Chester board hears legal processes to address Julian quarry violations

By Shawn Cunningham
© 2023 Telegraph Publishing LLC

In a memorandum to the Chester Select Board, municipal attorney Jim Carroll characterized the process for enforcing violations of land use rules under the town’s Unified Development Bylaws as “often-lengthy” and “expensive.” The memo was reviewed by the board in executive session on Wednesday, May 3 and made public the following day. Town Manager Julie Hance told The Telegraph that Carroll had outlined the process rather than discussing strategy and there was no need to keep it under wraps.

Town attorney Jim Carroll. Telegraph File Photo,/small>

“Any competent land use lawyer knows this stuff. It’s not a secret,” said Hance.

For several years, residents around Gassetts have complained that quarries operating in their area are in violation of their permits and that the noise, traffic, unsafe blasting and pollution have become too much to bear.

Carroll had been asked by the board to outline the process and options for dealing with violations of zoning permits and lack of permits for quarries operated by the Julian brothers. Two of the three quarries in question are on the south side of Rt. 103 in Gassetts while the third is along Dean Brook Road with an entrance on Chandler Road.

Carroll’s memo refers only to the town’s enforcement options, while the State of Vermont has issued a “jurisdictional opinion” regarding the operation of the three quarries under Act 250. The state opinion concluded that there were “material changes” in the use of the quarries and it required an amendment if the Julians are to continue to be used.

Carroll gave two routes for enforcing the town’s zoning regulations:

  • One would be through the Vermont Judicial Bureau through a municipally issued ticket and
  • the other would be through a civil complaint to Vermont’s Environmental Court.

The Judicial Bureau is the system that handles motor vehicle and municipal violation tickets. Carroll’s opinion is that the latter would be preferable because the fines and “injunctive relief” from through the “E-Court” are less limited than those available from the Judicial Bureau.

‘Lengthy and expensive process’

Carroll wrote that the process would begin with the town’s Zoning Administrator issuing a “notice of violation.” The quarry owners would have seven days to cure the violation or be subject to fine of up to $200 per occurrence.  The Julians can appeal the notice of violation to the Development Review Board and if the DRB agrees that a violation has taken place, the Julians can appeal to the Environmental Court.

Jason Julian, left, and Andrew Julian tell the Chester Select Board how much they care about the town. Photo by Shawn Cunningham

The town can also begin a civil complaint with the E-court for a judgment for fines and penalties. The E-court can hear both the appeal and the town’s civil action at the same time but appeal would be “on the record” of the DRB proceedings while the town’s complaint would be heard “de novo” or without regard to any previous decision.

To add to the complexity of this, the quarry owners could also file a permit application to “cure” the violation, which could make it issue moot. The DRB would have to review and decide on such an application and that could also be appealed to the E-Court.

Carroll said that in his experience the E-Court process can take up to a year to get to a trial and a court imposed mediation is likely to be ordered before a trial date is set. After a trial, both parties are able to appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court.

Finally, if the town wins a judgment, enforcing compliance with it may involve collection and/or contempt actions.

While he noted that the process is expensive, Carroll wrote that it is important that the Zoning Administrator get support for a good faith decision to bring an enforcement action.

The Julian quarries can continue to operate – and make income – while the legal process unfolds. But at several select board meetings neighbors have said that the quarry operations have picked up their pace in recent months prompting another question. Are the legal wrangling and any fines that made be levied on the quarry owners just the cost of doing business? If so, we may see the Julians’ lawyers try to drag out the process to keep the work going.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Filed Under: Latest News

About the Author:

RSSComments (1)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Kathy Vize says:

    Are there any endangered species in the subject area whose existence would be hampered by quarry activities?

    http://www.earthsendangered.com/search-regions3.asp