The Vermont Superior Court has scheduled an in-person hearing on Nov. 4 to decide whether it will hold Daniel Banyai, owner of the controversial paramilitary training facility Slate Ridge, in contempt of court.
Since 2017, Banyai has operated Slate Ridge, a facility on his 30-acre property in West Pawlet, where he has held “professional gunfighting” training that has sometimes involved explosives. He’s invited anti-government groups to train at Slate Ridge, and has allegedly antagonized and threatened neighbors and others who have spoken out against the facility.
In March 2021, the court’s Environmental Division issued a decision in favor of the town of Pawlet — later upheld by the Vermont Supreme Court — that required Banyai to stop operating Slate Ridge, remove structures related to the paramilitary activities on the property and pay the town more than $46,000.
Banyai has paid that fine, plus interest, and he has allowed town officials to inspect his property on foot. (The town had requested to inspect the property using ATVs, but Banyai declined that request). But town officials allege he has failed to comply with the court order’s other requirements.
In July, Merrill Bent, an attorney for the town, asked the court to hold Banyai in contempt. After the site visit, town officials said Banyai had not removed the structures as the court ordered. The town asked the court to fine Banyai an additional $200 per day since the order was issued in March of last year.
In response, Banyai has argued that the structures “are predominantly agricultural buildings that are not subject to zoning regulations” and “that the Town’s zoning regulations do not apply to the shooting ranges or other structures when used for private recreational purposes,” according to Environmental Court Judge Thomas Durkin’s response to the town’s requests — which included a summary of the case to date — filed last month.
Bent also asked the court to issue a $5,000 fine because Banyai had not submitted a site plan of his site from a surveyor, as required by the court. Banyai submitted the site plan several days later, and the court declined to impose the fine.
Over a scheduled six and a half hours at the Nov. 4 hearing in the Rutland Criminal and Family Courthouse, the judge will hear arguments and view evidence related to the other allegations of contempt, according to Durkin.
The hearing represents a continuation of an evidentiary hearing that began on April 18, but was not concluded “in large part because of Mr. Banyai’s failure to produce answers to the Town’s post — judgment interrogatories and failure to submit a site plan that complied with the requirements of the Judgment Order,” Durkin’s filing states.
“It’s just one more step towards what we need to do here — one more step, and hopefully one day it will come to an end,” Bent said of the November hearing and the yearslong case between Banyai and the town.
Reached by phone, Robert Kaplan, an attorney for Banyai, asked VTDigger to send questions via email. A response, attributed to Banyai, criticized VTDigger’s previous reporting on Slate Ridge and said Banyai “takes the Court action very seriously.”
Banyai “looks forward to his day in court at which he can provide the Court with a full presentation of his efforts to comply with all legal obligations pertaining to his property and agricultural endeavors in West Pawlet,” he said.
