Thursday, September 19, 2013

Fwd: Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs to City of Burlington



 
The document that is an attachment to this E-mail is self-explanatory.
The named City of Burlington officials and their law firm received this
notice by first class mail and E-mail today, Thursday, September 19th.
The document is also down below:
PO Box 225, Lyndonville, VT 05851
To: Miro Weinberger, Mayor - City of Burlington
All Personnel in City Attorney's Office, City of Burlington
All City Council Members, City of Burlington
City Management Personnel, City of Burlington
William Ellis Esq., McNeil, Leddy & Sheahan
Date: September 19th, 2013
RE: Freedom of Information Request
This is a request to inspect or copy public records pursuant to Vermont's Public Records Laws, Title 1 § 315 through § 320.
Under 1 V.S.A. § 317a, "A custodian of public records shall not destroy, give away, sell, discard, or damage any record or records in his or her charge, unless specifically authorized by law or under a record schedule approved by the state archivist pursuant to 3 V.S.A § 117(a)(5)."
"Records" mean "any written or recorded information, regardless of physical form or characteristics, which is produced or acquired in the course of public agency business." 1 V.S.A. § 317. §317 applies without regard to the type of technology or forum or ownership of equipment on which any such information is created, received, sent, or maintained.
Violation of such laws is subject to penalties of up to $1000 per violation under § 320. The maker of this request specifically reserves the right to assert the position that each and any destruction of a record without authority represents a separate violation subject to separate penalty under § 320.
This is also a NOTICE of PENDING OR THREATENED LITIGATION as to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision) that may be adopted by the City of Burlington (hereinafter "City" or local government) or any other Vermont municipal entity or State government, and as to which any such potential litigation the documents requested herein may be relevant. Penalties may be imposed by judicial officials for destruction of records after the receipt of this notice of potential or threatened litigation, and such penalties are separate from and can be in addition to penalties under the public records law.
The DUTY TO PRESERVE records that are or may be responsive to this request is distinct, different, and potentially broader than the obligation to produce records for inspection or copying. Under this request to inspect or copy records and notice of pending / threatened litigation, you are hereby instructed to IMMEDIATELY CEASE any and all deliberate, routine, or inadvertent deletion or destruction of any form of written record or communication or transmittal of any record, in any form, or any of the subjects covered in this request. This includes suspending any routine or other over-writing or other deletion of backup tapes, or revisions of website content without preserving evidence of past and changing versions that may contain content covered by this request.
This is also a CONTINUING REQUEST for records including records created on or after the date that this request is received by the City, and that come within the subject and scope of this request, which (future records) should not be destroyed without conferring and checking with the requester.
You are instructed to preserve and be prepared to provide examination or copying of all records responsive to this request in NATIVE FORMAT that preserves all relevant METADATA that may be contained in any digital form of any and all records responsive to this request, including dates, times, locations, all authors, all editors, track changes, additions, deletions, and other information regarding any and every creation or modification or transmittal of each record.
If there are materials that are responsive to this request, but that you believe or assert are privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from examination or copying YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO DESTROY THOSE MATRIALS but must preserve them pending full and final resolution of all issues presented by this public records request and also full and final resolution of any subsequent litigation that may arise regarding any eventual action taken by or against the City or any other Vermont municipality or the Legislature relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision). See, e.g. Price v. Town of Fairlee, 2011 VT 48 ¶ 21 ("authority to destroy…must be stayed when a public-records request for the material is filed pursuant to 1 V.S.A § 318, and the stay must remain in effect until the request is resolved.")
http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/supct/current/op2010-125.html
For any materials or portions of materials that are responsive to this request, but you believe are privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from examination or copying, you are to prepare an index, sometimes referred to as a "Vaughn Index" identifying the originator and recipient of the document, the substantive content of the document, and the basis and specific substantiating justification on which the content is allegedly confidential or exempt from examination or copying. See, e.g. Kade v. Smith 2006 VT 44, 180 Vt. 554 ¶¶ 3, 10.
You are also instructed whenever possible to redact exempt portions of records while providing the remainder of the record: "[a] public agency shall not withhold any record in its entirety on the basis that it contains some exempt content if the record is otherwise subject to disclosure; instead, the public agency shall redact the information it considers to be exempt and produce the record accompanied by an explanation of the basis for denial of the redacted information." 1 V.S.A. § 318(e).
I. Requested Subject matter

Anything relating to drafts, proposals, strategies, advantages, disadvantages, or any other consideration for or against any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision) within the City of Burlington or any other part of Vermont or all of Vermont.

II.Scope of Documents and Media Requested

This request covers, but is not limited to:

A.Any and all written correspondence or documents, transmitted or received in any form, whether paper or electronic, received or sent by any mode or technology, from or to any employee or elected or appointed official, or hired vendor (by way of example and not limitation: law firms, lobbyists, writers, consultants) of the City of Burlington, Vermont and relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

B.Any agendas or minutes, from any past present or future time relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

C.Drafts of potential legislation, rules, ordinances, penalties, or any other regulatory or punitive measure relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

D.Any articulation, of any form or nature, relating to strategy of proponents or opponents of any such potential legislation, rules, ordinances, penalties, or any other regulatory or punitive measure or consideration relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

E.E-Mail correspondence of any city officer or employee using accounts provided by the public entity relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

F.E-Mail correspondence using personal addresses, mailboxes, or accounts _not_ provided by the public entity (including, by way of illustration and not limitation: Hotmail, Yahoo, Gmail, or any other webmail or "cloud mail" service, any personal account of any public officer or employee, or any unaffiliated business account of any public officer or employee) but that relates to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision) [pursuant to 1 V.S.A. § 317, public records include any content "produced or acquired" in the role or actions of a public agency or official, without regard to whether such activity took place on or using any specific system or technology].

G.Social Media (including, by way of illustration and not limitation: Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Yahoo group, Front Porch Forum, or government or personal web pages that provide for or allow interaction) relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

H.Text messages and instant messages relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

I.Any weblog(s) or "blog(s)" in which any officer or employee of the City is or has been the publisher of such blog or merely a contributor or commentator relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

J.Any website maintained by the City or its officers or employees, whether in their official or personal capacity, relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

K.Any audio recordings, regardless of format in which they have been recorded, copied, or preserved that relate to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

L.This request specifically covers materials that originated from sources other than the public officials and public bodies and entities to whom this request is presented, but that (materials) were received from others by public officials and public bodies, regardless of the place, mode, device, or technology by which such materials were received by a public official or body relating to any effort to enact any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating to any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

M.Any written or recorded information contained in any personal computer, cell phone, smart phone, tablet, or other device, regardless of ownership or location of such device relating to any effort to enact any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating to any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

N.Any information shedding light on actual or anticipated financial expenditures, costs, or sources of funding associated with any effort to enact any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

O.Names, and lists of names, of supporters or opponents of any subjects covered in this request, including both private citizens and public officials, whether inside of or beyond Vermont, for or against any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

P.Any correspondence relating to any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change to statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision).

Q.Identify and name, individually and in detail, any and all city officers, employees, and outside vendors (by way of example and not limitation: Law firms, lobbyists, writers, consultants) that have spent time on, pro-bono or paid, for any efforts associated with any form of possible local or state regulation or restriction of or change in statutes relating in any way to firearms or other weapons (including but not limited to ordinance, charter change, statutory enactment or revision) including name, rate of pay, dates worked, hours worked, and sources of revenues used to pay for such work.

III.Past Deletions and Potential Violations of Public Records Law

As noted above, under 1 V.S.A. § 317a, "A custodian of public records shall not destroy, give away, sell, discard, or damage any record or records in his or her charge, unless specifically authorized by law or under a record schedule approved by the state archivist pursuant to 3 V.S.A. § 317(a)(5)."

If you have previously destroyed or deleted any correspondence or proposals relating to this inquiry, then you are instructed to:

A.Identify, to the honest and best of your ability:

i.Sender(s)

ii.Recipient(s)

iii.Subject

iv.Date; and

B.Provide the specific separate individual basis on which you had authority to destroy or delete each such item correspondence or written records or communications, on each occasion in which you destroyed or deleted such materials, without violating 1 V.S.A § 317a.

IV.Costs and Consultation with Requestor

Under 1 V.S.A. § 316 you have authority to charge actual cost for production of copies, and for certain staff time involved in making copies, but you are not authorized to charge for time or effort spent to identify, locate, or preserve responsive documents, or to make documents available for examination. See, e.g. Vermont State Employees Assn. v. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Dockets 517-7-10 Wncv and 518-7-10 Wncv, Washington Superior Court, Crawford, J., January 6, 2011.

You are to immediately commence identification and preservation of records covered by this request, and then continue such preservation until further written notice from the Requestor.

You are NOT to commence copying of records covered by this request until you have provided the Requester with descriptions of responsive records and the Requester has identified in writing what records the Requester wants copies of, and at what cost.

HOWEVER the DUTY TO PRESERVE records within the scope of this request continues unless and until the Requester has indicated that this request is closed and over.
To reiterate, this is also a CONTINUING request for records including records created on or after the date that this request is received by City or its officers or employees and outside vendors, and that come within the subject and scope of this request, which (future records) should not be destroyed without conferring and checking with the Requester.
Sincerely,
Clint Gray President, Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs
CC: Miro Weinberger, Mayor, City of Burlington
Mike Kanarick, Chief of Staff, City of Burlington
Bob Rusten, Chief Administrative Officer, City of Burlington
Sharon Foley Bushor, Ward 1 Councilor, City of Burlington
Kevin Worden, Ward 1 Councilor, City of Burlington
Jane Knodell, Ward 2 Councilor, City of Burlington
Max Tracy, Ward 2 Councilor, City of Burlington
Vince Brennan, Ward 3 Councilor, City of Burlington
Rachel Siegel, Ward 3 Councilor, City of Burlington
David Hartnett, Ward 4 Councilor, City of Burlington
Bryan Aubin, Ward 4 Councilor, City of Burlington
Joan Shannon, Ward 5 Councilor, City of Burlington
William Mason, Ward 5 Councilor, City of Burlington
Norm Blais, Ward 6 Councilor, City of Burlington
Karen Paul, Ward 6 Councilor, City of Burlington
Tom Ayers, Ward 7 Councilor, City of Burlington
Paul Decelles, Ward 7 Councilor, City of Burlington
Eugene Bergman, Assistant City Attorney, City of Burlington
Eileen Blackwood, City Attorney, City of Burlington
Linda Blanchard, City Attorney's Office, City of Burlington
Richard Haesler, Assistant City Attorney, City of Burlington
Lisa Jones, City Attorney's Office, City of Burlington
Gregg Meyer, Assistant City Attorney, City of Burlington
Kimberlee Sturtevant, Assistant City Attorney, City of Burlington
William Ellis Esq., Lawyer – McNeil, Leddy & Sheahan

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Senate Holding Open Forums on Current Use Program



PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING!
IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS PLEASE ATTEND ONE OF THE MEETINGS!
Thank you,
Clint 
For Immediate Release:                               
September 14, 2013


A Panel of Vermont Senators Hold Open Forums 
to Solicit Public Input on Vermont's Current Use Program

MONTPELIER, VT— A Special Senate Committee on Current Use will take public comment on Vermont's Current Use program. They are inviting Vermont citizens with an interest or experience in the Current Use Program to attend one of the forums detailed below.

Current Use, also called the Use Value Appraisal program, was adopted in 1978 by the Vermont legislature. The purpose of the law was to allow the valuation and taxation of farm and forest land based on its remaining in agricultural or forest use instead of  its value in the market place.  The primary objectives of the program were to keep Vermont's agricultural and forest land in production, to help slow the development of these lands, and to achieve greater equity in property taxation on undeveloped land. About  1/3 of Vermont's land is enrolled in the program.

The Senate Committee is soliciting public input into the effectiveness, efficiencies, and fairness of the law. All citizens are invited to share their experiences with the program.

Forums will be held in the following towns from 7 to 9 PM.

September 24th
Lake Regions Union High School
Barton, VT

October 1st
Bellows Free Academy
St. Albans, VT

October 8th
Ferrisburgh Central School
Ferrisburgh, VT

October 15th
Riverside Middle School
Springfield, VT

The Senate Committee Members:

Senator Starr, Chair of Senate Agriculture
Senator Hartwell, Chair of Senate Natural Resources
Senator Ashe, Chair of Senate Finance
Senator MacDonald, Senate Natural Resources and Senate Finance
Senator Bray, Senate Agriculture and Senate Finance
Senator Westman, Senate Appropriations

For more information on attending the forums, contact Agatha Kessler at 802-828-2279.

Contact: 
Rebecca D. Ramos, Esq.
802.828.3806
864.921.8916
 
 
 





Friday, September 13, 2013

Burlington City Council has moved the starting time to 6 P.M.


Note the public discussion period is starting at 6 P.M. on October 21st.
Vermont's outdoor sporting and shooting communities need to be there
and speak out against this slice and dice of our Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights.  (See statutes below)

Burlington City Council to allow more time for public comment in hot-button issues

Public comment hearings extended for discussions of livable wage, F-35s and guns

Sep. 12, 2013     
Written by
Free Press staff report
 
Due to increased participation in public comment hearings on hot-button issues, the Burlington City Council plans to offer extended public comment time at three upcoming meetings. The issues discussed will include the liveable wage ordinance, F-35s and gun-related city charter changes.
 
The public forums will be extended from a half hour to an hour at City Council meetings. The meetings will begin earlier than usual, City Council President Joan Shannon stated Wednesday.
 
Each public comment period will focus on a single issue:
• Sept. 23, 6- 7 p.m., Livable wage ordinance
• Oct. 7, 6 - 7 p.m., F-35s
• Oct. 21, 6 - 7 p.m., Gun-related city charter changes
 
Public forums are normally scheduled from 7:30 to 8 p.m., but so many speakers attended a recent meeting that some had to wait until the end of the meeting to speak, Shannon stated in a press release.
 
Shannon stated that the change would be more convenient for the public and a more efficient use of everyone's time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 VSA Section 2291(8)
(8) To regulate or prohibit the use or discharge, but not possession of,   firearms within the municipality or specified portions thereof, provided that an   ordinance adopted under this subdivision shall be consistent with section 2295   of this title and shall not prohibit, reduce, or limit discharge at any existing   sport shooting range, as that term is defined in 10 V.S.A. § 5227.
Politely request your legislators oppose the Burlington City Council attack on the Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights.
E-mail addresses for the Burlington City Council are down below. The three critical statutes are further down below.
The state laws are down below. 10 VSA Sec. 5227(a) defines sports shooting range.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2295. Authority of municipal and county governments to regulate firearms, ammunition, hunting, fishing and trapping
Except as otherwise provided by law, no town, city or incorporated village, by ordinance, resolution or other enactment, shall directly regulate hunting, fishing and trapping or the possession, ownership, transportation, transfer, sale, purchase, carrying, licensing or registration of traps, firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or ammunition. This section shall not limit the powers conferred upon a town, city or incorporated village under section 2291(8) of this title. The provisions of this section shall supersede any inconsistent provisions of a municipal charter. (Added 1987, No. 178 (Adj. Sess.), eff. May 9, 1988.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2291. Enumeration of powers
For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, welfare, and convenience, a town, city, or incorporated village shall have the following powers:
(8) To regulate or prohibit the use or discharge, but not possession of, firearms within the municipality or specified portions thereof, provided that an ordinance adopted under this subdivision shall be consistent with section 2295 of this title and shall not prohibit, reduce, or limit discharge at any existing sport shooting range, as that term is defined in 10 V.S.A. § 5227.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 § 5227. Sport shooting ranges; municipal and state authority
(a) "Sport shooting range" or "range" means an area designed and operated for the use of archery, rifles, shotguns, pistols, skeet, trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
(b) The owner or operator of a sport shooting range, and a person lawfully using the range, who is in substantial compliance with any noise use condition of any issued municipal or state land use permit otherwise required by law shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief resulting from noise or noise pollution, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.
(c) If no municipal or state land use permit is otherwise required by law, then the owner or operator of the range and any person lawfully using the range shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief relating to noise or noise pollution.
(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit or limit the authority of a municipality or the state to enforce any condition of a lawfully issued and otherwise required permit.
(e)(1) In the event that the owner, operator, or user of a range is not afforded the protection set forth in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, this subsection shall apply. A nuisance claim against a range may only be brought by an owner of property abutting the range. The range shall have a rebuttable presumption that the range does not constitute any form of nuisance if the range meets the following conditions:
(A) the range was established prior to the acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim; and
(B) the frequency of the shooting or other alleged nuisance activity at the range has not significantly increased since acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim.
(2) The presumption that the range does not constitute a nuisance may be rebutted only by an abutting property owner showing that the activity has a noxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the abutting property.
(f) Prior to use of a sport shooting range after dark for purposes of training conducted by a federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agency, the sport shooting range shall notify those homeowners and businesses with property abutting the range that have requested such notice from the range.
(g) If any subsection of this section is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect the other subsections of this section that can be given effect without the invalid subsection, and for this purpose, the subsections
 

Saturday, September 7, 2013

MORE Burl. Charter Change Gun Control minutes from June, July and August



Want to read MORE about what the gun control element in Vermont
has been, and is still currently, cooking up with the Charter Committee
of the Burlington City Council?  Get ready for some exciting PC reading.
 
The Burlington gun ordinance is truly just a first attack point for a state-
wide strategy for gun bans and these committee minutes will show you.
 
The minutes from the later Charter Committee meetings are in a separate
attachments above and the earliest is available by the link down below.  
July 15th minutes are in the left attachment, August 8th minutes in the right
attachment. The June 3rd committee meeting minutes are in the link below.
 
The July 15th attachment, on Page 1, has a statement that a felony in
Vermont is a crime with a with a potential sentence of more than a year. 
This is incorrect.  Any any criminal offense whose maximum term of
imprisonment is more  than two years, for life or which may be punished
by death is a felony.  Any other offense is a misdemeanor. 13 VSA. § 1.
 
In the June 3rd minutes, page three,  you can read how Councilor Tom
Ayres questions morality of Century Arms being in Vermont and asks
if the resources used by Century Arms shouldn't  be used by more
Politically Correct entities.  The Burlington City Council as rulers on
morals of businesses in other counties, wanting them to fold-up?
 
This is not just guns in Burlington. These folks want to neuter your
Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights. Once they slice and dice 24 VSA
Sections 2295 and 2291(8) your hunting, shooting, fishing, trapping,
reloading rights will be under attack all over this state.  (laws below)
As reported in Seven Days Magazine several weeks ago, council
members Norm Blais and Rachel Siegel, are leading forces on gun
control for the Burlington City Council.   And they have proved such.
You can contact the Burlington City Council and politiely say "No Gun Burlington Control"
Vermont's gun laws work just fine. Which is why Vermont has such a low crime rate.
 
 
 
 
 
The two critical state laws are down below. 10 VSA Sec. 5227 defines range.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2295. Authority of municipal and county governments to regulate firearms, ammunition, hunting, fishing and trapping
Except as otherwise provided by law, no town, city or incorporated village, by ordinance, resolution or other enactment, shall directly regulate hunting, fishing and trapping or the possession, ownership, transportation, transfer, sale, purchase, carrying, licensing or registration of traps, firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or ammunition. This section shall not limit the powers conferred upon a town, city or incorporated village under section 2291(8) of this title. The provisions of this section shall supersede any inconsistent provisions of a municipal charter. (Added 1987, No. 178 (Adj. Sess.), eff. May 9, 1988.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2291. Enumeration of powers
For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, welfare, and convenience, a town, city, or incorporated village shall have the following powers:
(8) To regulate or prohibit the use or discharge, but not possession of, firearms within the municipality or specified portions thereof, provided that an ordinance adopted under this subdivision shall be consistent with section 2295 of this title and shall not prohibit, reduce, or limit discharge at any existing sport shooting range, as that term is defined in 10 V.S.A. § 5227.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 § 5227. Sport shooting ranges; municipal and state authority
(a) "Sport shooting range" or "range" means an area designed and operated for the use of archery, rifles, shotguns, pistols, skeet, trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
(b) The owner or operator of a sport shooting range, and a person lawfully using the range, who is in substantial compliance with any noise use condition of any issued municipal or state land use permit otherwise required by law shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief resulting from noise or noise pollution, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.
(c) If no municipal or state land use permit is otherwise required by law, then the owner or operator of the range and any person lawfully using the range shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief relating to noise or noise pollution.
(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit or limit the authority of a municipality or the state to enforce any condition of a lawfully issued and otherwise required permit.
(e)(1) In the event that the owner, operator, or user of a range is not afforded the protection set forth in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, this subsection shall apply. A nuisance claim against a range may only be brought by an owner of property abutting the range. The range shall have a rebuttable presumption that the range does not constitute any form of nuisance if the range meets the following conditions:
(A) the range was established prior to the acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim; and
(B) the frequency of the shooting or other alleged nuisance activity at the range has not significantly increased since acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim.
(2) The presumption that the range does not constitute a nuisance may be rebutted only by an abutting property owner showing that the activity has a noxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the abutting property.
(f) Prior to use of a sport shooting range after dark for purposes of training conducted by a federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agency, the sport shooting range shall notify those homeowners and businesses with property abutting the range that have requested such notice from the range.
(g) If any subsection of this section is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect the other subsections of this section that can be given effect without the invalid subsection, and for this purpose, the subsections of this section are severable. (Added 1991, No. 20; amended 2001, No. 61, § 71, eff. June 16, 2001; 2005, No. 173 (Adj. Sess.), § 1, eff. May 22, 2006.)
 
 

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Burlington Charter Gun Control Law minutes (you should read this)





Want to read what the gun control element in Vermont is cooking up
with the Charter Committee of the Burlington City Council. 
This is not just guns in Burlington.  These folks want to neuter your
Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights.  Once they slice and dice 24
VSA Sections 2295 and 2291(8) your hunting, shooting, fishing,
trapping, reloading rights will be under attack all over this state.
As reported in Seven Days Magazine several weeks ago, council
members Norm Blais and Rachel Siegel, are leading forces on gun
control for the Burlington City Council.  You really ought to read this:
You can contact the Burlington City Council and politiely say "No Gun Burlington Control"
Vermont's gun laws work just fine. Which is why Vermont has such a low crime rate.

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Burlington City Council move on gun ban/control issue is nasty bit of work...

The Burlington City Council has moved the Burlington Gun Ban/Control issue from next
Monday to November.  The reason?  Because an antigun group asked them to move it
so the gun control group might better prepare strategies for the city council meeting. 
See the E-mail from City Councilor Rachel Siegel down below to city council.
 
In the case of the meeting taking up the gun issue, which was set for Monday, Sept. 9th, and
was announced in the media.  But, not the move of the gun ban/control agenda to November.
Our folks would have shown up next Monday, to speak on an issue moved to November.
 
Note that not only was the meeting moved for the accommodation of a gun control group but it
was moved right into time when hunters are readying for deer season.  Is this is dirty politics?
Does this make you wonder if the Burlington City Council vote in January was a done deal?
 
This is exactly why the legislature took control of the issues now protected by the Vermont Sportsmen's
Bill of Rights out of the hands of municipalities.  The very same law Burlington would slice & dice. 
 
If Burlington is successful, municipalities all over the state will have "Open Season" political games
with your hunting/shooting, fishing, trapping, guns, ranges, and ammo, currently protected not-PC
rights.  Tell your state legislators of the Burlington contempt for the Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights
From: Rachel Siegel <rsiegel@burlingtonvt.gov>
Date: September 3, 2013, 10:09:08 PM EDT
To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@burlingtonvt.gov>, Eileen Blackwood <eblackwood@burlingtonvt.gov>, Miro Weinberger <miro@burlingtonvt.gov>, Mike Kanarick <mike@burlingtonvt.gov>
Cc: "Shannon, Joan" <jshannon@burlingtontelecom.net>
Subject: Resolutions postponed

Hello colleagues,
 
At the urging of the GunSense Vermont organizers, we are putting the Charter Change resolutions on hold until early November.  That will give them more time for the statewide strategies they are working on.  It also means there's plenty of time for questions and suggestions.  Please feel free to tell us what you think.
 
On behalf of the Charter Change Committee,
Rachel Siegel
Ward 3 City Councilor

NRA Women On Target event at Caledonia F&S Club 9/14/13 (St. Johnsbury)


NRA Women On Target event at Caledonia Field & Strearm Club 9/14/13
Clint Gray will be conducting a NRA Woman On Target event at
the Caledonia Field & Stream Club in St. Johnsbury, Vermont on
Saturday, Sept. 14th. The course will start a 8:30 A.M..
The NRA Women On Target events are introductory firearms courses
in which the students learn safety in handling firearms. All firearms,
ammo, targets, ear and eye protection will be provided.
This a one day course in which the students do not need to bring any
items except writing materials. Lunch will be provided.
To enroll in the class contact Clint Gray at 802-535-7111 or E-mail at;
The NRA WOT event is provided at no charge to the students and the
cost of conducting the course has been paid for by a grant from the profits
of VT's six Friends of NRA banquets.
The last FNRA banquet for 2013 will be in Barre on Sept, 14th. Tickets can
be purchased on-line at: www.friendsofnra.org or by calling Frank Malnati at

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

In January Vermont gun owners were up in arms over protecting their rights...


Next Monday night, Sept. 9th, the Burlington City Council is taking up their gun control agenda again. 
This meeting starts at 7 P.M.   But you also may want to send a polite E-mail before the meeting. 
 
If Burlington is successful in getting the legislature to neuter the Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights, so as
to allow their type of bans/control, other towns all over Vermont will want such bans/control on guns, ammo,
hunting, shooting, ranges, fishing and trapping.  As all are now protected by the very same state law(s) Burlington
would dissect.  Burlington's desired legal changes would create an "open season" on gun/outdoor sporting rights.
Below are the E-mail addresses for the Mayor of Burlington and all of the members of the Burlington City Council.
A polite E-mail saying with the subject line of City Council Vote and the message of "No to City Gun Ban"  If you
live outside Burlington you can relate that you will be talking long and seriously with your legislators if the city council
goes forward with their gun control/ban proposal. 

Please pass this along to those that live in the Burlington area!
 
SEPTEMBER 9, 2013
BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL HEARING ON GUN CONTROL
PLEASE ATTEND!
ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT LIVE IN BURLINGTON!
YOUR VOICE WILL AND SHOULD BE HEARD!
 
Clint Gray,
President
Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, Inc.
 
On September 9th, the Burlington City Council will take up a very
impressive list of gun control items drafted by its charter committee. 
This is about Vermont municipalities being able to ban or restrict and
the licensing out of existence firearms, ranges, ammo, hunting, fishing
and trapping by destroying the effectiveness of our Vermont Sportsmen's
Bill of Rights preemption law.  
 
In effect since 1988, 24 VSA Sections 2295 and 2291(8) have protected
the rights of the outdoors sporting/shooting communities from banning or
control by the municipalities.  In 2006 the legislature added range protection
into 24 VSA 2291(8).
 
If Burlington gets this authority granted by the legislature, municipalities all
over the state will be trying to get exemptions or amend/repeal the above
cited Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights preemption law. 
 
Municipalities can then enact local ordinances to ban, regulate, tax or
license any or all of the items or activities currently protected by two laws.
 
The two critical state laws are down below.  10 VSA Sec. 5227 defines range.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2295. Authority of municipal and county governments to regulate firearms, ammunition, hunting, fishing and trapping
Except as otherwise provided by law, no town, city or incorporated village, by ordinance, resolution or other enactment, shall directly regulate hunting, fishing and trapping or the possession, ownership, transportation, transfer, sale, purchase, carrying, licensing or registration of traps, firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or ammunition. This section shall not limit the powers conferred upon a town, city or incorporated village under section 2291(8) of this title. The provisions of this section shall supersede any inconsistent provisions of a municipal charter. (Added 1987, No. 178 (Adj. Sess.), eff. May 9, 1988.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 § 2291. Enumeration of powers
For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, welfare, and convenience, a town, city, or incorporated village shall have the following powers:
(8) To regulate or prohibit the use or discharge, but not possession of, firearms within the municipality or specified portions thereof, provided that an ordinance adopted under this subdivision shall be consistent with section 2295 of this title and shall not prohibit, reduce, or limit discharge at any existing sport shooting range, as that term is defined in 10 V.S.A. § 5227.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 § 5227. Sport shooting ranges; municipal and state authority
(a) "Sport shooting range" or "range" means an area designed and operated for the use of archery, rifles, shotguns, pistols, skeet, trap, black powder, or any other similar sport shooting.
(b) The owner or operator of a sport shooting range, and a person lawfully using the range, who is in substantial compliance with any noise use condition of any issued municipal or state land use permit otherwise required by law shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief resulting from noise or noise pollution, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.
(c) If no municipal or state land use permit is otherwise required by law, then the owner or operator of the range and any person lawfully using the range shall not be subject to any civil liability for damages or any injunctive relief relating to noise or noise pollution.
(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit or limit the authority of a municipality or the state to enforce any condition of a lawfully issued and otherwise required permit.
(e)(1) In the event that the owner, operator, or user of a range is not afforded the protection set forth in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, this subsection shall apply. A nuisance claim against a range may only be brought by an owner of property abutting the range. The range shall have a rebuttable presumption that the range does not constitute any form of nuisance if the range meets the following conditions:
(A) the range was established prior to the acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim; and
(B) the frequency of the shooting or other alleged nuisance activity at the range has not significantly increased since acquisition of the property owned by the person bringing the nuisance claim.
(2) The presumption that the range does not constitute a nuisance may be rebutted only by an abutting property owner showing that the activity has a noxious and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the abutting property.
(f) Prior to use of a sport shooting range after dark for purposes of training conducted by a federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agency, the sport shooting range shall notify those homeowners and businesses with property abutting the range that have requested such notice from the range.
(g) If any subsection of this section is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect the other subsections of this section that can be given effect without the invalid subsection, and for this purpose, the subsections of this section are severable. (Added 1991, No. 20; amended 2001, No. 61, § 71, eff. June 16, 2001; 2005, No. 173 (Adj. Sess.), § 1, eff. May 22, 2006.)