Mailbox dispute ends

Rutland Herald

By Emily Cutts
STAFF WRITER | May 12,2016

 

KILLINGTON — A Killington man will move his mailbox from a state right of way following a settlement with Vermont Agency of Transportation.

The agreement resolves a dispute between Josef Guggenberger and the agency that began in June 2014.

The issue stems from a disagreement with a neighbor over a shared driveway entrance in the state right of way off Route 4 that then leads to the two separate homes.

Guggenberger’s mailbox “sawhorse structure” and reflective poles were placed in the middle of the driveway’s entrance that hindered the neighbor’s ability to turn into it.

The agreement, reached through mediation in February and approved by the judge in Rutland civil court late last month, calls for Guggenberger to remove the sawhorse mailbox, posts and all other items he placed in the state right of way and relocate them to the “westerly side” of his driveway by June 1.

Once the mailbox has been removed, the agency is required to do work on both driveways including straightening as well as regrading both driveway accesses and perform work on the drainage ditches.

The decision also requires Guggenberger’s neighbors to file an application for a valid access permit for their driveway and record it with the town.

The case was brought to civil court on an appeal of a decision from the Vermont Transportation Board.

According to that decision and order from the Vermont Transportation Board, Guggenberger originally filed a damage claim of $523 in Rutland civil court to cover the cost of lumber for the mailbox structure and sod that he placed between two driveways, which was removed by state transportation workers.

That case was dismissed in December 2014 after a judge ruled that court did not have jurisdiction. Guggenberger then took his case to the Vermont Transportation Board and a hearing was held in March 2015.

The board ruled in favor of the Agency of Transportation on April 21, 2015. At that time, the agency filed a counterclaim alleging Guggenberger had installed another “sawhorse structure” as well as metal posts with reflectors. The agency requested an injunction to remove the items until he obtained a proper permit and penalties for each infraction

As part of the agreement, the counterclaims filed by the agency were dismissed and both Guggenberger and the agency will pay their own legal costs.

A call made after 4:30 p.m. Wednesday to the state’s attorney general office, who represented the Agency of Transportation, was not immediately returned. Calls to Guggenberger went unanswered.

Vigilance required to curb robberies in Killington

Mountain Times
May 11, 2016

May 11, 2016

As winter transitions into summer, Killington’s police department offers pointers regarding property break-ins and burglaries. Killington law enforcement officers will be engaging in a number of enforcement tactics to help curb these types of crimes. For example, patrol times and locations may be altered and increased, and the local police will continue working with other law enforcement agencies to gather information. It will take a community-wide effort to curb these crimes.

Here’s how you can help:

    Make your home look occupied and make it difficult to break in.
    Consider a burglar alarm.
    Include audible and video/picture surveillance. This will give law enforcement a good starting point.
    Lock all outside doors and windows before you leave or go to bed.
    Leave lights on when you go out. If you are going to be away for a length of time, connect some lamps with automatic timers to turn on in the evening and off during the day.
    Close and lock garage doors.
    Secure vacant rental or foreclosure properties from copper thefts by using a padlock and chain security device and alarm/video. Have a reputable management company or neighbor check property regularly and at different times.
    Arrange with the post office to hold your mail or arrange for a friend or neighbor to pick it up regularly.
    Arrange for your lawn to be mowed by a trusted individual while you are gone for an extended time.
    Push-button locks on doorknobs are easy for burglars to open. Replace them with deadbolt locks.
    Make sure your property is well lit. A motion-sensitive light is recommended for backyards.
    Never hide a key outside or in an exterior building.
    Trim trees and shrubs so that they cannot be used as hiding places for intruders or robbers.

Be a good neighbor. Be vigilant, pay attention to detail and report any suspicious activity to law enforcement, or call 9-1-1 immediately. Make sure you get the description of the vehicle and include the plate number and state, and note the physical descriptions of any suspicious person(s).

Know whom to contact: Always call 9-1-1 for an emergency. For non-emergencies call Killington Police, 802-422-3200 or state police dispatch, 802-773- 9101, who will call out to the closest officer to respond.

Upon request, Killington Police are happy to provide individual property checks as well. To arrange this please email or call Whit Montgomery, chief of the Killington Police Department at whit@killingtontown.com or 802-422-3200.

Is The State Out To Get Craig Mosher?

Vermont Standard

April 21, 2016

I could not believe that the State chose to bring felony charges against Craig Mosher in the tragic accident that resulted in the death of the driver of the car that hit one of his animals.

Craig has always been a person who was always ready to help anyone and free of charge. Who would the State have brought charges against if it had been a Moose, deer, dog or even a human on the road that night?

I have horses walk past my house in the road and the cars always stop. I remember a couple of years ago a Bridgewater man hit a horse in South Woodstock and the rider was injured I think, as I remember the driver lost his driving privilege in Vermont. The sun blinded him and he did not see the horses or riders.

I guess it looks like the State is out to get you Craig or someone is, next time the State needs something, let them do it themselves.

Bridgewater

Laura Robinson 672-5013

---

Board stays out of Mosher case

Rutland Herald

May 05,2016

 

KILLINGTON — Town lawyers have told the Select Board not to take any official action in support of the Killington farmer facing criminal charges after his bull escaped and caused a fatal car crash.

Killington Town Manager Deborah Schwartz said Wednesday attorneys for the town at Langrock, Sperry and Wool had advised it would be “inappropriate for the board to act, as a board, on a criminal matter.”

“Certainly the town, the Select Board members can act as individuals, in whatever capacity they chose ... but I wouldn’t be in a capacity to speak to that,” she said.

The decision by Rutland prosecutors to charge Craig Mosher with involuntary manslaughter after his bull escaped and caused a crash in last summer has been met in Killington with anger by many who consider Mosher an upstanding member of the community.

Killington resident Vito Rasenas brought the matter to the board April 19, suggesting the Select Board could help the town rally around Mosher. Another resident specifically suggested the board issue a statement on behalf of the town in support of Mosher.

“I know I certainly would personally — as a board, I would just want to check if there’s any doo-doo we would be stepping in doing such,” Select Board chairwoman Patty McGrath said at the time.

 

Comment: Such gratitude! Nevermind all the post Irene heroics, Craig Mosher, whether consciously or not, acted in accordance with the town's so called "Strategic Operating Plan", by creating a bucolic gateway to the town. He purchased a decrepit eyesore of a property and turned it into an inviting pastoral scene with grazing livestock which in turn became a much visited tourist attraction right at the edge of town. Many tourists stopped to observe and/or take pictures of the animals.

Craig's efforts with this land fulfilled several of the town plan's objectives, it beautified a critical venue in the town - literally its gateway, it attracted tourists, its made it more attractive to families- many of which were the one's stopping with their children to interact with this live diorama.

In part it is because of Craig's creation of this placid setting that he is in the legal pickle he find himself in. 

Maybe we should all cease any activities promoting the town's plans if this is the kind of gratitude we can expect.

Vito

Rose Kennedy passes hard test

Rutland Herald
May 05,2016


There are two ways a citizen can be charged with a crime in Vermont. One is where a law enforcement officer believes probable cause exists that a crime has been committed and issues a citation.
The other is by grand jury indictment. The grand jury is a panel of citizens who decide whether probable cause exists.
Grand juries are often used by prosecutors when presented with information a crime has been committed, but circumstances are such that the prosecutor wants confirmation from a jury of citizens that the charge should be brought.
This is where Rose Kennedy found herself when a person was killed after colliding with an animal in the road. While many may disagree with the indictment, it was the grand jury’s decision that probable cause did exist that a crime may have been committed.
Honoring a grand jury indictment is made that much more difficult when the person charged is an outstanding member of the community.

However, these are the tough calls a prosecutor has to deal with. Their oath of office requires them to pursue the grand jury indictment, even though it may be unpopular. Time will tell whether another jury will agree.
Either way, Rose Kennedy is doing a hard part of the job she was elected to do.
JOHN PAUL FAIGNANT
Rutland Town

Comment: If there is a test here it is of Ms. Kennedy's judgement. As one elected to use her judgement as to what incidents to bring forth before a grand jury Ms. Kennedy has miserably failed. In this case there are civil remedies available. It's not as if Craig Mosher willfully flouted the law with no regard.
As the saying goes, a prosecutor "can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich". Only one side of the case is presented, no defense is presented or allowed - the prosecutor is in full control. The grand jury is just a buffer so it doesn't look like the prosecutor is the one dictating the indictment.
As was stated in the above letter "the person charged is an outstanding member of the community" and what better way to gain notoriety than persecuting a prominent member of the community under the guise of  "passing a test" or "making a tough decision".
More and more this seems like political grandstanding in the quest for higher office. I certainly hope it that isn't the case, but making a judgement to prosecute a high profile personage, which Craig Mosher certainly is with all he has done for the central Vermont community, to gain political notoriety does not pass any tests of judgement. It just shows blind ambition.
In my opinion Ms. Kennedy shows a distinct lack of judgement in this case. There is no need to go after a criminal indictment especially when civil remedies are available (and have already been settled).
Craig Mosher has already paid a penalty, through the loss of his pet, the financial settlement reached with the Bellis family, and the emotional travail he has endured in the wake of this tragedy. 
Now he is faced with more persecution, legal bills, disruption of his business, and the looming threat of incarceration. 
Do we really need this prosecution, which is sending out tremors of panic amongst farmers, livestock owners, and even  pet owners, not just in Vermont but nationwide, who fear if something happens involving their animals they can be prosecuted? Do we really need some flatlander from Pittsburgh coming into our community with the attitude "We're going to teach him [Mosher} a lesson."
That kind of attitude is not reflective of a person with sound judgement. My grade is an F.


Vito

Don’t criminalize act of farming

Rutland Herald

May 05,2016

 

I was dismayed to find that the state’s attorney was bringing charges against my friend Craig Mosher. His bull escaped confinement, wandered on to Route 4 and was hit by a car, unfortunately killing the driver of the car. This is a very sad event but does not make Craig a criminal.

I have worked with Craig on several projects over the years and have always found him to be a very responsible individual, certainly not one to be careless with his animals.

I have had several horses over the years, and occasionally, despite my best efforts, they have gotten out. At times, I have found my neighbor’s escaped cows in my yard. Indeed, virtually all owners of horses and cows have had some get out. These are not criminal acts.

This action by the state’s attorney has the potential of criminalizing every Vermont farmer.

ARTHUR KRUEGER

Shrewsbury

Opinion: Vermont facing environmental crisis

Burlington Free Press

Ed Amidon 7:57 a.m. EDT May 4, 2016

(Photo: Courtesy of Steve Wright)

Vermont is experiencing an environmental crisis similar to the late sixties when real estate development was exploding with bad consequences for the Vermont landscape. At that time the problem was rampant large scale second home development, particularly around ski areas, without any consideration for the effect on the environment. Today it is unrestrained large scale industrial solar and wind development.
It was almost 50 years ago when the alarm was sounded and a bipartisan effort was undertaken to rein in the land developers. I was employed on the office of Attorney General Jim Jeffords and remember well the sense of crisis because mostly out of state corporations were buying large tracts of pristine land and subdividing them without any consideration even for septic disposal (“Killington where the affluent meet the effluent”).
Emergency regulations were issued and then Act 250 was crafted, modeled on Hawaii’s statewide land use law, and passed with bipartisan legislative support.
We have a similar situation today. Large scale industrial, solar and wind developments are being built with virtually no control over siting. The Public Service Board’s “build everywhere” policy is wrecking the iconic landscape that makes our state a special place underlies our tourist and second home economy.
An approach more respectful of Vermont’s fragile environment and viewscapes would be to remove siting control from our utility regulatory board and to allow local zoning and planning and Act 250 to control siting of these obtrusive developments. Act 250 is not perfect but it has played an important part over the years in protecting Vermont from some of the environmental messes in other states.
Construction might be slowed by treating wind and solar like other industrial uses, but it will occur in a deliberate and not a “gold rush” fashion. What’s the hurry? Congress has now renewed developer tax credits so that the deadline for building has been extended for five years.
Yes, Vermont should be making a contribution to reducing global carbon emissions but respectful of our unique landscape, and particularly considering that almost all our electricity is generated by low emission gas and zero emission hydro and, recently, a small amount of wind and solar when the wind blows and/or the sun shines.
Most of our emissions are from vehicle use and burning heating oil. Our electricity generation mix has for years been among the greenest in the country. Unlike the majority of states, our electricity does not come from coal or oil. Why does making a reasonable contribution to global climate control require cutting off pieces of our mountains and ridges and erecting 500-foot-high turbines and trying to cover the state with large clumps of solar collectors?
People move to Vermont and tourists come here to experience a relatively unspoiled and non-industrial landscape. People buy houses feeling protected by local zoning and planning only to find that state law allows industrial wind and solar developers to override the protections.

This is a land use crisis no less than in the sixties. Our unique Vermont landscape is at serious risk. Hopefully, our current Legislature will come to the rescue as its predecessor did in enacting Act 250 in 1970.
Ed Amidon lives in Charlotte.

Comment: Food for thought. 

Vito