney has put forward doesn’t reconcile with the person that I know,” she said.

lola.duffort @rutlandherald.com

Animal Life In Vermont: When Does Neglect Become Homicide?

Bedlam farm.com

by John Katz.

In Vermont, a local tragedy has become a national concern about farming, animal care, negligence, accidents and the law

Last July, a Scottish Highlander bull walked out of Craig Mosher's fence – not for the first time – and was struck by a car driven by Jon Bellis, 62.

Bellis and the bull were both killed, Bellis's wife Kathryn survived the crash and is helping to lead a campaign that seeks to make the accident a felony crime, not an inevitable fact of animal life.

Mosher, a popular excavator in Killington, Vt., has been charged with involuntary manslaughter, a homicide charge punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Kathryn Bellis argues that the case is about extreme negligence, not farming or animal welfare. The local prosecutor agrees.

Farmers and many animal lovers and friends of Mosher are deeply concerned about the case, fearing it could sent insurance rates skyrocketing for people with animals and transform animal escapes – for all of American legal history considered accidents – into criminal cases. If so, many animals would face euthanization, many farmers would face ruinous new costs, many people would forego living with them.

Lawyers would step right into the middle of the historic and very wonderful human animal bond.

The Vermont Farm Bureau is asking the legislature to pass new laws protecting farmers and animal lovers from criminal charges when their cows, horses, dogs or cats escape and cause accidents. Ms. Bellis is an articulate and understandably passionate advocate for the prosecution of Mosher.

She lost her beloved husband of more than 40 years in a brutal accident that she says was preventable. Mosher is not a farmer, she argues, his bull escaped many times, and the case is about negligence and safety.

When I first wrote about this case her on the blog, the story got 10,000 shares on Facebook and many messages from all over the country expressing concern that animal escapes – common to almost every farmer and animal lover – might now be considered crimes punishable by devastating lawsuits and jail.

The police released details about the many calls made about Mosher's bull being out and in the road, including several the week of the accident. For me, the case became a bit gray, not so black-and-white.

As happens in legal conflicts, there is no real discussion or negotiation, just a settling in and digging in of opposite sides. Mosher, a local hero for the unpaid work he did freeing people and opening roads after Hurricane Irene. faces a long and excruciating ordeal.  Farmers everywhere, already under siege from low milk and food prices, corporate competition, and a culture that is increasingly removed from farming and the real lives of animals, have a lot to worry about.

Ms. Bellis may or not be justified in her campaign to see this case prosecuted as a criminal case – that is not for me to decide – but there is not much doubt that the case has opened a door that could radically alter farming and the lives of anyone who loves and lives with animals – yes, certainly including horse and dog and cat lovers.

If the case stands, rightfully or not, it seems almost certain that insurance rates will go up for farmers and many animal owners. Farmers will find it harder to lease land from other property owners. Many will keep their animals confined, or switch to less risky crops and other kinds of farming. Very few farmers can afford the kinds of fences that are escape-proof, and there is little evidence short of maximum-security prisons that there is such a thing.

I buy the best an safest fences available. The fences on my small farm cost over $9,000.

But animal escapes have always been a side effect of living with animals.

They are an integral part of rural life, and of life with pets.

I had a donkey who learned to unlatch a gate, another who squeezed under a very expensive fence to get at some alfalfa. I've had many dogs slip out of doors and windows. I've had sheep who dive right through electric fences when their wool is thick. I had a steer jump right over a five-foot fence.  I don't know a dairy farmers whose cows have not gotten into the road. They are all horrified at the idea that this is now a potential crime, a frightening new door for many lawyers, always looking for new turf to litigate in our very litigious world.

If you look at the news, you can see there hardly anything is considered an accident any longer, we always look for someone to blame, someone to sue.

In rural America and farming communities, animal escapes are about community, not crime. People look out for each other, stop and help to get cows back inside fences. Farmers will tell you they often meet their neighbors that way. In pursuing a serious case like the Mosher case, it is not clear that the prosecutors have any real idea about the implications of their indictment, they certainly haven't been willing to explain it much or ally the fears it has provoked.

This case is not typical of farm escapes. Someone died, and that is rare, and there is considerable evidence to suggest the bull had escaped a number of times, and that Mosher could have been more vigilant and responsive.

But that is not really the only issue, tragic as it is.

The issue is also whether this kind of neglect, if it occurred, constitutes a homicide, and involuntary manslaughter is a homicide charge. Should Mosher be threatened with jail for up to 15 years because the prosecutor wants to make a point? Is there no other legal recourse or punishment better and more realistic than a homicide charge?

The very indictment has changed the environment in which people and animals live together. Some may think this is about time, others feel is another form of disconnection in our world, another loss of community and peace of mind, the gradual death of the idea that sometimes life just happens.

The police and local prosecutors are not really the proper institutions to work out issues of animal care and neglect or to think them through more carefully.

For one thing, every animal escape – whether it involves a cow, a horse, or a golden retriever – involves neglect.

None of us can always be so vigilant and wealthy and alert to create structures and environments that make animal escapes impossible. Hardly any farmer can afford to build miles of escape-proof fencing. Fences short out when it rains, are wrecked by trees and floods, overgrown by weeds, damaged in accidents, often moved or opened by powerful and determined animals curious to cross the road.

Do we really wish to live in a culture that treats a dog escape like a criminal offense if it  results in accident and injury, even death?  A lot of us will be headed to court.

None of this is the fault of Kathryn Bellis, or even her concern really. I don't believe anyone should or could fault her for seeking  her own justice. She is trying to make certain no one else's spouse or child does the way her husband did, killed in a collision with an animal on a highway just minutes after someone had warned the animal's owner that it was loose.

But it is the role of government and legislators to consider the consequences, and they could be very real.

If you are a farmer or an animal owner, the question, I think, is this: what, exactly, is the boundary between neglect and homicide?  What is preventable and what is not?

When does an almost inevitable kind of accident become a crime?