In Re Village Associates Act 250 Land Use Permit

Reiber, C.J.,

¶ 29. dissenting in part and concurring in part. The plain language of Act 250 allows only a few carefully circum*129scribed situations in which primary agricultural soils will not be protected. This is not one of those circumstances. Further, when interpreting statutes, “our primary objective is to effectuate the intent of the Legislature.” Swett v. Haig’s, Inc., 164 Vt. 1, 5, 663 A.2d 930, 932 (1995). Through Act 250 and its various amendments, the Legislature has expressed an unequivocal intent to protect Vermont’s primary agricultural soils. Because the majority misinterprets the…