(All dates are only approximate):

1993-97(?) First attempt by Walmart and the St. Albans Group to locate a store on prime-ag soil at Exit 20 off of I-89 in the Town on St. Albans. “Concerned Citizens” forms and obtains Interested Party status to oppose the project with the assistance of the VNRC. Application defeated in Act 250; subsequent appeal denied by Supreme Court.

2004 January JLD Properties announces plans to locate a Walmart on the same tract of land at Exit 20 (still owned by St. Albans Group). JLD has option to buy property from St. Albans Group; plans to lease completed building to Walmart.

2004 January “Concerned Citizens” reorganizes as “Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth.” VNRC offers its help and we gratefully accept.

2004 June Walmart and JLD Properties launch p.r. for the project at a big community rally at the Town Educational Center.

2004 July NWCRG petitions for Interested Party Status in DRB Hearings and receives it.

2004 July Development Review Board Hearings begin in the Town Hall. Board member signs petition advocating for Walmart, then removes his name the next day, on advice from Town Selectboard. Another Board member appears at the first hearing wearing a hat that reads “St. Albans Needs Walmart!” When asked to remove his hat, the Board member sets it on the table in front of him, very deliberately directing the Walmart message towards the audience.

2004 Two weeks later. Our attorney submits a letter complaining of the conflict of interest represented by the two Board members’ behavior.

2004 Sept. NWCRG holds their first big public event the “Big Box Barbeque” at Hudak Farm (the organic farm located 3-tenths of a mile from the proposed project.)

2005 DRB Hearings continue and Town Selectboard complains that the process is taking too long; insists that permit should be granted soon. NWCRG and Marie Frey (Hudak Farm) continue to advocate against the project, with the assistance of the VNRC.

2005 March/April (?) Dissatisfied with the progress of the Walmart permit application, the Town Selectboard removes the two members from the Board who were most vocal in their doubts about the project, and replaces them with more amenable parties.

2005 April/May After just one more meeting, the DRB grants a permit for the Walmart store. We are given to understand that this is a permit for the store ONLY, and does not include a possible, but undelineated, PUD.

2005 June/July In two separate motions, our attorney, Jon Groveman, appeals the permit decision, raising issues of conflict of interest and res judica (sp?) (literally“settled law;” which argues that parties should not be forced to expend additional resources to oppose a project that has already been decided against by the Supreme Court).

2005 Oct. NWCRG holds their second big public event “Festival for a Local Vermont”, featuring a performance by “Bread and Puppet” and speeches by Peter Welch and Vince Iluzzi.

2005 (year end?) Northwest Regional Planning Commission announces that its Project Review Panel has recommended overwhelmingly against the project, based primarily on economic and traffic impact issues. Town Selectboard pronounces outrage at the decision and their representative on the Commission demands that an Ad-Hoc Committee be formed to reconsider the decision. The Ad-Hoc committee is created, setting a new precedent at the NRPC. The committee members include individuals who have been known to be vocal advocates for the project all along, and one who signed a petition in support of the Walmart. Opposition voices are excluded from the Ad-Hoc appointments. Ad-Hoc Committee members are charged with reaching “consensus” on the matter.

2006 January NRPC Ad-Hoc Committee meets a total of four times. Represented on the committee are representatives of the Town of St. Albans, the City of St. Albans, and the Town and Village of Swanton. They are deemed the only “affected communities”. Two more individuals are appointed to bring the total number to committee members to ten. Although the developer is frequently allowed input, the public is not permitted to speak until the conclusion of each meeting, following the voting on the issues that were reviewed at just that single meeting. The public is not permitted to comment on anything but what has already been discussed and voted upon. The public is therefore disenfanchised from the process. The Town representatives succeed in re-defining “consensus” as “majority opinion,” then proceed to pressure the others for their agreement.

2006 April Ad-Hoc Committee meets for the last time and votes 7-3 to recommend in favor of the project. The City of St. Albans has finally voted to oppose the permit, but 7-3 is still deemed “consensus.” These findings are submitted to the NRPG for their consideration.

2006 May The NRPC votes to substitute the findings of the Ad-Hoc Committee for those of the Project Review Panel, which had considered the project for a year and a half. In a tension-filled public meeting, NRPC members are denied a request to vote by paper ballot. The Ad-Hoc Panel’s recommendation will now be submitted by the NRPC to the Environmental Court for the Act 250 process.

2006 June The Act 250 Court convenes to consider the Walmart project. Jon Groveman, the City of St. Albans and expert witnesses succeed in proving that the economic and traffic studies provided by JL Davis on behalf of Walmart are critically flawed. TheAct 250 Court recesses to consider the implications.

? At some point (when, remains unclear) the DRB granted a permit to JLD Properties for a PUD at the site. We were excluded from that process, if it really happened at all. As of the recess of Act 250, neither we nor our lawyer were aware that a permit had received.

2006 July(?) Jon Groveman’s “res judica” motion to dismiss is denied. even been issued for the PUD. In fact, JLD’s attorney said on several occasions, when directly questioned, that they were seeking a permit only for the store.

2006 July The Town Development Review Board (DRB) prints a notice that they will review a new application by JLD for the site. It is assumed that this new application concerns the P.U.D., so we petition, once again, for Interested Party Status.

2006 August The DRB again announces a hearing re: the JLD application. We attend and learn that it has been postponed, and that there is some issue with our petition for status. We have not yet received the letter regarding our status, but restate our intention to participate in the process.

2006 August The Court of Act 250 asks for more accurate economic impact information and makes some additional demands from the developer for traffic improvements. The applicant revises the ecomonic impact study to reflect greater impact, but refuses to address any of the traffic issues

2006 September The DRB hearing is finally held and we learn that not only have we not been granted Interested Party status; but that the application is actually for a SUBDIVISION of the PUD…which apparently has already been granted! We depart confused and, in the minutes of the closed session, it appears that one Board member recuses himself, while a second board member openly questions the process, and even the validity of the supposed PUD permit!

2006 September The Environmental Court finally rules on Jon Groveman’s motion to dismiss, based on the conflicts of interests. The ruling judge finds that conflict of interest does indeed exist in the DRB’s decision to permit the Walmart, and that our civil rights were violated; but she stops short of vacating the permit, leaving the window open for further legal action on our part.

2006 September NWCRG holds its Second Festival for a Local Vermont

2006 September The St. Albans Town Selectboard petitions the Environmental Court to vacate the permit. So that they can avoid legal problems later on, they want to quickly do a new DRB permit review.

2006 October Our attorney, Jon Groveman, responds that vacating the permit at this point only to begin the process again causes undo hardship (in terms of time and cost) to us, and could have been avoided had the conflicts been addressed when those issues were raised immediately after the incidents occurred. He further asserts that no permit process can be deemed unbiased until a Town policy is in place, addressing the issues of conflict of interest; and until an entirely new board is appointed, having no members that sat in on the original, corrupted, process.

2006 November 13 NWCRG is a presenter and co-sponsor at the Building Solutions Conference held in Randolph, VT, at the Vermont Technical College.

2006 November 13 at the Building Solutions Conference, NWCRG is honored by the NEGEF, the VNRC, VPIRG, Rural Vermont, Toxics Action and Vermont Technical College for our work to promote responsible land-use.

2006 November 13 at the Building Solutions Conference, NWCRG is honored by the NEGEF, the VNRC, VPIRG, Rural Vermont, Toxics Action and Vermont Technical College for our work to promote responsible land-use.

2006 December – As the Town of St. Albans had requested, the Court vacated the DRB permit; and the Developer submitted a new permit request for the same project to the St. Albans Town Development Review Board, and we are required to submit a new petition for Interested Party Status in that permit process. In responding to the request to vacate, our attorney had stipulated that an entirely new and unbiased DRB would have to be in place before the new hearings begin, in order to ensure that our constitutional rights would not, once again be violated.

2007 January 4 – The Town Development Review Board convened to hear a “new” application for the same project. The board member who was cited as having a conflict of interest in the prior hearing, recused himself. At this first meeting, two other members of the DRB strongly recommended that the Chairman recuse himself from the hearing because of his own conflict of interest, but he refused to do so. We again requested that an entirely new and unbiased board be appointed to review the project.

2007 January 9 – We have petitioned the DRB for Interested Party Status in the new hearings and are awaiting a decision on that petition.

2007 March with the assistance of UVM students provided through the efforts of the NEGEF, the NWCRG embarked on an ongoing project to compile a practical manual, based on our own experiences, for community activists involved in responsible landuse issues. The second portion of the manual is intended to provide a template for recording the tactical successes and failures of each community as they go through the process of challenging sprawl, so that we can learn from one another how to make our efforts more effective.

2007 May 5 NWCRG sponsor “Let’s Celebrate,” an Earth Day/ Green-up Day event, held at St. Albans City Hall to entertain and educate children and their parents about responsible water, energy and recycling habits.

2007 June -District 6 Environmental Court hears the Act 250 permit arguments.

2007 September – 3rd Annual “Festival for a Local Vermont” held at Hudak Farms.

2008 April – District 6 Commission issues Act 250 permit to JLD.

2008 April – Parties opposing project file Motions to Alter Act 250 permit. All denied.

2008 May- Project supporters hold a failed rally and push a “petition” for the Walmart.

2008 May 10 – NWCRG holds “Mother Earth Day,” a free event, open to everyone.

2008 June – NWCRG, VNRC, Hudak Farms, ANR and St. Albans City file appeals of Act 250 permit. Our appeals include appeals re: conflicts of interest.

2008 Sept. 28- Our fourth Annual “Festival for a Local Vermont,”2008 featuring Woods Tea Co. & Patty Casey, is held at Hudak Farms. Hundreds attend.

2008 Oct. 4 – JL Davis and Walmart supporters hold huge, highly publicized rally at Collins Perley Sports Complex in St. Albans, with TV and VCR give-aways, free food and hats etc. Over 1,000 in attendance (most of whom vacate as soon as the goodies are exhausted.) Gov. Douglas sits on stage in front of a banner saying “Drop the Appeals” and listen as the audience is encouraged to “persuade” us to abandon our opposition to the project. Two individuals are named as particular targets, as the governor listens without raising an objection.

2008 Oct. 8 – The City Council of St. Albans votes to drop their Appeals and agrees to a settlement with JL Davis.

2009 March – Environmental Court rules on side issues. Will not address conflicts of interest, but leave them for a higher court (if we appeal to Supreme Court). Upholds“Res Judicata” and requires JLD Prop. to demonstrate that this project differs significantly from the one that the Supreme Court rejected in 1994. •

June 17-19 Environmental Court trial takes place in St. Albans. Judge Durkin presides. A decision is expected in Fall 2009.

Oct. 11, 2009 Harvest Festival of Foods, co-sponsored by VNRC and Preservation Trust of Vermont and featuring workshops, entertainment and tastings of local and organic foods to be held at Hudak Farm in Swanton, VT. This is our sixth annual fall event and includes participation by local chefs and food producers, and by a host of organizations who are concerned with sustainable living and local foods.

January 20, 2010 Judge Durkin of the Environmental Court upholds Walmart permits.

February 1, 2010 VNRC files a Motion to Alter the Environmental Court Decision based on errors and omissions with regard to Hudak Farm.

May 2010 Judge Durkin agrees with some of the assertions in the Motion to Alter, but upholds his own decision, nonetheless.

June 2, 2010 VNRC notifies Vermont Supreme Court of their intention to appeal on behalf of Marie Frey, Hudak Farms and Northwest Citizens for Responsible Growth. JLD Properties also has filed a notice of cross-appeal.