After a week detained in a Vermont facility following her arrest in Manchester, Davona Williams vanished from the state Department of Corrections system Tuesday morning, leaving her lawyers and family unsure of her whereabouts for around 24 hours. 

Williams, 42, is originally from Jamaica and has lived in the United States for about 17 years, according to her attorney, Christopher Worth, a visiting assistant professor at the Center for Justice Reform at Vermont Law and Graduate School. Williams was in the midst of a yearslong process to gain legal status and was living in Manchester with her partner and three children, he said.

Wednesday morning, Williams called a family member and told them she had been transferred from the Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility to the North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan, Worth said. 

The federal online system is supposed to notify legal representatives of transfers in immigration cases, but Worth said he was not notified. Williams has yet to appear in the federal ICE detainee locator, which reflects an “imperfect system,” he said.

The Bennington Banner first reported Williams’ move to the Michigan facility.

On the morning of Aug. 25, Williams was pulled over by ICE officials in unmarked cars, who were carrying out a prior order to have Williams deported, which was issued in 2013, Worth said. Williams was given time to call a family member to pick up her 18 month old son who was with her at the time of the arrest before she was transported to Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility in South Burlington, he said. 

While she remains in Michigan, Williams’ case is being litigated in the Boston Immigration Court. Since taking on the case last Thursday, Worth said filed an emergency stay so she could remain in the country. After a judge granted the motion, Worth said his next step is to argue against the 2013 order with the goal of having it dropped. 

Worth said he did not file a petition to prevent her from being transferred out of state because the most “pressing issue” in a short time frame was to block deportation.

“Davona is staying strong in the face of a challenging legal system that is stacked against her,” Worth said.

Rutland Area NAACP President Mia Schultz said it was scary to learn early Tuesday morning that Williams had disappeared from the system, and that ICE detention has been tough on Williams and her family. But Schultz said the local community has rallied around the family by starting a GoFundMe campaign to help her family pay bills during the immigration proceedings.

“She is beloved by her community,” Schultz said. “We’re trying to ensure the things she built here stay intact.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Davona Williams transferred to Michigan after ICE arrest in Manchester.

Stuart Hurd — a career civil servant who worked as the Bennington town manager since 1992 and a total of 52 years for the municipality — died Saturday at age 77 from a long-term illness, the Bennington Banner reported. 

Sharyn Brush, who previously served on the selectboard, zoning board and as a town health officer, said Hurd served in many roles in town government and on local boards. She said “his door was always open” to talk to Bennington community members. 

“He wore many hats, and he wore them all well,” Brush said. “He solved problems well. He looked after the town. He was conscious of the budgets, and he really, really loved Bennington.”

State Rep. Mary Morrissey, R-Bennington, said Hurd “went right up the ranks,” serving the town for around 20 years before taking on the role of town manager in the early ’90s. 

“Stuart was highly respected around the state by fellow town managers and heads of communities as well,” Morrissey said. “That says volumes as to who the man was.”

Assistant Town Manager Dan Monks assumed the town manager’s duties when Hurd took extended medical leave on July 8, according to the Bennington Banner.

Town officials declined to comment on Hurd’s life and legacy Tuesday in accordance with family wishes. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Longtime Bennington town manager dies at 77.

An ongoing labor dispute in southeastern Vermont subsided on Labor Day when bus company Travel Kuz ended its lockout of bus drivers and monitors represented by the Vermont Teamsters Local 597 union.

The workers returned to transporting students enrolled in Windham Southeast Supervisory Union’s 10 schools in Brattleboro, Dummerston, Guilford, Putney and Vernon on Tuesday. 

The workers had been on the picket line for nearly two weeks since Travel Kuz locked them out from the company’s Brattleboro headquarters after contract negotiations stalled. The company brought in replacement workers for the start of the school year. 

Travel Kuz accused the union of unlawful picketing and endangering students in a cease-and-desist letter last week. Local law enforcement did not witness any unlawful activity and the Teamsters disputed the characterization. 

A spokesperson for Travel Kuz — affiliated with Beacon Mobility — wrote in a press release that the company ended the lockout because the union is ready to return to the bargaining table. 

“From the start, our hope has been to reach an agreement that is fair for employees and affordable for the town, while keeping the focus on what matters most: children arriving at school safely and returning home with care,” the spokesperson wrote. “We care deeply about our drivers and want to be sure they feel valued and fairly paid for the vital work they do.”

Curtis Clough, president of the Vermont Teamsters Local 597, said the union has “always been available to negotiate with the bus company,” even during the lockout. 

“We’d love to get back to the table with the company,” Clough said. “We’ve already sent the company multiple letters asking for them to come back to the table and negotiate, so hopefully that bears some fruit.”

Lena Melentijevic, spokesperson for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, wrote in a statement that Travel Kuz notified individual drivers and monitors late Monday afternoon that the lockout ended, but the union has not received direct communication from the company about the situation or future bargaining as of Tuesday.

“The company created a stressful situation for our members and the community,” Melentijevic wrote in a statement. “We call on the company to come back to the table and negotiate a fair contract for our members.”

Travel Kuz previously told VTDigger the union’s proposal would cause an “unrealistic burden” by expanding company costs by over 40%. 

At the Aug. 22 meeting held during the lockout, Clough said, the union adjusted its workers’ pay proposal but maintained its benefits request. He said the Teamsters Local 597 is asking for a contract pay package similar to bus drivers represented by the Teamsters in other states, particularly in New Hampshire. 

Clough said the company has repeatedly delayed workers’ pay, retirement matches and health care premiums, and has asked the union to agree to concessions such as limiting family and medical leave, barring drivers from taking on extra hours and canceling bus monitors’ pay guarantees.

The Vermont Teamsters Local 597’s want a fair contract that ensures members have what they “need to afford to live in the community and afford their health care,” Clough said. 

Windham Southeast Supervisory Union’s Superintendent Mark Speno wrote in a Tuesday statement that he is glad the drivers and monitors are able to return to work while a handful of replacement drivers continue to fill in for some routes. 

The supervisory union is hopeful the contract negotiations settle soon and the bus company makes improvements to the routing and communications systems, according to Speno.

“My expectation is that there is a contract settlement that recognizes support and balance within very few days, so we can all move forward,” Speno wrote.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Company ends lockout of Vermont bus workers, contract talks in the works.

The bus transportation company Travel Kuz sent a cease-and-desist letter Wednesday to the Vermont Teamsters Local 597 alleging the union engaged in “unlawful” picketing practices and put student safety at risk.

The Teamsters Local 597 president denied the allegations, and local law enforcement said they did not witness criminal activity during Wednesday’s demonstration at Brattleboro Union High School. 

The labor dispute began when the company, affiliated with Beacon Mobility, locked out its Vermont union bus drivers and monitors from the Brattleboro headquarters last week after contract negotiations broke down. 

Travel Kuz provides student transportation for Windham Southeast Supervisory Union schools in Brattleboro, Dummerston, Guilford, Putney and Vernon. The union bus drivers and monitors with Teamsters Local 597 typically handle school routes for the 10 schools in the supervisory union, but they have not been allowed to work with their employer Travel Kuz due to the lockout. 

Since the work stoppage by Travel Kuz, the union drivers and monitors have been on the picket line. The company brought in replacement workers to serve Windham Southeast Supervisory Union schools for the start of the school year. 

Travel Kuz claimed that union members picketing Wednesday at Brattleboro Union High School spat on school buses, blocked school bus access, caused traffic disruptions and hazardous conditions and displayed “obscene and aggressive behavior toward students and drivers,” according to a Travel Kuz press release. 

Curtis Clough, president of Teamsters Local 597, denied the allegations of union members spitting, risking public safety or otherwise causing harm to students or drivers. He said the union members did cross the street a few times during the picketing but that is a legally protected activity. 

He said the union is looking into taking legal action against the company and the company’s counsel due to allegations in the letter. He said it is the company’s actions — tapping replacement workers and preventing local bus drivers and monitors who are more familiar with the community and school routes from working — that are detrimental to students, not the union demonstrations. 

“We didn’t put any students in danger yesterday,” Clough said. “They were the ones that put students in danger by locking out the bus drivers.”  

The Travel Kuz company is seeking injunctive relief against the union and claimed to be working with local authorities and legal counsel to “ensure compliance with labor laws and public safety standards,” according to the press release. 

Clough said Brattleboro police were present during picketing and did not issue any citations or tell the union to cease demonstrating. 

Brattleboro Police Capt. Adam Petlock confirmed that officers were present at Brattleboro High School during the picketing because it is customary to have law enforcement stationed at schools during the first week of school. 

Petlock said the role of law enforcement is to respect the right of people to protest and engage in protected First Amendment activities while ensuring the safety of children and the public. 

Officers who were present during picketing demonstrations witnessed “no criminal violations” by union members, Petlock said, and Travel Kuz has not contacted Brattleboro law enforcement to his knowledge.

Brattleboro resident Ian Turner, a parent of two students in the supervisory union, said that the lockout has caused inconvenience and safety concerns for his family as they are forgoing bus transportation for their children during the lockout.

One of Turner’s children enrolled in the 10th grade is nonverbal and needs preparation to use the bus, and was comfortable with the union driver and monitors during the previous year, he said. Turner said he has reached out to Travel Kuz and the company has yet to communicate a transportation plan, and the lockout by the company is disruptive to his child’s education. 

Turner said he talked with the union members picketing outside of Brattleboro Union High School yesterday and did not witness any aggressive behavior. On the contrary, Turner said he has generally seen union picketing garnering positive reactions from parents and he considers the union bus drivers and monitors to be trusted members of the community.

Lena Melentijevic, a spokesperson for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, wrote in a statement many of the drivers are part of the community and have students in the supervisory union. 

“Travel Kuz is failing in its desperate attempts to distract the public from the truth — this company locked out its own workers, preventing them from returning to work since last week,” Melentijevic wrote in a statement. “This lockout could end today if the company chose to end it.”

Clough said the contract negotiations are still active despite the labor dispute, and the Teamsters Local 597 will work to agree on a fair contract.

“We’re gonna be out there on the picket lines until the company gives us a fair contract,” Clough said. “They’ve locked us out. They say they’re not gonna let us back in until we agree to a contract, so it’s gonna have to be a fair one.”

The Windham Southeast Supervisory Union superintendent did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Bus company accuses union drivers of unlawful and unsafe picketing at Brattleboro school.

Two women were arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents Monday at their Manchester homes, a local official and an advocate said. 

Jill Martin Diaz, executive director of the Vermont Asylum Assistance Project, confirmed ICE’s presence in town and said at least one person arrested is a parent of young children.

“There’s been ICE presence in Manchester. They’ve been making arrests,” Martin Diaz said Wednesday. “I understand that people are really afraid.” 

Will Lambek, of the advocacy organization Migrant Justice, said one of the women detained Monday is Davona Williams, known by her nickname Candy by friends and family who called the organization this week. Originally from Jamaica, Williams is a mother and has lived in the United States for 18 years, Lambek said. 

Williams, 42, was checked in to the Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility at 5:14 p.m. Monday, according to the Vermont Department of Corrections database.

As of Wednesday, Williams is detained at the state facility and is on federal immigration hold, Department of Corrections spokesperson Haley Sommer wrote in an email to VTDigger. Sommer referred other inquiries from VTDigger to ICE.

The presence of immigration enforcement at the two women’s homes at the Torrey Knoll housing development in Manchester was “unbeknownst to the town or the police department,” said Scott Murphy, town manager of Manchester, in Bennington County.

“It caused some consternation among a lot of people, especially our workers in town,” he said. “We have a lot of workers that are from another country that have been relocated here legally.”

Manchester community members plan to help the family and children of the detained individuals by providing counselors and reaching out to the local food pantry to deliver food, Murphy said. 

Lambek said in an interview that the ICE arrests in Manchester are an “awful situation” and are part of an ongoing pattern of detentions across the state. Since the arrest on Monday in Manchester, Lambek said Migrant Justice has received information about two other possible ICE arrests in Rutland and Winooski on Wednesday. 

“ICE’s actions seek to terrorize immigrant families. This latest detention is part of an escalating wave of attacks from Trump’s deportation agents to detain workers and separate families, both in Vermont and around the country,” Lambek wrote in a statement to VTDigger. “Vermonters must stand up to this violence and protect our neighbors.”

Neither Murphy nor Lambek nor Martin Diaz could confirm the identity of the other individual arrested in Manchester or other information on the arrest. 

ICE officials and the Manchester police chief did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Clarification: A previous version of this story misnamed the Vermont Asylum Assistance Project.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Two women arrested by ICE agents in Manchester.

As the school year begins Wednesday, the Windham Southeast Supervisory Union says students will still have transportation to and from school — even as contracted bus drivers and monitors remain locked out from their jobs.

Unionized drivers and monitors with Vermont Teamsters Local 597 started picketing last week after their employer, Travel Kuz, locked them out of the company’s Vermont headquarters due to fraught contract negotiations. But Windham Southeast Superintendent Mark Speno wrote in a statement Tuesday that replacement drivers will be brought in to cover routes for the supervisory union’s 10 schools in Brattleboro, Dummerston, Guilford, Putney and Vernon. 

Speno wrote that the supervisory union was assured that “replacement drivers are prepared to step in to ensure that transportation runs as smoothly as possible.”

“Our hope and expectation is that an agreement will be reached quickly between the two sides for the benefit of all involved, and especially for our students,” he wrote.

Curtis Clough, president of the Vermont Teamsters Local 597, said Tuesday that the union will continue to picket every day at the Travel Kuz headquarters in Gill, Massachusetts, and outside Windham Southeast schools while the lockout is ongoing. 

The union met with the company — affiliated with Beacon Mobility — on Friday, and contract negotiations are active, but Clough does not foresee a quick end to the lockout due to “big concessions” the company asked for during the last bargaining meeting. 

The concessions include restrictions on family and medical leave and prohibiting drivers from taking on extra hours, which “would considerably dilute the earning ability of the drivers that work there,” Clough said. He added that the company’s proposal would also take away bus monitors’ pay guarantees. 

The union plans to demonstrate outside of Brattleboro Union High School on Wednesday, the Academy School on Thursday and Green Street School on Friday in Brattleboro, Clough said.

Travel Kuz did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Correction: A previous version of this story mischaracterized the type of labor dispute between the employer and its employees.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Amid work stoppage, bus company brings in replacement workers for start of school in Windham County.

Bus drivers and monitors for Windham Southeast Supervisory Union schools picketed in Brattleboro Friday afternoon in front of Academy School and Brattleboro Union High School as tense negotiations continue with their private employer. 

The student transportation workers, represented by the Vermont Teamsters Local 597 union, have been locked out of their place of employment since Wednesday by Travel Kuz, which has offices in Brattleboro and northern Massachusetts. According to its website, the company became affiliated in 2023 with Beacon Mobility, a firm with school bus companies nationwide.

“The employer is not letting anybody go to work until they agree to their terms and conditions, so they’ve locked us out to try to put pressure on the group,” Curtis Clough, president of Teamsters Local 597, said in an interview.  

The school year begins for students in Windham Southeast Supervisory Union, like many others across the state, on Aug. 27. In addition to Brattleboro schools, the supervisory union also includes schools in Dummerston, Guilford, Putney and Vernon. 

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters claimed in a press release that if the bar on bus drivers and monitors working continues into next week, its members are concerned it could mean that students enrolled in Windham Southeast schools will not have bus transportation. 

An email from Travel Kuz said the temporary lockout at the Brattleboro office was implemented earlier this week after no agreement was reached with the union, but that the lockout will not affect student transportation routes. 

The email from the company said that the union’s request would result in over a 40% increase in costs to the company, “an unrealistic burden under fixed school district contracts,” and that the company is prepared to meet with the union to find a “fair, balanced resolution.”

In addition to claims it cannot pay workers what they’re asking for, Travel Kuz has held back retirement matches and health care premiums and frequently failed to pay workers on time, Clough said. 

Teamsters Local 597 asked to open bargaining in February and the union’s contract expired in June, Clough said. Between May and July, there was a period of several weeks when negotiations were at a standstill because the company refused to meet with the union. It has been difficult scheduling a time to meet with companies to continue negotiations after their last bargaining session Aug. 7, he added. 

Teamsters Local 597 filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board due to Travel Kuz withholding a revenue contract document that the union requested and the lockout notice. This along with refusing to negotiate for weeks displays the “bad faith bargaining” of the employer, Clough said. 

Catherine Cleveland, a union member, said she was looking forward to her first day of school as a bus driver after receiving her certification in June. She worked as a bus monitor with the company before that, and said that she was injured on the job a year ago and is “still fighting workmen’s comp claims.” Beyond higher wages, Cleveland said she would like the company to demonstrate more appreciation for the work and responsibilities of bus drivers and monitors safely transporting students.

Cleveland said the children will be negatively impacted if the lockout continues even if the company sends out-of-state drivers and monitors to serve the Windham Southeast schools.

“They don’t know the children. They don’t know the schools,” Cleveland said, “A lot of them probably don’t know a lot of the areas, so even just being out driving a route is going to be a challenge.”

The Windham Southeast Supervisory Union superintendent could not be immediately reached for comment.

Correction: An earlier version of this story misidentified Academy School, and misidentified a town within the Windham Southeast Supervisory Union.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Days before the school year begins, Windham Southeast districts’ contracted bus drivers walk the picket line.

Vermont hospitals presenting annual budgets in public hearings this month largely aligned their proposals with state regulatory guidelines or suggested even lower or negative growth rates. That’s a marked difference from the last two years when most hospitals’ requests exceeded the benchmarks for budget growth set by the Green Mountain Care Board.

Staff and board members at the state’s top health care regulator, alongside health care leaders, have been immersed for two weeks in hearings to review 2026 budget requests for the 14 hospitals under the board’s regulatory purview. The fiscal year for hospitals in the state begins Oct 1. 

The annual hospital budget hearings are transpiring amid an ongoing health care affordability crisis, with the state’s largest insurers teetering on the edge of insolvency and Vermonters bearing the highest health care premiums in the country in recent years. 

The state’s top health care regulator is reviewing three metrics within hospital budgets this year. The board asked hospitals to limit the increase in their net patient revenue — the amount of earnings through patient service without uncompensated care and other deductions — to 3.5% or below this fiscal year, and set a rate of 3% for growth in operational expenses. 

Most critically for Vermonters’ private health insurance costs, the care board set a benchmark of a 3% increase in the amount hospitals can charge commercial health insurers this fiscal year.

The high cost of health insurance in Vermont reflects the overall high cost of health care in the state, and the decisions of insurers, hospital and regulatory health care leaders, Vermont’s Chief Health Care Advocate Mike Fisher said in an interview Thursday. All these factors impact Vermonters’ ability to afford the care they need and can lead to people being priced out of care, he said.

The Green Mountain Care Board also reviews proposed price increases for certain types of commercial health care plans in Vermont. Those increases are often directly influenced by hospital budgets. The board held hearings on state insurance rates last month, and plans to decide on whether to grant Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont and MVP rates requests on Aug. 22, according to board spokesperson Kristen LaJeunesse.  

A new state law capping how much hospitals can charge private health insurers for certain outpatient pharmaceuticals is likely the largest influence on the coming year’s budget proposals, Emma Runia, an analyst for the Green Mountain Care Board, said last week. 

The new price restrictions apply primarily to injectable and IV-administered drugs for immunotherapy and cancer treatment and go into effect Jan. 1, 2026. Preliminary board staff analysis found that the price caps will reduce revenue for affected hospitals by approximately $100 million collectively. A large majority — around $70 million — of the dollar impact will fall on the University of Vermont Medical Center, the only academic medical center in the state. 

Vermont’s critical access hospitals — a federal designation for small hospitals in rural areas — are exempt from the legislation’s impact unless they belong to a hospital network. 

That measure and other new legislation, including a move towards reference-based pricing, are positive steps forward, Fisher said. 

In a recent letter, an independent liaison group suggested the care board limit commercial pricing for all hospital services to 500% of the Medicare rate. While Fisher said he appreciates the group putting forward a starting concept for a cap on health services charges, he said it may take a couple of years to determine what counts as a reasonable upper limit to prevent excessive charges.

With hearings closing out on Wednesday, the Green Mountain Care Board will review the information and ultimately make a decision to accept, reject or adjust to hospitals’ requests by Sept. 15. 

Michael Del Trecco, president and CEO of the Vermont Association of Hospitals and Health Systems, urged the board to support the hospitals’ “lean” budget requests on Aug. 5 at the onset of hearings. He said Vermont hospitals are taking measures to address the state’s health care affordability crisis, such as the University of Vermont Health Network announcing cost-saving measures like layoffs late last month to meet its proposed 2026 budgets. 

“We need payment models that are fair and sustainable and that create the right incentives. Just having rate restrictions is not viable,” Del Trecco said. “I truly believe reductions beyond what has been submitted will challenge transformation efforts and the ability for hospitals to meet the needs of their communities.”

Fisher said addressing the health care affordability crisis and pricing across in the state will require a concerted effort from health care leaders over many years. 

While Vermonters often view hospital budgets in terms of access to services in their local communities, the annual budgetary decisions are felt across the statewide health care system, he said. 

“I know that communities recognize how important their community hospital is in terms of people being able to get the care they need and in terms of the economic engine that hospitals represent for every community,” Fisher said.

“This decision on how much to give hospitals across Vermont has a direct bearing on, to what degree more Vermonters are priced out of the ability to get care,” he said. 

Hospital budget proposals

Almost every hospital with budgets regulated by the Green Mountain Care Board either met or came in under benchmarks set by the board this year, according to a staff analysis of hospital submissions presented on Aug. 5. The hospitals’ rate requests are subject to change through the hearing process and beyond. 

The largest community hospital in Vermont — Rutland Regional Medical Center — requested a 2.8% increase to operating expenses, a 1.7% decrease to net patient revenue and 3.7% decrease to charges to commercial insurers. 

Northwestern Medical Center requested a 3% increase to operating expenses, a 2% decrease to net patient revenue, and a 2.6% increase to commercial insurance rates. 

Southwestern Vermont Medical Center proposed a 2.4% increase to operating expenses, a 1.9% increase to net patient revenue and 3% increase to commercial rates. 

While facing significant budgetary shortfalls in the current fiscal year, Brattleboro Memorial Hospital sought increased rates at last week hearings, including a 1.8% increase to operating expenses, a 1.7% increase to net patient revenue and a 3% increase to commercial rates. 

The three hospitals that requested rates above the regulator guidance are all critical access hospitals: Springfield Hospital, Mt. Ascutney Hospital & Health Center and Copley Hospital. 

Springfield Hospital requested a 8.3% increase to net patient revenue, a 10% increase to operating expenses, as well as a 3% increase to commercial rates. Mt. Ascutney Hospital & Health Center in Windsor requested a 3.5% net patient revenue, a 5.3% increase to operating expenses and 3% increase to commercial rates. 

Copley Hospital in Morrisville asked for a 3.7% decrease to net patient revenue, a 1.6% increase to operating expenses and a 4.2% increase to commercial rates to insurers. 

But one critical access hospital — Gifford Medical Center in Randolph — requested no change to its operating expenses, a 2.5% decrease to its net patient revenue and a 3% increase to commercial rates from the current fiscal year. 

Two of University of Vermont Health Network’s hospitals also requested decreased rates to charges to commercial insurers for the coming fiscal year, mostly due to recent legislation capping outpatient-administered injection drugs. The network’s critical access hospital — Porter Medical Center in Middlebury — requested increased rates for net patient revenue and commercial rates at the regulator’s benchmark and below the benchmark for operating expenses. 

There were no hearings for Grace Cottage Hospital, North Country Hospital and Northeastern Vermont Medical Center, as the board accepted the three critical access hospitals’ budgets with rate requests that all fell below the board’s benchmark increases. 

Correction: An earlier version of the caption to the screenshot accompanying this story misstated the number of Green Mountain Care Board members pictured.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Amid health insurance affordability crisis, most Vermont hospitals seek moderate budget changes at annual hearings.

A tense exchange between health care leaders on Monday punctuated the annual, multiday marathon hospital budget hearings before the Green Mountain Care Board. 

The discourse focused on a letter from an independent health care liaison that described a “simmering and ongoing adversarial relationship” between the state’s largest hospital network and its largest health insurer. 

The letter conveys Blue Cross Blue Shield Vermont’s claim that University of Vermont Health Network leaders allegedly threatened to drop patients on the carrier’s insurance plans to pressure the insurer to accept higher network charges in previous years. Network representatives disputed this characterization at the hearing.

Regulators also asked health network executives about revenue overages and profit margins at the University of Vermont Medical Center, the state’s only academic medical center and the only one certified for the highest level of trauma care.

Health care regulators hold extensive hearings annually on the budgets proposed by Vermont’s hospitals for the next fiscal year, but one day of meetings typically impacts Vermonters’ health care costs more than the rest. This year, that was Monday, when all day was spent reviewing the proposals by the University of Vermont Health Network’s three hospitals in the state.

That’s because a big share of what is spent on Vermonters’ health care goes to the state’s hospitals, almost half the money spent in 2022, according to one dataset analyzed by board staff. And the three network hospitals — University of Vermont Medical Center in the Burlington area, Central Vermont Medical Center in Berlin and Porter Medical Center in Middlebury — together earn almost two thirds of the money spent on behalf of patients at the 14 hospitals under board review. 

This year, for the first time in recent memory, two network hospitals submitted proposed reductions to commercial insurance rates in the coming fiscal year for the board’s approval.

Also, for the first time, the board dug deeply into the budget and finances of the overall University of Vermont Health Network.

The Green Mountain Care Board set benchmarks for Vermont hospitals this coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, to not exceed a 3.5% increase for net patient revenue, which the regulatory board defines as earnings from patient services after certain deductions such as uncompensated care. Other benchmarks set by the regulator are a 3% increase both for hospital operating expenses and for charges to commercial health insurance companies. 

University of Vermont Medical Center is seeking a 2.2% increase to its net patient revenue. The center also expects to increase operating expenses by 3% and decrease what it charges commercial insurers by 7.9%.

Central Vermont Medical Center requested a 3.5% increase to net patient revenue, a 2.8% increase for operating expenses and a 3.6% decrease to commercial rates. 

The reduction in commercial insurance charges put forth by the two medical centers comes after the Green Mountain Care Board entered a settlement in April with their parent health network related to those two hospitals exceeding the patient revenue caps set by the board through this process in the 2024 and 2023 fiscal years. 

A new law capping pharmaceutical drugs costs accounts for the majority of the two hospitals’ commercial rate reductions, alongside compliance with the enforcement settlement.

Health network officials projected last week that the University of Vermont Medical Center will exceed budget caps for the current fiscal year as well, also part of the hospital’s proposed 2026 rate reduction.

Porter Medical Center, a federally-designated critical access hospital — one of eight in the state — asked for a 3.5% increase to net patient revenue, a 2.4% increase to operating expenses and 3% increase to commercial rates. The designation, intended for hospitals that provide care in rural, underserved areas, requires higher reimbursements tied to costs from Medicare. 

Late last month, just prior to the start of hospital budget review hearings, the University of Vermont Health Network announced cost saving measures, including layoffs and workforce reductions, particularly in network-wide administrative services, in order to meet the 2026 fiscal year hospital budget proposals. 

‘Lingering animosity’

Board chair Owen Foster, a former federal prosecutor, asked University of Vermont Health Network executives to respond to the letter the board had received last week from Mike Smith, who the board had appointed as an independent liaison to a new working group required by the legal settlement.

The letter dated Thursday gave an update on private negotiations between leaders at the network and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont, which were convened with the goal of finding “common ground on cost reductions to lower commercial health insurance rates for 2026, and hopefully beyond.” The update, which included the liaison team’s own recommendations for the Green Mountain Care Board, was also sent to the Department of Financial Regulation, the state’s main insurance regulator.

The discussion between the UVM Health Network and Blue Cross Blue Shield had broken down due to what Smith described in the letter as “lingering animosity” between the health network and insurance carrier.

Despite the insurer being on the brink of insolvency, Blue Cross Blue Shield Vermont officials said they have not negotiated assertively over rates in past years because the Health Network had threatened to cease serving Blue Cross patients if the insurer did not cede to their demands, according to Smith’s letter.

At the board meeting Monday, Kelly Champney, a health network vice president, denied that the University of Vermont Medical Center threatened to not serve Blue Cross patients in negotiations in recent years. 

“I know we have gotten to very tough conversations before,” Champney said. “To my knowledge, there’s not been a termination conversation.”

Smith’s liaison team offered their own recommendations to further lower commercial health insurance rates for the next fiscal year. They included capping reimbursement of health services at 500% of the Medicare payment rate to prevent “excessive cost,” a version of so-called reference-based pricing incorporated into a law signed earlier this summer.

Smith also said the leaders of the Health Network and Blue Cross Blue Shield Vermont should meet regularly to develop a “healthy working relationship.”

Over revenue cap again this year

Amid hearings about the next fiscal year, the UVM Medical Center and Central Vermont Medical Center leaders met with the board last Wednesday to discuss how to address projected overages to hospital patient revenue in the hospitals’ current fiscal year, which ends September 30. 

A hospital’s net patient revenue is the result of both the price of the service provided and the number of patients who receive it, a measure often referred to as ‘utilization.’ Health network hospitals attribute their recent revenue overages largely to more patients seeking more services than anticipated. 

Hospital leaders told regulators that the University of Vermont Medical Center is looking to reduce commercial insurer revenue by $20 million and Central Vermont Medical Center is looking to reduce revenue by $6 million through targeted rate reductions. A large portion of those reductions would be realized in the coming fiscal year, not the current one, because of the late date.

Rick Vincent, executive vice president of finance and chief financial officer for the health network, said the network would have looked to adjust its rates in early May, but had to assess a price cap on outpatient-administered injection drugs then being considered by the Vermont Legislature and later signed into law. 

“The delay was really due to trying to understand exactly what was happening with the drug legislation and how that might impact our budgets going forward,” Vincent said. 

Mark Hengstler, staff attorney for the Green Mountain Care Board, said the board only sets commercial health insurance rate upper limits, not rates themselves, so it is within hospital prerogative to lower rates to meet their set patient revenue cap at any time. 

After questioning from new board member Sara Teachout — formerly an executive and spokesperson for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont — Vincent said that even with the reductions proposed, the University of Vermont Medical Center is projected to end the year over the revenue cap by around $2 million, and may again be subject to regulatory enforcement action. 

At the hearing Monday, Green Mountain Care Board member Thom Walsh asked how the board should view the University of Vermont Medical Center’s budget projections for the coming 2026 fiscal year given the hospital’s underestimation of service utilization that in the recent past has led to revenue overages, regulatory enforcements and mid-year commercial health insurance rate adjustments. 

Judy Peek-Lee, chief financial officer for the University of Vermont Medical Center, said their methods for making projections have not changed, but staff have developed better communication between departments to more quickly recognize any upticks in how patients are using services.

Peek-Lee said that the academic medical center’s focus on special services and advancements in the medical field make it more difficult to project out costs for the coming fiscal year compared to community hospitals, but that staff will continue to assess budget projections throughout the coming year. 

While past overages in net patient revenue are high in dollar amounts, as a percentage of the medical center’s overall budget, the number is relatively small, she said. 

Network ‘centralization and consolidation’

During a new afternoon session on Monday, the board delved into the expenses of the parent organization, University of Vermont Health Network, itself. 

Green Mountain Care Board member Jessica Holmes expressed concern with the increased “centralization and consolidation” of shared services to improve quality care measures and population health outcomes among network hospitals — three in Vermont and three in New York — represented in the increased size of the network’s budget. 

Holmes noted that while the network spent more on these services in recent years, federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services quality ratings for their hospitals diminished between fiscal years 2022 and 2026.

The University of Vermont Medical and Porter Medical Center is currently at a three star federal rating and Central Vermont Medical Center is at two stars, with similar ratings at the New York hospitals, Holmes said. That means that “half of your hospitals are in the bottom third of all hospitals in the country, and none are in the top third,” she said.

Stephen Leffler, president and chief operating officer of University of Vermont Medical Center, said that the hospital’s leadership and staff lost focus on maintaining high quality care ratings during the pandemic, but recent data shows that the academic medical center is making progress to improve ratings. 

“We’ve started that climb,” Leffler said. “We have to sustain that and make it better. I am confident that the network has heard what we’re asking for and that we will do better, but we’re not where we need to be.”

Board chair Foster asked network executives about how funds flow from hospitals to the network, particularly from University of Vermont Medical Center and the New York hospitals.

Sunny Eappen, president and CEO of the University of Vermont Health Network, conceded upon questioning that the New York hospitals’ contributions to network operations are currently not sufficient. He said the network will be looking for higher commercial rates for the New York hospitals.

“The commercial negotiations in New York have looked very, very different than they have in Vermont the last few years. The increases that we’re seeking are much larger. They’re going to be much larger again this year,” Eappen said. “We do the same thing in terms of advocating at the state for additional funding, so the same things that we’re doing in Vermont, we’re doing in New York.”

Maintaining affiliations with the New York hospitals is still a net positive for Vermont, Eappen said, because it increases capacity and access to special services. It also keeps patients from eastern New York seeking care from overwhelming Vermont hospitals, because “patients don’t follow borders.”

Foster probed further, asking why the Board should grant the network hospitals’ budget requests given “competing interests,” such as the state’s cash-strapped, largest health insurer and Vermonters facing a health care affordability crisis. This suggests that the board might consider lowering the patient revenue caps or further lowering the commercial rate reduction proposed by the larger hospitals. 

Eappen responded that the health network would have to continue deferring maintenance on capital projects, and would not be able to maintain the same level of care and services to the region if hospitals’ rate requests were not met. 

Reflecting on what he had heard on Monday, board Member David Murman, who is an emergency room doctor at Central Vermont Medical Center, noted that the University of Vermont Medical Center’s profits swamp that of all other hospitals in the state, and alone represent about half of all hospital revenue this year. 

Green Mountain Care Board staff calculated the profit margin expected by the 14 Vermont hospitals in fiscal year 2025 based on their end-of-year projections, some of which are negative, meaning they’ve experienced operating losses. The analysis highlighted that because of its size, the University of Vermont Medical Center’s 3% positive margin, around $72 million, accounted for almost 95% of all the profit likely across the entire system, estimated at $76.1 million.

Murman, who is not participating in decisions related to his direct employer, also said that the University of Vermont Health Network as a whole is a large player in the state’s healthcare landscape and many Vermonters rely on network hospitals for their care and livelihoods. 

But operations at the University of Vermont Medical Center in particular have an outsized impact on commercial insurance rates, Murman said. That’s because the academic medical center sees a larger proportion of commercially insured patients than other hospitals in the state, 26% compared to less than 20% on average, according to board staff. The other patients at all hospitals are largely covered by the federal and state insurance programs Medicare and Medicaid, which generally pay much lower rates for services than commercial health insurance. 

“While you enjoy massive market power, very high commercial prices, and a remarkably strong payer mix compared to the region that you live in, you also hold the responsibility to not take too much advantage of that,” Murman said. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Discord with BCBS VT sparked flashpoint in UVM Health Network annual budget hearing.

A proposed Manchester housing development sits at the intersection of two of Vermont’s biggest crises: a shortage of affordable housing stock and the growing threat of flooding.

The proposed 43-unit project on a 8.2-acre field beneath the shadow of Equinox Mountain would include at least nine units of workforce affordable housing, according to the Manchester-based developer Paul Carroccio. The project is sited in a mixed-use zone and a flood hazard overlay district, according to the developer’s permit application. 

Manchester neighbors have voiced concerns at town meetings that the project, located on a flood-prone field, will have negative environmental impacts on future tenants and make flooding worse on their own nearby properties. Residents have also voiced aesthetic, public safety and other concerns with the proposed project. 

But the state’s Land Use Review Board determined the project is exempt from Act 250 — Vermont’s land use and development review process — because it qualifies as priority housing under Act 181 passed in 2024. The project includes at least 20% affordable housing units, is located near Manchester’s downtown and can be served by public water and sewer systems, among other requirements under the exemption. 

Four neighbors with property abutting the project sent a reconsideration request to the state’s review board, but the board upheld its original decision Monday.

One neighbor, Edward Gotgart, said he was concerned about the development increasing impervious surface and exacerbating surface erosion and property damage during future flooding events.

“The issue with placing it on the floodplain is that it reduces the available area for floodwaters to spread out and slow down, which is exactly what that field has been doing the last 100 years,” Gotgart said. 

Land Use Review Board Executive Director Peter Gill wrote in a statement to VTDigger that the decision by district staff was informed by Act 181 interim housing exemptions. 

“This exemption, of course, is based on a number of factors including a local process for review under the town’s zoning and subdivision bylaws,” Gill wrote.

The project is currently being assessed at the local level by the Development Review Board, which decided at a Wednesday meeting to continue discussing the project at its September meeting. 

Manchester Zoning Administrator Peter Brabazon declined to comment while the project is under review. 

Kyle Medash, floodplain manager for the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, said the plan to place fill in the flood hazard zone to raise the building will reduce space for water to flow in the event of a flood. 

Medash advised the town and developer to conduct a water movement analysis to assess if there would be adverse effects like additional flooding in the area due to the project’s current plan and if the development requires a redesign. 

Carroccio told VTDigger he will pursue a water flow study per the state’s recommendation. He said he is following “rules by the book” under the priority housing exemption and seeking permitting through local review, including designing a stormwater system and planning to build one foot above the base flood elevation.  

At the Development Review Board meeting, Michael Fernandez, district manager for the Bennington County Conservation District, said he and his team are opposed to developing a large-scale housing project in the “historic floodplain.”

Fernandez urged that any future hydrological study be based on a 500-year floodplain standard, not a 100-year standard. He said it is a “much more realistic standard, given the current rapid change of our climate and the increasing numbers of these extreme flooding events that we are seeing both here in Bennington County and throughout the state.”

From a planning perspective, it is valuable to site new housing projects in areas that are walkable and have access to services and jobs — but many of Vermont’s downtowns are located in floodplains, Sen. Seth Bongartz, D-Bennington, said. The requirements to qualify for the Act 250 exemption attempted to straddle that “tension” between the need to invest in “healthy downtowns” and prepare for flooding, he said. 

Priority housing projects are allowed in flood hazard areas, which are considered areas of “rising water” that tend to have less severe flooding than areas in river corridors and floodways, Bongartz added.

Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale, D-Chittenden Southeast, who helped draft the priority housing project exemption, said the legislation is aimed at reducing duplication of permitting and appeal processes at the federal, state and local levels that create cost barriers for building multiunit affordable housing projects.

With many municipal downtowns near rivers and in flood zones, Ram Hinsdale said priority housing projects allowed under the exemption are subject to flood resilience building standards.

“Many new buildings that have been built by our affordable housing community withstood floods in areas where most of the other homes were inundated and potentially destroyed,” Ram Hinsdale said. “We are living in a new reality where we can’t simply make land off limits or we will not have land that people can build multifamily housing on.”

Federal Emergency Management Agency reports indicate that low-income areas with older housing stock were disproportionately impacted by past flooding events in the state.

Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, said the affordable housing crisis has spurred “irrational exuberance” for development without properly considering environmental impacts.

Smith said she is concerned that low-income Vermonters living in affordable housing units built in flood hazard zones without Act 250 reviews will be affected by future flooding and the town will be liable for flood remediation costs. 

She said she would like to see the legislature repeal Act 181 and instead strengthen Act 250. 

“It is disturbing to see that the legislative intent was to allow priority housing in flood hazard areas,” Smith said. “How does it make any sense at all to put people in harm’s way?”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Neighbors worry Manchester priority housing proposal will worsen flooding.

A federal judge in Vermont last week dismissed with prejudice a 2023 lawsuit filed by the  American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of John Chinnici, who previously accused Bennington police and town officials of violating his constitutional rights.

The parties to the lawsuit “successfully reached a mutually agreeable resolution of this matter to avoid further litigation,” according to a statement provided by the Vermont American Civil Liberties Union spokesperson Emily Hagan-Howe. 

“The Parties make no admissions regarding liability or the strength or weakness of any claim in reaching this resolution,” the Vermont ACLU statement read. “The Parties look forward to moving past this lawsuit and will have no further comment.”

Court filings did not include the conditions of the mutually agreed upon resolution. The case stems from Chinnici’s arrest and prosecution after two masked men robbed a Bennington convenience store at gunpoint in 2016, according to the ACLU complaint. 

The complaint claimed that Bennington police, including Chief Paul Doucette and detectives Lawrence Cole and Anthony Silvestro, targeted Chinnici despite him not matching witness descriptions of the armed robber. 

The complaint describes police officials using “a variety of coercive and unlawful tactics” to charge him with the crime. Chinnici has maintained his innocence, and his federal conviction in 2017 for the robbery was subsequently dismissed, according to the complaint.

The civil case regarding the alleged violations of Chinnici’s constitutional right to be free of unlawful search and seizure was originally filed in January 2023 in Bennington Superior Court but was moved to federal Vermont district court in March of that year. 

On July 30, 2025, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union, town and police officials submitted a request for the case to be dismissed with prejudice, which means the parties cannot bring the suit back to court. The attorneys also asked for the parties involved to bear their own legal fees. The federal Magistrate Judge Kevin Doyle approved the stipulated motion, closing the case last week, as first reported by the Bennington Banner.

Doucette declined to comment. Neither Bennington Town Manager Stuart Hurd nor Michael Leddy, the attorney for the town and police officials, could immediately be reached for comment.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Judge dismisses lawsuit that accused Bennington police and officials of violating resident’s rights.

Nectar’s, a linchpin of the local music community and night life in Burlington, is officially closing its doors after a half-century on Main Street. The small, independent music venue served as a springboard for many acclaimed musicians over the years, notably the popular jam band Phish.  

First reported by Seven Days, the downtown staple announced its closure on social media Wednesday. An outpouring of comments offered stalwart support to Nectar’s. 

“Nectar’s will no longer occupy the space that helped shape the soul of Burlington’s music scene,” the company wrote in an Instagram and Facebook post. “While our time at this beloved address is coming to a close, the spirit of Nectar’s will live on.”

The decision came after Nectar’s took a summer hiatus starting June 8 amid waning foot traffic as a result of the ongoing Main Street construction project and public safety concerns in downtown Burlington, the company previously said.

The venue’s owners said they aimed to use the pause to envision a future course for Nectar’s.

“The energy has shifted. And for a small, independent venue like ours, that shift cuts deep,” the company said in Instagram and Facebook posts on May 8. “We believe in what Nectar’s stands for. And we believe Burlington still needs places like this — spaces that nurture creativity, foster community and keep the music alive.”

Nectar’s owners did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Burlington music venue Nectar’s closes after 50-year run .

Updated at 5:45 p.m.

The Marble Valley Regional Transit District — which operates Rutland County’s main public transportation, The Bus — is relocating the bus route’s main transfer point Wednesday due to ongoing health and safety concerns at the state-owned Rutland Transit Center. 

Environmental hazards such as animal pests and trash build-up have persisted in the center due to a lack of regular maintenance, the transit district’s Executive Director Jade McClallen said in an interview. Also, the district had to close the public bathrooms in the center due to misuse, McClallen said. 

A recent stabbing incident at the transit center last week — as reported by WCAX and the Rutland Herald — created urgency around ongoing security concerns and served as a catalyst for the immediate relocation, she said.

“The increase in illegal activity had raised concern from the community and our drivers and their families enough for us to recognize that we could no longer be down there,” McClallen said. 

For the past five years, the transit district has urged the Vermont Department of Building and General Services to maintain the “basic safety and sanitation standards of the lease agreement,” but no substantial and lasting improvements have been made at the center, according to a letter signed by the McClallen and transit district’s Board of Commissioners Chair Devon Neary.

The Vermont Department of Building and General Services received notice of the relocation Tuesday, and the Commissioner Wanda Minoli visited the center to make on-site assessments of the area that very day, according to Department of Building and General Services’ spokesperson Cole Barney.

The transit district changed the transfer point to the Rutland Amtrak train station parking lot on Evelyn Street in the interim until the center is rehabilitated, McClallen said in an interview. 

“The conditions within and surrounding the Transit Center have deteriorated to such a degree that (the Marble Valley Regional Transit District) leadership are compelled to take immediate action to protect the health and well-being of its employees and riders,” McClallen and Neary wrote. “The facility, in its current state, is not only a public health risk but a liability that undermines broader efforts to revitalize downtown Rutland.”

In the letter addressed to Gov. Phil Scott, the head of the Department of Building and General Services, the Agency of Transportation Secretary and the Rutland City mayor, McClallen and Neary urged the state to assume responsibility for rehabilitating the Rutland Transit Center for public use. 

The Rutland City leadership and the Vermont Agency of Transportation supported the relocation, according to the letter. 

While the move is temporary, McClallen said the timeframe for the rehabilitation of the center has yet to be determined, and so she does not know how long the transfer point will remain at the train station. The transit district notified the public through signs and staff stationed at the center to ensure minimal disruption of riders’ transportation plans this week, she said. 

The transit district’s administrative work, bus storage and maintenance operations are separate from the transit center, and will not be impacted by the change, she said. 

The transit district communicated with the Department of Building and General Services commissioner about the need for increased security presence, additional lighting and increased sanitation and maintenance, McClallen said. The department, the transit district and the city are working on a plan going forward, she said.

The department has addressed “many of the specific cleaning and maintenance issues,” and is working towards dealing with other problems at the facility, Barney wrote in a statement, and continues to urge the transit management staff to reach out to law enforcement when security concerns arise. 

The department is committed to partnering with lawmakers and local leaders to address the “larger public safety, mental health and addiction issues” facing the city and state, Barney wrote. 

The Rutland City Police Department has also stepped in to provide coverage of the center in the absence of state-sponsored security, and the Rutland City Fire Department and Department of Public Works has helped mitigate sanitation concerns in the past, Neary said in an interview. The Rutland City Mayor Mike Doenges has helped to coordinate meetings with partners to devise local solutions to concerns at the center, he added. 

But, Neary said, local leaders are limited in their ability to holistically address concerns, and it is the state’s responsibility as landlord of the center to provide long-term solutions to the facility’s persistent problems.

While a hard decision, Neary said the relocation to the train station parking lot is necessary for the safety of riders and staff, and he hopes it will spur further action to aid in revitalizing the city’s downtown. 

“This is a cry for help,” Neary said. “We were really left with no other option than to leave, to force the state to engage in a productive conversation that will lead to permanent solutions that benefit Rutland.”

The Rutland City mayor did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Rutland’s The Bus operator relocates due to health and safety concerns.

Updated at 6:32 p.m.

The University of Vermont Health Network announced Tuesday it will cut 77 positions, including 68 staff roles and nine leadership roles, as part of its plan to reduce expenses for the coming fiscal year. 

While some staff will remain in their roles until the end of the fiscal year in late September, other staff positions will end as soon as Tuesday this week, said Annie Mackin, the network’s spokesperson. 

The health network — which comprises three hospitals in Vermont and three in northern New York — will also not fill 69 current vacancies following Tuesday’s announcement. The network chose not to fill 120 vacant positions last year, and several hundred more positions were phased out earlier this year.

The announced staffing cuts, which amount to over $5 million in spending reductions, come a week ahead of hospital budget review hearings overseen by the Green Mountain Care Board. The state regulating body is tasked with approving the amount of patient-related income in budgets for the next fiscal year at all 14 of the state’s non-federal hospitals. 

The cuts are largely to positions not involved in direct patient care, specifically in the networkwide finance, human resources and information technology teams, said Mary Broadworth, vice president of human resources for the health network. The Vermont hospitals in the health network are Central Vermont Medical Center in Berlin, Porter Medical Center in Middlebury and University of Vermont Medical Center in the Burlington area. 

Along with layoffs, the health network aims to reduce spending through deferring capital projects, increasing efficiencies in clinical care and administrative work, reducing the number of traveling and temporary workers in favor of permanent staff, eliminating tentative, performance-based bonuses for administrative leaders, and consolidating real estate. 

The plans set forth Tuesday represent approximately $185 million in expense reductions, according to the network. The cost-saving measures will help the University of Vermont Medical Center meet its proposed $2.3 billion budget for the next fiscal year. 

University of Vermont Health Network is requesting the Green Mountain Care Board approve a nearly 8% decrease in rates charged to commercial insurers by the Burlington hospital, the largest by far in the network, according to their budget review filings. 

In recent years, the network has surpassed the Green Mountain Care Board regulated budget caps for patient revenue by millions of dollars. The regulatory board approved a settlement with the network this spring to address some of the overrages.

Staffing is the organization’s largest expense, with the non-physician workforce compensation accounting for 36 cents of every dollar spent by the network. In their effort to reduce costs, staffing cuts were “unavoidable,” Broadworth said. 

The health network aims to support the staff impacted by the cuts, including identifying other opportunities within the organization, and minimize the “impact on patient care as a result of this decision,” Broadworth said. 

Sunny Eappen, president and CEO of the University of Vermont Health Network, said the administrative layoffs and other cost-saving measures reflect the broader affordability challenges facing the health care industry in rural areas.   

“Our goal has been to be very transparent and stay focused on putting patients and communities and their health first, and keep making choices that make us be effective and efficient to support them in the long term,” Eappen said. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: UVM Health Network announces layoffs as part of budget cuts.

Built in 1771 by prominent Bennington resident and Revolutionary War Capt. Elijah Dewey, the Walloomsac Inn is the oldest lodging establishment in Vermont. 

After over 30 years as a private residence, the Walloomsac Inn had fallen into disrepair, but now the ramshackle inn at the heart of Old Bennington is set to be restored and opened to the public. 

The inn was purchased June 25 by Rafe Churchill and Casey Sunderland through a new joint venture called Place in Mind, which aims to restore historically significant properties in the Northeast and across the country. The co-founders are also part of the leadership team for the architecture and interior design firm Hendricks Churchill, and Churchill is an alumnus of Bennington College. 

“Our mission is really to resurrect these historic structures,” Sunderland said. “Hospitality happens to be a really great backbone to do that on, because you can generate revenue and open up the experience to so many more people than if it were just a private residence.” 

The restoration project will be a “significant undertaking,” so there is no set timeline yet for opening, Sunderland said. However, the duo plans to honor the existing property structure during renovations and bring the Walloomsac Inn back to its original glory shown in old postcards and photos from decades past, he said. 

Along with the Walloomsac Inn, Sunderland and Churchill acquired the Mount Anthony Seminary, a former school in Old Bennington. The co-founders plan to rebuild the historic bell tower on the property and open the building as a smaller, six-bedroom lodging near the Walloomsac Inn, Sunderland said. 

Old Bennington is a “beautiful little hamlet of Vermont that is, quite frankly, undiscovered in many ways,” Sunderland said. The duo hopes the projects will help make the Walloomsac Inn, the Mount Anthony Seminary, and, by extension, Old Bennington, into a destination where people can experience the history the area has to offer, he said.

“We’re just hoping that the town, the neighbors, the community continues to feel excited about being able to open up this to not only the Bennington community, but just travelers from far and beyond who want to come see this historic landmark,” Sunderland said. 

Shannon Barsotti, community development director for Bennington, said the Walloomsac Inn will benefit the economy of the town and region by providing a space for people to stay when visiting local notable spots, such as the Old First Church, its historic cemetery and the nearby Bennington Battle Monument — the most visited landmark in the state. 

Bennington Museum Executive Director Martin Mahoney said the Walloomsac Inn is a “long-standing staple of community life” in Old Bennington, and the restoration coinciding with the country’s 250th anniversary celebrations is fortuitous and welcome news for residents.

With a storied history, the Walloomsac Inn, known at the time as Dewey’s Tavern, served as a meeting place for the Vermont Legislature during the state’s time as an independent republic from 1771 until statehood in 1791, Mahoney said. 

The inn also hosted members of the Continental Army before the pivotal victory at the Battle of Bennington, said Jonah Spivak, the town of Bennington’s communications coordinator and chair of the Bennington Regional 250th Anniversary Committee. A member of the Dewey family, Mary Tilden Dewey, baked 80 loaves of bread to feed soldiers in the inn’s kitchens ahead of the battle, he said.

The inn was also visited by Presidents Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison through the years. After the Deweys, the inn was acquired by James Hicks who added a third floor and ballroom to the second floor in 1823. After procuring the property in 1848, George Wadsworth Robinson changed the establishment’s name from Hicks Tavern to the Walloomsac House. Another former owner, Walter Berry, added a three-and-half-story extension to the building after acquiring it near the turn of the 20th century.

The 250th Anniversary Committee looked into acquiring the property for historic preservation through a community trust, Spivak said, but noted the project is a “heavy lift” that required people “with the resources and the knowledge to pull it off” — like Churchill and Sunderland.

Spivak said he is glad the restoration of the Walloomsac Inn will serve a “public purpose” going forward and be “an incredible enhancement to the historical experience in Bennington.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the year James Hicks made additions to the inn.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Old Bennington’s Walloomsac Inn to be restored, opened to the public.

After three years of double-digit insurance premium hikes, Vermont’s two health insurers are considering reduced percentage increases for plans sold on the state insurance marketplace in 2026, citing a new state law on prescription drugs as one big factor.

The state’s health care regulator, the Green Mountain Care Board, reviews the pricing for plans qualified to be sold the following year on Vermont Health Connect, the state’s Affordable Care Act marketplace. The board held hearings on the 2026 rate proposals this week for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont and MVP, the only two insurers that sell health insurance plans there. 

Vermonters without access to an affordable health plan through an employer can purchase plans on the individual market for themselves and their families. Businesses with 100 employers or less can buy small group plans. These plans provide health coverage for fewer than 70,000 Vermonters, according to insurer filings with the Green Mountain Care Board. But the trends that lead to price increases for those health insurance plans affect other commercially available plans as well.

In their initial May filings, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont requested average premium rate increases of 23.3% for individual plans and 13.7% for small group plans.

The Green Mountain Care Board and its actuary, Lewis & Ellis, recommended BCBS consider lowering the average premium rate increases for a variety of reasons. 

After considering them, the insurer’s chief actuary Martine Lemieux wrote in a July 15 letter that the insurer is considering a reduction of 15.1% for the individual plan and 7.4% for small group plans. However, the company said it wanted to further evaluate these lower rate increases once more information is available about 2026 hospital budgets. 

Facing financial headwinds, Blue Cross has been on the brink of insolvency after a yearslong surge in the cost of insurance claims, ending 2024 with a record deficit of $62 million. 

Double-digit premium rate hikes every year are not sustainable for Vermonters, said Charles Becker, a staff attorney at the Office of the Health Care Advocate, which represents consumers at the rate hearings. That’s especially true when the hikes are “not even enough to keep Vermont’s sole home state insurer solvent given the extraordinarily high cost of care.”

MVP, which sells the large majority of its plans in New York state where the company is based and only 8% of its plans in Vermont, asked for a lower increase than Blue Cross in May and later said it would accept an even lower increase. While it hasn’t submitted a new filing, the company said it would now like the board to approve an average premium increase of 2.9% for small group plans, down from 7.5%, and of 2.8% for individual plans, down from 6.2%, MVP’s attorney Gary Karnedy said at the hearing.

MVP’s financial problems have not fully resolved, but the company trimmed administrative costs and is projected to be in the black for 2025 after years of losses for individual plans in Vermont, while still seeing losses from their small group plans, said the carrier’s top actuary Eric Bachner at the rate review hearing.

The proposed reduction in rates for MVP has a “clear and positive impact,” Vermont’s Chief Health Care Advocate Mike Fisher said during the MVP rate hearing. However, the widening divide between the cost of the plans from the marketplace’s two insurers is concerning. 

“A large and growing price variation between the two carriers has a substantial and real negative impact on many Vermonters,” Fisher said at the MVP hearing. 

That’s because federal tax credits that subsidize the purchase of individual health insurance plans on the marketplace, to an amount depending on household income, are set based on lower cost plans, Fisher explained in an interview. If the benchmark for the credits is based on the lower rate increase of MVP plans, people on Blue Cross’ plans will likely face higher premium costs due to the disparity in rate increases. 

Meanwhile, expanded tax credits for medium-income households put in place during the Covid-19 pandemic, called Enhanced Premium Tax Credit, are set to expire at the end of 2025 if Congress does not extend them. 

The enhanced subsidy “provided for a really substantial improvement of premium affordability for Vermonters,” Fisher said. He said he is worried about the return of a sharp end to all subsidies above 400% of the federal poverty line — roughly an income of $62,000 for a one-person household — once enhanced tax credits disappear. That may lead some Vermonters just over that line to forgo insurance altogether, he said.

Alongside the phase-out of the Enhanced Premium Tax Credit, Vermont officials project 45,000 Vermonters will lose access to health insurance — both Medicaid and marketplace plans — under new regulatory requirements included in President Donald Trump’s recently signed “One Big Beautiful” tax bill. 

During a public comment period, Grace Powers, 27, said she opted into a Blue Cross insurance plan because the enhanced federal tax credits made it affordable. As a result, Powers said she was able to get surgery necessary to improve her quality of life. 

With the expected sunsetting of the federal enhanced subsidies and the requested rate increases for both Blue Cross and MVP, Powers said she will no longer be able to afford any health insurance plan in Vermont. Her only access to health care will be the emergency room if her “health deteriorates enough to be treated there.” 

“Without insurance, I won’t be able to access primary and preventive care,” Powers said. “I’m urging you to reject these increases because it will make accessing any health care unaffordable for myself, my loved ones and my community.”

Bankable savings

The curtailment of Vermont insurers’ proposed premium rate increases follow a handful of health care bills Gov. Phil Scott signed into law in June. 

Act 55 curbs the amount Vermont’s larger hospitals can charge for outpatient prescription drugs, particularly injection or IV-administered drugs for the treatment of cancers or autoimmune diseases. Act 68 sets forth a long-term plan to transform the health care system, including the implementation of reference-base pricing for health care providers. Act 49 designates emergency authority to the Green Mountain Care Board to set hospital prices in case of insurer insolvency.

Michael Donofrio, a lawyer for the insurer, said during the hearing that the Act 55 cap on some prescription drugs will result in a “measurable, bankable set of savings” for the insurer in 2026.

Another Blue Cross attorney, Bridget Asay, warned that if the Green Mountain Care Board does not approve the company’s needed rate increases, it “will not reduce the cost of health care.”

“What it will do is threaten the company’s solvency and ability to serve Vermonters,” she said.

Part of why Blue Cross needs a larger increase than MVP is the insurer’s need to replenish the reserves it uses to pay claims, said the insurer’s Chief Financial Officer Ruth Greene. The company expects to place 7% of premium earnings back into those reserves, she said, calling it a “critical component” of the insurer’s financial recovery plan. 

MVP estimated that just 2% of its premiums would need to be allocated to reserves in 2026 to maintain them.

But for Blue Cross, savings are “dangerously low,” Greene said, noting the insurer took out a $30 million loan at the end of last year from its parent affiliate Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

Becker, the consumers’ attorney, said that a large percentage contribution to insurer reserves was “once unthinkable.”

Vermonters should not be “forced to hand over 7% in premiums each year for who knows how many more years in order to rebuild Blue Cross’ depleted reserves and to pay back Michigan,” he said.  

Vermonters ‘need serious relief’

A Vermonter named Melissa from Westfield said in a written comment that her family is insured through a small business plan, and pays over $1,500 a month with a $14,000 deductible. 

When asked by Becker how Melissa’s situation made him feel, Andrew Garland, a Blue Cross vice president, said it was “very upsetting.”

“That’s not what we want for our customers. The cost of care is too high,” Garland said. “We have to find a way to break that cycle and bring it down. It is not affordable.”

In the Blue Cross hearing, Green Mountain Care Board Chair Owen Foster said the state’s health care leaders came together in May for emergency talks about how to address health care affordability concerns, but produced “$0.00 of savings.”

“We have to be accountable to results right now, not just effort,” Foster said. “It’s just not okay to say to Vermonters, ‘We couldn’t come up with anything amongst all these health care leaders. Nothing we could do,’ is not an acceptable answer to Vermont right now.”

The Green Mountain Care Board asked for additional data and analysis from the two insurers as the board’s members review the insurance rate filings in the coming weeks. 

The requested hikes for small group and individual plans come after the Green Mountain Care Board approved double digit increases to the baseline for insurance premiums for large employers last month.

Former Blue Cross lobbyist Sara Teachout was appointed to the Green Mountain Care Board by Gov. Scott earlier in July, and is set to start her role July 28. Teachout will not be participating in the 2026 Qualified Health Plan rate review as the companies’ filing were submitted in May and the process started internally in the fall of last year, according to the Board’s Communication and Information Officer Kristen LaJeunesse.

At the close of the Blue Cross hearing, Foster said the board will seek to balance the risks the insurer will face without the proposed premium increases with the interests of Vermonters who “need serious relief.”

Correction: This story has been updated to reflect that Vermont’s health insurance carriers’ premium increase proposals are still under discussion. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: In hearings, Vermont health insurers and regulators work to reduce 2026 premium increases.

Vermont’s landmark education bill, signed into law this month, queues up some big changes to the state’s education system in the months and years to come. But one immediate impact is the bill’s effect on private schools, called independent schools under Vermont law.

Those changes, which went into effect on July 1 — the same day Gov. Phil Scott signed Act 73 into law — have left some independent schools and advocates uncertain, and others reeling.

Under the new law, private schools located in the state now have to pass two tests in order to be eligible for public funding. First, they must be physically located in a school district or in a supervisory union — an administrative unit made up of multiple districts — where at least one school district does not operate a public school for some or all grades as of last July.

Second, for a school to remain eligible, students funded by a Vermont public school district during the 2023-24 school year must comprise at least 25% of the student body. (Private therapeutic schools that serve special needs students are exempt from these requirements).

While some independent schools on the margins are waiting for the Vermont Agency of Education to confirm what side of the line they are on, others already know their eligibility status. 

“There’s a large number of schools that, right off the bat, are just out of the mix,” said Oliver Olsen, a former state representative and a lobbyist for the Vermont Independent Schools Association.

The population of publicly-funded students at Vermont’s independent schools make up a minimal percentage of Vermont’s overall kindergarten through 12th-grade population. Although around 9,680 students attended K-12 independent schools in Vermont during the 2022-2023 school year, according to the Vermont Agency of Education — roughly 10.5% of the total K-12 student population that year — only slightly more than one-third of those students, around 3,540, were being paid for by their public school district. 

But the issue took on a large share of attention as the Legislature crafted Act 73 this year. Public school advocates took issue with perceived conflicts of interest among lawmakers with ties to independent schools.

Meanwhile, significant limitations on the use of public funds to pay for private schools were put in place.

Olsen estimates that, under Act 73, more than half of Vermont’s independent schools that were previously eligible for public funding will now no longer be eligible.

As part of a transition mechanism in the legislation, students who were already enrolled, or were accepted to be enrolled in now ineligible independent schools before July 1, will still be eligible to receive public tuition to attend those schools through graduation.

But for future students, options will be limited going forward, Olsen said.

“H.454, now Act 73, results in the biggest reduction in access to independent schools in the history of Vermont’s education system, without question,” he said.

Uncertainty in Bennington

Independent schools have historically served more rural parts of the state that don’t have public schools for certain grades, often in middle school or high school. This dynamic has played an important role in many of the state’s supervisory unions, which function as administrative superstructures that allow otherwise distinct member school districts to share services.

A half dozen independent schools that serve mostly publicly-funded students — St. Johnsbury Academy and Lyndon Institute in the Northeast Kingdom, Thetford Academy and Sharon Academy in the Upper Valley, and Burr & Burton Academy in Manchester, among them — will easily pass both tests in the law.

But other private schools are still unsure whether they will qualify for public funding under Act 73’s new provisions. The state Agency of Education is working to validate enrollment data for the state’s independent schools and the school districts that send students to them.

Education Secretary Zoie Saunders, during a state Board of Education meeting this month, said that the validation process for eligibility remains underway. The agency set a July 28 deadline for schools to certify their 2023-2024 enrollment data with the state.

She noted during the meeting that the effective date for the new eligibility criteria “coincided with the date that this was enacted into law, so that creates a little bit of a challenge.”

Rep. Will Greer, D-Bennington voted against H.454. In an interview last week, Greer said he worried the law does not achieve what the Legislature set out to do — reduce the burden on taxpayers — and may have negative consequences for public and independent schools alike. 

In his district, the Village School of North Bennington will still qualify for the public tuition program, Greer said, but it is uncertain whether the Southshire School or the Hiland Hall School will still qualify under the 25% threshold.

It’s not the only part of the law he’s concerned about: Restricting multiage classrooms to two grade levels for kindergarten through eighth grade — one of the law’s new requirements for public and private schools alike — is certain to negatively impact the Southshire School and the Hiland Hall, Greer said, because they often place students from three grades in the same classroom. 

Many students with learning disabilities benefit from being paired with students with similar skill sets, rather than students who are in the same grade, he said. 

‘Huge impact’

Some schools already know where they stand, including The Grammar School in Putney, a small independent school serving 85 to 95 students in pre-K through 8th grade. 

The school was immediately disqualified by the 25% threshold requirement, said Nick Perry, the head of the school. “It was a non-starter for us,” he said. “It would be nearly impossible for us to reach that 25% threshold.”

While the total population of The Grammar School does not meet the 25% threshold, Perry said it would if just the upper grades were considered, rather than the school’s whole student body. 

Neighboring school districts serving the towns of Vernon, Dover, Grafton and Westminster pay for almost half of the school’s seventh and eighth grade student population every year, he said.

Perry said he has talked to parents from those towns who were looking forward to sending their students to The Grammar School for those grades. But now, those parents have fewer options and do not know if they will be able to afford the tuition without the public funding program, he said. 

The Grammar School aims to accept as many students through their financial aid program as possible, but Perry said he is “projecting a huge impact” on both their budget and school community in the coming years. 

The nearby Putney School, a high school with around 230 students, will also not be able to receive publicly-funded tuition anymore due to the new 25% floor, said head of school Danny O’Brien. There are typically only five to 10 publicly-funded students there every year, he said.

While the school community appreciated having as many Vermont students as possible at the Putney School, the school plans to continue to bring in students from Vermont through need-based financial aid. 

On the other end of the spectrum, the Long Trail School is among the independent schools that will still qualify under the two-prong requirements. The school resides in a district that does not operate a high school — Taconic & Green Regional School District — and had 73% of its student body receiving public tuitioning funds in the 2023-2024 school year, according to Head of School Colin Igoe.

Igoe noted that there are “real problems” that have risen from Vermont’s “byzantine” education funding system. But, he said, the restrictions placed on independent schools do not solve those issues and will have unintended consequences.  

Particularly, Igoe said he is concerned that the requirement for average class size minimums under the education reform legislation could cause a “devastating” impact on students’ educational experience at Long Trail and other independent schools. 

Under the law, an average of at least 10 students per classroom would be required in first grade, 12 students in grades 2 through 5, 15 in grades 6 through 8; and 18 students for grades 9 through 12. 

These class size minimums would take effect in July 2026 for the 2026-27 school year and would apply to both public schools and private schools that receive tuition from public school districts.

Igoe said there is a misconception that independent schools cost taxpayers more. No public funding goes to capital projects, such as building construction or large purchases, for independent schools, he said.

Not only is the public tuitioning program a “drop in the bucket,” Igoe said independent schools serve a “public purpose” for rural communities that don’t have accessible public school options. 

“Independent schools have stepped in to fill the gap where we don’t offer public schools,” Igoe said. “ We shouldn’t want to try to dismantle that because we’re not in competition with public schools.” 

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Hiland Hall School. Because of an editing error, a previous version of this story misnamed the Lyndon Institute.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Independent schools weigh the impact of Vermont’s new education reform law.

Updated July 23 at 4:27 p.m.

Genesis HealthCare, a prominent nursing home provider in Vermont and one of the largest skilled nursing companies in the nation, filed for bankruptcy last week. 

Genesis currently operates three long-term care facilities in the state: the Bel Aire Center in Newport, the Mountain View Center in Rutland City and the Saint Albans Health & Rehabilitation, a spokesperson told VTDigger.

There are provisions in the bankruptcy filing to ensure staff at all Genesis-owned facilities, including the three in Vermont, retain positions, pay and benefits, for residents to continue receiving care during the court proceedings, and for the company’s vendor agreements to stay in place, according to the spokesperson. 

“There will be no expected impact to patient care as a result of this filing. Our daily operations remain unchanged, and our commitment to those we serve continues uninterrupted,” the spokesperson wrote.

According to bankruptcy documents filed in the Northern District of Texas U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Genesis has racked up between $1 billion and $10 billion in estimated liabilities, including over $700 million in unsecured claims to their 30 highest creditors. This includes $324 million in a real estate loan, over $103 million in deferred payroll taxes to the Internal Revenue Service and over $12 million owed to the New England Health Care Employees Pension Fund. 

Genesis faced challenges due to legacy debt, including “approximately $8 million per month in settlement and defense costs arising from alleged personal injury and wrongful death claims, most of which date back many years,” Genesis’ co-Chief Restructuring Officer Louis Robichaux IV wrote in the court document. 

Genesis skirted bankruptcy in the spring of 2021 after the private equity-backed company ReGen HealthCare provided an influx of capital, according to a case brief filed by Robichaux. ReGen, backed by Pinta Capital Partners, is also aiding Genesis’ “exit plan” through the form of a stalking horse bid, setting a minimum price for the company at auction, Robichaux wrote.

Three New York-based owners planned to take over five of the nine facilities Genesis owned in Vermont in 2020, including Bennington, Berlin, St. Johnsbury, Burlington and Springfield, after financial struggles, Covid-19 outbreaks, neglect cases and safety violations. According to reporting by Seven Days, the New York buyers dropped their bid for the five facilities in 2021 after state scrutiny into their previous management of facilities. 

The Genesis spokesperson wrote that the company has no current ownership stake and is not affiliated with any nursing homes other than the Bel Aire Center, the Mountain View Center and Saint Albans Health & Rehabilitation. 

However, Vermont’s business database shows that limited liability companies registered to six other facilities previously owned and operated by Genesis in Bennington, Berlin, Burlington, Rutland, Springfield and Saint Johnsbury were noted as affiliates or subsidiaries of Genesis in the bankruptcy filings. 

The spokesperson did not say why these limited liability companies were listed in the bankruptcy documents. The Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living did not immediately respond to inquiries regarding the current ownership and operating companies of the six facilities. 

Genesis’ bankruptcy filing comes after the company has faced a number of controversies in recent years.

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., spoke out against Genesis in 2021, calling the $5.2 million bonus to the company’s top executive amid patient deaths and Covid-19 outbreaks a display of “unfathomable greed.”

In one of the largest nursing home settlements in the state’s history, Genesis HealthCare entered a $740,000 settlement with the Vermont Attorney General’s Office in 2020, which created a patient care coordinator position and mandated at least two years of ongoing monitoring. 

The settlement followed four reports of neglect that resulted in a resident’s death and two residents being hospitalized at the then-Genesis-operated facilities Burlington Health & Rehab, Berlin Health & Rehab and St. Johnsbury Health & Rehab. 

The Vermont Attorney General’s Office sent a letter “identifying some concerns” to Genesis when the settlement ended in 2023, and there is no present ongoing monitoring, according to the office’s Chief of Staff Lauren Jandl. However, Division of Licensing and Protection surveys reveal recent deficiencies at the Mountain View Center and Saint Albans facility. 

In a survey of the Mountain View Center in June, residents said they were questioned by a staff member following a previous complaint and feared they would face retaliation if they spoke out about their concerns with care.

Another resident reported verbal abuse from a licensed nurse assistant after experiencing incontinence, according to the report. The division’s surveyors also found that a resident diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, which affects the body’s ability to regulate temperature, reported inconsistent temperature being set in their room that caused the resident to be cold despite reporting concerns with the heating to staff. 

The division’s report stated that numerous medications, cleaning supplies and food kept past expiration dates were in view as well.

According to a January survey of the Saint Albans Health & Rehabilitation center, the division found the building had numerous environmental safety violations. The report included descriptions of cracks and bare plaster spots on walls, a displaced electric outlet, visible rust and brown stains on a heater and bathrooms with broken or no toilet paper holders and tiles that were caked in unknown substances. On April 2, the division conducted a revisit survey and found the center in compliance. 

Kaili Kuiper, the state’s long-term care ombudsman with Vermont Legal Aid, said the organization has heard complaints from residents at Genesis-operated facilities and other privately run, private equity-backed facilities in the state of poor food quality and staff turnover, which indicate challenges in providing “good quality, patient centered care.” 

Executive Director of the Long-Term Care Coalition, Richard Mollot, said the organization has tracked an increasing “corporatization of nursing home care” in which for-profit, and private equity health care providers cut costs, particularly staffing, at the expense of quality care. 

Mollot said low staffing and a lack of hours nurses have to spend with residents tend to indicate quality of care at nursing homes. Currently, the average nursing staff hours per day for residents in Genesis-operated facilities in the state is below the Vermont average and the expected amount set by the Long-Term Care Coalition.

Sam Peisch, a health policy analyst with the state’s Health Care Advocate’s Office at Vermont Legal Aid, said there is broad consensus and concern regarding increasing private equity ownership of nursing homes due to lack of quality care, staffing level and health outcomes. 

According to data with the Private Equity Stakeholder Project, 26% of nursing homes in the state are run by private equity or private equity-backed companies. With a large aging and elderly population, Peisch said Vermont faces a “dystopian challenge” with lack of viable health care and nursing home ownership and operating options.

Peisch said the state’s existing protections and transparency requirements for private equity ownership in health care and nursing homes are weak. He said Vermont Legal Aid is advocating for a bill, introduced this past legislative session, to increase health care transaction oversight and hopes the bill gains traction next session.

Peisch said the main objective of the bill is to arm regulatory bodies with strong state statutes to act upon when requirements for transactions are not being followed, to “prevent some of the worst harms” that result from the private-equity model in the health care industry from happening in Vermont in the future.

Corrections: The photo for this story has been updated to show a facility currently operated by Genesis HealthCare. Additionally, an earlier version of this story misspelled Richard Mollot and Sam Peisch’s last names, as well as ReGen Healthcare.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Nursing home operator with troubled Vermont facilities files for bankruptcy.

A Superior Court judge dismissed, in part, the Pownal Center Community Church’s complaint against the town in an ongoing property rights dispute.

Through a lawsuit filed in April, representatives from the church aimed to shed light on the property rights of the historic building established in 1790 and connected land, and called for the town to renounce any outstanding ownership claims to the property.  

In the July 2 ruling, Judge David Barra asserted the church failed to demonstrate sufficient rights to the congregation’s site of worship for all but the carriage shed adjoining the property. 

The church has 30 days to amend the complaint to bring forth “factual allegations” and better explain the “‘inherent vagueness and complexities of title to land in Vermont’ that may entitle (the) Church to relief or quiet title,” according to the ruling.

In the original complaint filed April 4 by attorney Evan Chadwick, the church claimed it had rights to the property because it had continuously used the building for more than 15 years.

Chadwick further argued that the church held legal rights to the property going back to 1790, when the church was first established, as the land was set aside as a glebe, or parcel for the Church of England, in 1760. 

The town stopped using the church basement for meetings in 1991 and built a municipal office in 2021. The church has maintained the property since 1951 and held insurance on the property since 1980, according to the complaint. 

Chadwick also pointed to the church trustees’ and Pownal community’s possession of a deed to the carriage shed on the southwest corner of the property since 1905, according to the complaint. The town refused to sign a quitclaim deed for the carriage shed property in 1976, agreeing that the town “held no title interest” in that section of the property.

In the July ruling, Barra wrote that the “Church has only stated a plausible claim for the ‘carriage shed’ portion of the Property.”

Barra ruled that the assertion of the property as glebe land does not mean the church has a legal right to the entire property. The church also did not establish a legal claim under the state’s time limit for land recovery and exemption of public lands from recuperation through continuous use, Barra ruled.

Pownal town officials and Chadwick declined to comment.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Judge partially sides with Pownal in church property rights dispute.

Slow-moving showers and scattered thunderstorms that began Thursday morning are expected to continue throughout the afternoon and evening, which could lead to flooding in low lying areas in the state. 

Some parts of the state may see no precipitation while other areas may see 1 to 3 inches of rain or more, said Matthew Clay, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service’s Burlington office.

The National Weather Service issued severe thunderstorm and flooding warnings for Vermont, and meteorologists expect up to 60 miles per hour wind and quarter-sized hail, particularly in the northwestern portion of the state and Lamoille County. 

Clay said the weather conditions could bring localized lightning, torrential rain, and “some gusty to damaging winds.”

“All the thunderstorms today are going to be capable of producing very heavy rain and frequent cloud-to-ground lightning,” Clay said. 

The storm is forecast to move eastward across the state Thursday afternoon and evening, with the most severe conditions expected to hit between 3 and 8 p.m., he said. 

While watching for flash flooding, Clay said the weather service has only observed standing water flood conditions in areas in the state, which are flood conditions that are slower developing and less life-threatening. 

National Weather Service Meteorologist Seth Kutikoff said the weather event predicted is not a cause for high alarm as it is a “typical type of thunderstorm that we get at least a few times a year.” Hot conditions are expected to follow in the coming week, he said.

He also recommended that people in Vermont remain near shelter areas throughout Thursday and stay aware of rain and wind conditions.

“I just recommend people to stay calm,” Kutikoff said. “We’re not expecting any high end impacts.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont to see scattered thunderstorms throughout Thursday.

In his early years, Dante Anderson was in awe of the graceful yet forceful karate moves he saw in action movies — particularly the 2010 “Karate Kid” film with Jaden Smith and Jackie Chan. 

Now, he’s headed to the world championships. 

Sherlyn Anderson, a single mother who moved to the U.S. from Nicaragua, said her son Dante blossomed when he enrolled in a dojo to learn karate at 5 years old. She continued to support his dream and dedication to martial arts throughout the past eight years, Anderson told VTDigger.

This winter, the 13-year-old of Rutland City was the only Vermonter to qualify to represent the U.S. in the World Karate-Do Alliance World Championships held in Malta in March 2026. There, Anderson said he plans to compete in the advanced category, performing a Kata — a solo choreography of karate techniques called Shito-ryu — and a weapons demonstration called Kobudo, with a staff called the kai-bo.

Anderson will be joining a dozen others representing the U.S. at the World Championships, said José Dimacali, the sensei for House of Samurai in Londonderry, New Hampshire. Anderson’s positive and respectful demeanor stood out to him when selecting people for Team USA, Dimacali said, adding that Anderson has a “great mat presence” and that “he knows how to carry himself inside the ring.”

“When we’re teaching him the new style of karate, there was no negativity. He was so eager to learn,” Dimacali said.  “For me, that’s the most important.”

Anderson reigns undefeated in martial arts championships, placing first in all Twin State Championships, joint state competitions in Vermont and New Hampshire this year. He also achieved a triple crown victory this year — winning three events in one season including form, sparring and weapons, Dimacali said.

Anderson practices his craft every day, he said, and trains alongside other kids from age 6 to 17 at the dojo.

“It doesn’t matter what age you are. As long as you’re in the tournament team, you got to bring it as hard, you got to train as hard as the other kids. So if you’re younger, you got to train as hard as the old kids,” Anderson said. “To get into this level, I needed to be the best for myself.”

Anderson is the only Vermonter attending regular online classes with his dojo the House of Samurai, said Rebecca Dimacali, program director for House of Samurai, and he trains twice a month in person at the Londonderry dojo, which demonstrates his commitment to training for the World Championship and the team.

Anderson said he is versed in his performance techniques, but he hopes to increase the speed of his movement through his training regime in preparation for the World Championships.

Along with the skills he has learned through his karate training, Anderson said he has also learned the principles of discipline and self control that apply to all interactions in his life. He said his motivation to keep practicing karate is to make his mother “proud and happy.”

After Anderson competes in the World Championship, Sensei José Dimacali said he plans to invite Anderson to advance from the state Twin Valley Championships to compete in regional competitions, recognizing his skill and future in martial arts. 

Once he reaches the age of 18, Anderson said, he hopes to use his skills to compete in the professional championships and eventually open his own dojo to spread the knowledge of martial arts to communities that do not have access. 

There is a sense of camaraderie in martial arts practice, Anderson said, and he finds the encouraging environment helps everybody on his team thrive. 

“In the dojo, we all support each other and we push each other,” Anderson said. “What my sensei says is: ‘If you’re at the dojo or even if you’re at the tournament, if you want to be better, push others.’”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Rutland’s karate kid is only Vermonter picked for world championships.

Two weeks after the state confiscated 39 horses from a horse farm in Townshend, all the horses are stable, but some have a longer “road to recovery” than others, according to Jen Straub, executive director of Dorset Equine Rescue. 

The two horses with critical condition when seized from Friseians of Majesty are still in a veterinary hospital as of Wednesday — a gelding with severe dental issues due to lack of routine dental care and a mare with an acute hoof abscess, Straub said. 

The majority of horses are healing from some combination of lice, mites, roundworm infection and a skin fungus called rain rot. 

“That’s all just due to neglect, not getting proper grooming and bathing, not getting regular care,” Straub said.

After the fourth and largest seizure of horses from the Friesians of Majesty horse farm in two years, Windham County State’s Attorney Steven Brown said the ongoing animal cruelty investigation is a “fairly unique case.” 

The horse farm’s owner, Robert Labrie, pleaded not guilty to criminal charges of animal cruelty and violations of conditions of release on June 18. 

The state is exploring options including a permanent or temporary order barring Labrie from possessing horses, Brown said. The state attempted to request that Labrie turn over the horses still on his property to a third party as a condition of his release at an arraignment hearing, but that motion was denied by the judge due to lack of authority to issue the order, he said. 

The first seizure in July 2023 has been adjudicated, and those 13 horses have been forfeited to be rehomed, Brown said. The second forfeiture request by the state, after 20 horses were seized in September 2024, is also still pending. The state also seized two horses from the farm in June of 2024. In the second forfeiture case, the state filed 16 misdemeanor animal cruelty charges under Vermont’s animal cruelty statute related to the condition of the 20 horses.

The state will file another forfeiture order for the most recent seizure to begin the process of finding permanent homes for the 39 horses, according to Brown. He expressed gratitude for the rescue agencies that have assisted the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department and taken in horses.

Since the most recent seizure, 25 of the 39 horses have been relocated from their first stop at Dorset Equine Rescue to the Gentle Giants horse farm in Maryland. They are “visibly looking better in even just a week,” said Lorin Grey, the director of growth at Gentle Giants.

“They’re starting to gain weight,” Grey said. “They’re out on pasture and have access to hay, feed, grain, so they are all doing well and settling in, and we’re starting to address any specific medical issues.”

Grey said the organization was contacted by Vermont’s animal welfare partners for help because some stallions needed “specialized housing and individualized turnout,” a practice of allowing horses to graze in a pasture or paddock.

Gentle Giants horse farm is “one of the only rescues on the Eastern Seaboard that are equipped to house a large number of stallions and a large number of horses in general,” she said. 

The Maryland horse farm also took in seven stallions after the seizure from Friesians of Majesty in September 2024. Those horses have all now recovered, but Grey said they were “several hundred pounds underweight” and many had “ongoing, longtime skin issues that hadn’t been addressed.”

The Maine State Society for the Protection of Animals took in six horses on June 20 after they were originally transferred to Dorset Equine Rescue. Peg Keyser, the society’s advancement director, said the horses’ body condition scores were between 1 and 2 — the low end of the scale. Keyser said the horses’ feet and teeth were neglected and their skin was riddled with ticks and parasites, and in at least one case “raging dermatitis.”

The horses have already seen improvement since arriving and are going through veterinary evaluations and refeeding processes tailored to the horses’ individual challenges, Keyser said. But, the neglect and malnourishment the horses experienced for an unknown amount of time has caused compounded stress and chronic health conditions that will likely have lasting effects, she said. 

A more efficient and effective system

Rep. Chea Waters Evans, D-Charlotte, said the previous seizures at the Townshend horse farm, along with the death of goats within her district in 2023, drew attention to the shortcomings of the state’s animal welfare system.

Those two cases prompted Waters Evans to cosponsor H.626, which was signed into law in June 2024. The law created a Division of Animal Welfare, a new governmental arm tasked with creating a more efficient and effective animal welfare system, she said. 

“There are a lot of people who were trying to solve similar problems in a parallel fashion, instead of collaborating together,” Waters Evans said. “Hopefully if we have a more streamlined system, we’ll be able to stop some of these problems before they start.”

Lisa Milot, the state’s newly appointed division director, said she does not have a formal role in the active animal cruelty investigation, but is tasked with creating a comprehensive plan to improve the state’s animal welfare system in the coming months. 

Milot said Vermont has lacked uniformity and a clear process for law enforcement entities in different parts of the state. There is a need to strengthen and simplify the process of reporting, investigating and seeking recourse through the courts in animal cruelty cases, she said. 

“There’s no real consistency in how the cases are handled,” Milot said. “There’s some large cases that have come up in recent years, and (the state) wants both a better approach to investigating and prosecuting them, but also to, long term, preventing these sorts of cases.”

Milot said animal owners accused of animal cruelty are still allowed to own and breed animals while cases are pending because of the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty.

Along with a general backlog of cases in the Vermont courts since the Covid-19 pandemic, Milot said animal cruelty cases can take years to complete because crimes against humans are prioritized over property related crimes. 

Horses and other animals are considered by the state to be “special property,” so animal cruelty cases are litigated before crimes related to inanimate objects. Milot said the “biggest thing that would help with rescues, with the state expense on these cases is speeding up the rate at which the animal can be rehomed.”

Milot said there is no state-run impound center to house animals during animal cruelty cases in Vermont, and that would be very expensive to create. Partner rescue groups must foot the bill to house, feed, care and treat medical conditions of seized horses before they are forfeited and can be adopted, she said.

Milot said she has been reviewing the animal welfare laws in other states, such as legislation to expedite animal cruelty cases and reduce some of the cost burden on rescue agencies. Her goal is to “come up with a plan and procedures that can help alleviate those sorts of strains, but without causing extra strains on taxpayers,” she said.

Straub, of Dorset Rescue, said there has been productive collaboration between her rescue and the state investigators at the Fish & Wildlife Department and law enforcement. But, she said would like to see more attention and investment in the state’s animal welfare system overall.

“There’s a lack of resources for implementing the laws. There needs to be more people that have time to go do welfare checks and follow through on these neglect cases,” Straub said. “There are a lot of animals suffering across the state, and it’s not being dealt with as timely as it should be.”

The Fish & Wildlife Department, the Agency of Agriculture Food & Markets and the Vermont State Police all declined to comment due to the ongoing animal cruelty investigation. 

Labrie’s attorney also said she could not comment while the case is active, and Labrie did not respond to requests for comment.

Read the story on VTDigger here: 4th seizure of horses from Townshend farm highlights animal welfare system’s ongoing gaps.

This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin and VTDigger reporter Greta Solsaa, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and Vermont Public.

Chris Duprey was looking for a tent. One large enough to shelter his fiancée, his toddler and his 6-year-old kid.

It was time to check out of the Motel 6 in Colchester, where the family had lived for the better part of a year. The motel voucher that had allowed them to stay here was expiring.

“I’m hoping for a prayer right now,” said Duprey, 47, as he lingered in the motel parking lot on Tuesday morning. Packing up the room proved too painful. “We need a prayer.”

This latest round of evictions from the motel program has specifically targeted families with children and people with acute medical needs, like those who are homebound or receiving cancer treatment. It is the result of the expiration of an executive order that extended motel stays for those groups, deemed by Gov. Phil Scott’s administration as the most vulnerable to harm if they lost shelter.

Over 800 people — including nearly 300 children — were slated to exit the program on Tuesday, according to data provided by the Department for Children and Families. (An additional 138 people were scheduled to exit the program between June 23 and July 1 because their vouchers had timed out, according to the department.)

A back injury Duprey suffered after a fall while on a construction job had left him unable to work — and addicted to painkillers. He and his partner, Jessica Delary, 31, each had a criminal history stemming from a period when both struggled with substance use disorder, which proved a barrier to getting an apartment, he said. 

But for over a year, both Duprey and Delarey had been in recovery. They were focused on staying clean for the sake of their kids. Last month, their toddler had celebrated his first birthday at the motel where he’d spent most of his life, with a little party under the trees at the edge of the asphalt. They had recently landed a rental voucher, and were waiting to hear if a landlord they’d spoken to would accept it, but nothing was final.

By 11 a.m., the couple had decided to pay $80 out of pocket to stay at the motel one more night. They’d been calling around to service providers trying to find a tent, and hadn’t landed one yet. Purchasing one themselves would eat into the $900 a month they survive on from state welfare funds. And then there was the cost of paying for a campsite with water and electricity during the peak summer season.

“We can’t even afford a campground,” Duprey said.

State action 

The executive order, signed by Gov. Scott in late March, granted a three-month extension for families with children and people with acute medical needs who were sheltered in motels “to allow time for DCF to ensure” they have access to services and supports needed to transition to a long-term housing, shelter, or health care placement.

Without the order, those groups would have faced eviction when the motel program’s more flexible winter rules ended for the season in April. Democratic leaders in the Legislature had sought an extension for everyone sheltered through the program at that time, but Scott, a Republican, twice vetoed their effort — opting instead to protect a much narrower cohort his administration deemed most vulnerable. 

Yet homelessness advocates had not anticipated a mass exodus upon the executive order’s expiration. Because the order stated that existing time limits on motel stays “shall be waived” between April and June, they expected people would have more days left to use after the order lifted, forestalling the next wave of evictions until later this year.

But DCF sent out notices in early June specifying that nights sheltered under the order would in fact count towards each individual’s 80-day clock.

In recent days, service providers, Burlington city leaders and several lawmakers have issued letters to Scott imploring him to rescind those early-June notices, effectively giving motel residents more time in shelter. They have also called upon the governor to declare a state of emergency and direct officials to create shelters for people exiting the motels, among other demands.

So far, Scott has not taken action. A spokesperson for his office told VTDigger/Vermont Public in mid-June that he did not intend to extend the executive order.

Miranda Gray, deputy commissioner of DCF’s economic services division, said in an email that the department is encouraging people slated to lose their motel rooms to connect with local housing agencies. State employees and contracted case managers “have been working with the households housed under the (executive order) to identify plans for July 1st,” Gray said. 

DCF has not provided data on how many households it has helped ensure alternative accommodations for past June 30.

Last fall when Vermont saw a wave of families evicted from motels, the state opened a new family shelter at the Waterbury Armory. State officials shut it down on June 13. Asked if officials are considering reopening the shelter, Gray said that “all potential opportunities, including those involving existing facilities, are considered as part of this ongoing effort to expand safe and appropriate shelter capacity.”

Overnight parking and tents 

In at least one instance, a municipality is preparing to offer a sanctioned location for people to park their vehicles and sleep overnight.

On July 4, the city of Burlington will begin allowing up to twelve vehicles to park overnight at Perkins Pier, at the foot of Maple Street along the city’s waterfront. Individuals will need to get a permit from the city by noon on the 3rd in order to begin using the site the following day, said Sarah Russell, Burlington’s special assistant to end homelessness.

Those interested in using the site can reach out to Russell directly at 802-829-6326 or srussell@burlingtonvt.gov Monday-Friday. People will need to vacate the lot during the daytime. The city plans to install an ADA-accessible porta-potty onsite, but the site does not have access to electricity or running water. 

Russell called the sanctioned parking area a “pilot” project and a “harm reduction strategy.” Last fall, the city offered campsites at North Beach to families exiting motels, but now the popular campground is booked for the season, she said.

In Burlington and elsewhere, service providers are handing out tents to people in need.

At the Econo Lodge in Rutland Tuesday morning, Brenda Siegel, executive director of End Homelessness Vermont, offered supplies for people exiting the motel voucher program like tents, sleeping bags, blankets and tarps that the organization had purchased.

End Homelessness Vermont and other emergency providers have been “repetitively drained” after each motel exit, Siegel said. The need around the state far outweighs the resources the organization has available to give to the unhoused, she said.

“Their likelihood of survival is not high. I think they should at least have the right to get to and through a fair hearing to appeal this,” Siegel said. “Our system is failing, because it really means that it’s impossible for people to argue for their rights, and that’s not what should be happening right now. We should have a system that works.”

Casey Stevens, 38, of Rutland, said she had been staying at the Econo Lodge for six months after staying at hotels through the motel voucher program intermittently for a year and half. 

Stevens said she finds it unfair to be required to exit the hotel without sufficient time to figure out her plan. She did not know where she would be staying the night Tuesday, she said, but had reached out to BROC Community Action to inquire about shelter for the next few days. 

Stevens gained sobriety with the help of the organization Better Life Partners in Rutland and was in the process of interviewing for jobs, she said. She was planning to earn her bookkeeping certificate, but exiting the hotel may jeopardize her progress on those goals, she said. 

“Being able to be here has helped me become sober. I secured my plan. I actually signed up to go back to school this fall,” Stevens said. “I fear losing it all again.”

Editor’s note: Information about Chris Duprey and Jessica Delary’s family being affected by flooding has been removed from this article because it could not be verified to meet editorial standards.

Read the story on VTDigger here: ‘We need a prayer’: As executive order ends, hundreds of Vermonters exit motels.

A former employee is suing The Greenwood School in Putney for allegedly permitting sexual harassment and discrimination and breaching an implied contract. 

The trial date has been set for March 1, 2026.

A former administrative assistant for The Greenwood School alleged that the school’s administration failed to adequately address recurrent sexual harassment that she experienced from a student, according to the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court of Vermont by attorney Theodore Kramer in June 2024. 

The employee resigned from her post at The Greenwood School — a specialized boarding and day school, serving neurodivergent students from grades 6 to 12 — in January 2024 due to the “sexually hostile environment.”

The complaint describes a student repeatedly “inappropriately touching” the former employee as well as making comments, facial expressions and engaging in “other acts of a sexual nature” directed at the former employee between May and November 2023. 

When the former employee reported the first incident, in which the student pulled her toward him and touched her buttocks, the dean of students said that the student had “‘mommy issues’ and was looking for a connection,” the complaint states. 

The complaint goes on to describe several times when the student touched her breasts, buttocks and other parts of her body despite the former employee asking the student to stop, and after she reported the instances to the administration. 

The former assistant “specifically recalls the head of school telling her to ‘get over it’ and ‘nothing is ever solved by worrying about what has already happened’” after she wrote a letter to the administration about her concerns in November 2023, according to the complaint. 

The administration and faculty at the Greenwood School were allegedly aware that the student had a pattern of “inappropriately touching faculty members, students and parents of students,” according to the complaint.

The student was barred from the administrative building by the head of the middle school in September 2023 after the student engaged in “continued sexual assaults and harassment,” the complaint states. 

The former employee continued to bring her concerns to administrators after harassment occurred, but the school “took no action to investigate or correct the hostile work environment,” the complaint states. 

The lawsuit argues that the alleged hostile work environment interfered with the former employee’s ability to execute her work duties, negatively impacted her mental and physical wellbeing and led to her resignation. 

The complaint also asserts the school breached an implied contract established in the school handbook by “failing to uphold policies and procedures” and not safeguarding the former administrative assistant from the “many examples of harassment” that occured during her employment. 

The former employee is seeking redress in the form of monetary compensation and attorneys fees as well as any “further relief the Court deems proper” during the trial scheduled for next year. The Greenwood School Head of School did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The attorney for the former employee declined to comment while the case is pending in court.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Lawsuit accuses a Putney therapeutic school of creating hostile work environment.

An unidentified man drowned in Lake Champlain near Red Rocks Park in South Burlington Wednesday, the third reported drowning in Vermont in the span of a week.

A park visitor noticed an unresponsive man underwater near the base of the Red Rocks cliffs Wednesday night and called 911. The South Burlington dispatchers received the call at approximately 7:43 p.m., and the South Burlington Fire Department arrived around 5 minutes later, according to a South Burlington Police press release. 

Fifteen fire department first responders helped locate and retrieve the man in water 10 to 12 feet deep. No form of identification was located when the man was recovered, according to police. 

The South Burlington Police Department is seeking information regarding the man’s identity and events leading up to the drowning. There is no evidence of foul play, according to the police press release.

“The deceased is described as a white male, bald with hazel eyes and a husky build, wearing a grey T-shirt with a white-over-black stripe pattern, navy blue athletic shorts, grey socks, and Cloudrunner grey running shoes with white soles,” the press release stated. 

The South Burlington Police Department, the Burlington Fire Department, University of Vermont Rescue, Colchester Technical Rescue and the U.S. Coast Guard aided in the search and recovery. The Saint Michael’s Fire Department and off-duty South Burlington personnel monitored the city of South Burlington during the crew’s absence. 

In the press release, South Burlington police reminded the public to practice water safety, including learning and refreshing swimming skills, learning CPR and water rescue techniques, wearing U.S. Coast Guard-approved life jackets and supervising inexperienced swimmers. 

A Burlington High School senior Eljak Menjwak drowned at Bartlett Falls in Bristol on Saturday, and Darren Kemp, 30, drowned in Lake Champlain on Tuesday night. 

Amid a heat wave in Vermont this week, people have likely sought relief from extreme temperatures in bodies of water. The Department of Health maintains a list of more than 400 places to cool off this summer. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Man drowned in Lake Champlain near South Burlington’s Red Rocks Park .

Vermont State Police have identified the man who drowned Tuesday in Lake Champlain as Darren Kemp, who was originally from South Africa. 

Kemp, 30, lived and worked at Basin Harbor Club, which spans parts of Vergennes and Ferrisburgh. On Tuesday, Kemp swam in Lake Champlain near the club, but did not emerge from under the waters, according to a police press release. 

State Police received word of the drowning incident around 9:25 p.m. and reported to the scene along with the Vergennes Area Rescue Squad and the Addison, Charlotte, Ferrisburgh and Vergennes fire departments. First responders carried Kemp from the waters to shore, but efforts to revive him were not successful. 

Kemp was pronounced dead at approximately 10:10 p.m, and the Chief’s Medical Examiner’s Office in Burlington will perform an autopsy to determine the cause and manner of death. There is no evidence the drowning death is suspicious, according to police.

This is the second reported drowning in the state in the span of a week, after an 18-year old Burlington High School student Eljak Menjwak died in the New Haven River in Bristol on Saturday. 

Like other states in the East, Vermont has been hit with extreme heat, humidity and thunderstorms this past week, leading many people to seek relief in or near bodies of water.

The state’s Department of Health has identified more than 400 cooling centers where Vermonters can seek shelter from heat waves this summer. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Police identify man who drowned in Lake Champlain.

Updated at 7:42 p.m.

RUTLAND CITY — Hundreds of people over the weekend toasted to the smashing success of the Rutland County Pride festival at Bailey’s Place, a new bar and lounge space for LGBTQ+ residents in the Marble City. 

Several thousand people attended the third annual Rutland County Pride event on June 21 to enjoy the day’s activities and nearly 100 vendors provided food and goods for the crowd, said William Fourney-Mills, executive director of the Rutland County Pride Center. 

Around 500 people dropped by the bar, which opened in April, according to Bailey’s Place co-owner Faith McClure.

Bailey’s Place is only one of a handful of bars in Vermont founded for the purpose of creating a space for their local LGBTQ+ communities, according to McClure. In 2021, Fox Market and Bar in East Montpelier ended a nearly 15-year drought of LGBTQ+ bars in the state, and Foxy’s in Barre joined the slim ranks of Vermont’s LGBTQ+ bars in 2024.

The building for Bailey’s Place on Evelyn Street was briefly Prouty’s Parlor ice cream shop and before that housed the bars Strangefellows, which closed around the Covid-19 pandemic, and Shooka Dookas, which closed in 2006, according to McClure.

While Shooka Dookas and Strangefellows evolved into de-facto gay bars, Bailey’s Place is the first designated LGBTQ+ bar to open in Rutland City, McClure said. 

The 21-year-old owner said it was important for her to designate Bailey’s Place as an LGBTQ+ lounge in Rutland, as she hopes to create a space that is “all inclusive.” Bailey’s Place gained its moniker from her family’s nickname for McClure “Buddha Bailey“ — dubbed for her laughing buddha statuesqueness as a newborn. The shortened name Bailey stuck, and she associates the bar’s name with being “fat and happy,” she said.

McClure said her stepfather and co-owner Fred Watkins helped rehabilitate the Bailey’s Place property, which occupies a historic building in Rutland City’s downtown near the train station. `

“There’s a lot of spaces downtown that I feel like could be revitalized to be welcoming community spaces like this,” McClure said. “I’ve had other queer people in the community come up to me, and they’ll say this to me directly going, ‘Oh, there’s not really a whole lot of spaces in Rutland. If there is the closest one is like, three hours away.’”

During Rutland’s Pride festivities over the weekend, the bar and lounge offered karaoke, a DJ and drag performances, along with food and drinks throughout Saturday night. McClure said 25% of the proceeds from sales of its cocktail special, a strawberry lemon drop, are set to be allocated to the Rutland County Pride Center. 

“People loved the performers over at Bailey’s. People were digging karaoke,” she said. “We were really happy that everyone had a good time.”

During the daytime Pride events, McClure also operated a Bailey’s Place booth along with dozens of vendors lining the streets of Rutland City’s downtown.

The festival organized by the Rutland County Pride Center kicked off with speeches from U.S. Rep. Becca Baliant, the first openly LGBTQ+ person to represent Vermont in Congress; Christine Halquist, the first transgender Democratic nominee for Vermont governor; Mia Shultz, the president of the Rutland County NAACP; and city officials.  

McClure said people at the Pride festival were “pretty focused on the joy” of the day but that it’s important to celebrate Pride amid growing concerns over government actions limiting LGBTQ+ rights across the country.

“It lets people know that in these hard times with our country, with what the government’s doing with the rights of those in the LGBTQ+ community, that there are still people like Bailey’s (that) are going to be around for as long as the community will allow us to be,” McClure said. 

Fourney-Mills said they are concerned about the funding cuts to federal agencies that hinder services for the LGBTQ+ community in the case of the Trump administration ending a specialized LGBTQ+ youth sucicide prevention hotline and investments in HIV-related research. The Rutland County Pride Center continues to offer resources and community events year round, Fourney-Mills said.

“In times like these, we need to stand up and let ourselves be seen as a community,” Fourney-Mills said. “One thing about the queer community is the resiliency and that we do come together to celebrate together, and especially now with the attacks on trans youth and trans adults, we know we need to make sure that all of our community is safe.”

McClure said her long-term goal is to expand or move into a bigger space to accommodate dancing and larger celebrations. In the meantime, McClure said she and her team have been working one day at a time to renovate the bar, refine the food and drink menu, and host trivia nights and other events to attract new customers. 

“It’s nice to know for the Rutland community that there’s something in your backyard,” she said.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Rutland’s 1st LGBTQ+ bar shines during the city’s Pride celebrations.

In the latest development in an ongoing animal cruelty investigation, the owner of the Friesians of Majesty horse farm was charged Tuesday with animal cruelty and violating conditions of release. Authorities seized more than three dozen horses from the property. 

Thirty-nine horses were removed from a private Townshend business as part of an investigation by the Fish & Wildlife Department Game Warden Service, Department of Public Safety’s Animal Welfare Division and Vermont State Police, Joshua Morse, a spokesperson for the Fish & Wildlife Department, confirmed to VTDigger in a statement.

“The 39 horses have been moved to a private partner that can provide adequate space and care,” the statement read. 

Friesians owner Robert Labrie faces a maximum penalty of one year in prison and a $2,000 fine under the animal cruelty charge. The charge for violating conditions of release could result in up to six months in prison and a $1,000 fine.

Jen Straub, executive director of Dorset Equine Rescue, said this was the fourth time she has assisted an investigation at Friesians of Majesty. The rescue has taken in 74 horses from the farm since the first seizure in 2023, she said. 

Straub said she has aided in animal welfare investigations numerous times over the years in Vermont and other states, but Tuesday’s operation was by far the most horses the organization has taken in one seizure. 

Approximately 25 horses remain on the farm, she said. 

Straub said the seized horses had various ailments, including emaciation, skin infections or other injuries, some that were left untreated. Two of the 39 horses needed to be hospitalized, she added.

According to a probable cause affidavit, Detective Sgt. David Taddei for the Department of Fish & Wildlife’s Warden Service wrote he visited the Townshend farm Tuesday after obtaining a warrant to investigate potential animal cruelty. 

State Veterinarian Kaitlynn Levine accompanied Taddei and identified horses that were underweight. The duo said they witnessed “unacceptable conditions for horses to be living in,” according to the affidavit. 

“They did not have access to shelter and there was no natural shelter,” the affidavit stated. “Their entire paddock was mud and horse feces, with the exception of a large rock in the upper area of the paddock, which all the horses were competing to stand on.”

Labrie was arrested Tuesday morning on an animal cruelty charge. Labrie was ordered to appear in court in Brattleboro the next day, and then he was released from the Westminster State Police Barracks on the condition that he not return to the farm until after the state had completed its investigation.

However, Labrie returned to the property Tuesday afternoon while the search was ongoing and was arrested a second time, according to a probable cause affidavit by Warden Noelle Kline. 

Labrie refused to sign citation documents as well as the bail and conditions of release orders after both arrests, according to court filings. 

Straub said some of the 39 horses will remain at the Dorset rescue, while others are set to go to rescue farms in Maine and Maryland while the case proceeds. 

“To absorb 39 horses when you already have a full rescue full of horses is really, really challenging,” Straub said. “We are really grateful that a couple of other rescues were able to step up and offer help to take in some of the horses, so once they’re medically sound and stable, we will be transferring some to them.”

Straub said a judge ordered the 13 horses seized in 2023 to be forfeited to Dorset Equine Rescue, and most have since been adopted. But the horses seized in 2024 from the Townshend farm have not been forfeited through the court system and are still under the rescue’s care.

Dorset Equine Rescue is tasked with covering all medical bills, transportation, food and staff to care for the horses because neither the state nor federal government provide funding for animal welfare organizations in Vermont, she said.

Straub said she purchased a 178-acre property in Rupert after a fundraiser last year. She set up temporary fencing and structures on the property for the influx of horses from the Townshend farm. Straub plans to launch a fundraiser to build permanent structures to expand the rescue’s capacity and better meet the high need to care for rescued horses.

“We get asked to take horses every single day, whether it’s from a neglect case or the owner surrenders (because) they can’t afford the horses,” Straub said. “The need is huge.”

Clarification: This story has been updated to reflect which state departments are investigating the Friesians of Majesty horse farm.

Read the story on VTDigger here: 39 horses seized from Townshend farm in latest animal cruelty investigation.

After 12 years of legal disputes, the town of Bennington agreed to support two controversial solar projects before the state, following lawsuits from the developer that jeopardized a major local revitalization effort. 

Plans for two adjacent solar projects on a forested, 27-acre plot between the Apple Hill residential area and highway have garnered pushback from residents over the years. The main concerns have been that the project locations are in violation of town plan and zoning rules and could negatively affect the scenic hillside and neighboring community.

The proposed Apple Hill and Chelsea solar fields — each designed to produce 2 megawatts of power — have gone through multiple iterations but were repeatedly denied by the state’s Public Utility Commission. 

But solar developer and lawyer Thomas Melone has continually appealed the commission’s decision to dismiss his plans to the courts, though the Vermont Supreme Court struck down his appeals in the past, sending the decision back to the commission in 2019. There are four administrative agency appeals regarding the applications for Apple Hill Solar LLC and Chelsea Solar LLC pending in Vermont Supreme Court.

Thomas and his son, Michael Melone, have also filed lawsuits against state regulators, Bennington residents, the town of Bennington and the Apple Hill Homeowners Association. Even Gov. Phil Scott has been caught in the legal crossfire, according to Vermont Public.

Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, said she views the amount of litigation initiated by the solar developers as unusual and unprecedented in the history of Vermont utilities cases.

Bennington resident Dianna Leazer said at a June 9 Select Board meeting that locals and the town had “successfully defended our beautiful small town from a corporate solar developer who would scar our hillside with a huge commercial size solar development.” Leazer said residents “deserved to know all the factors that led to this decision” to ratify the agreement.

What’s in the agreement?

In a special Select Board meeting on June 3, the board voted 5-1 to ratify the settlement, agreeing to direct the town’s planning commission to consider rezoning the land as rural residential instead of rural conservation. 

“There were a number of factors and risks in either accepting the agreement or rejecting it,” Select Board Chair Tom Haley said at the June 9 meeting. “We want to make clear that after consultation and in consideration of the town’s goals and needs, the Select Board approved the settlement agreement.”

According to the settlement, the town agreed the two projects are in a “preferred area,” are not prominently visible on a hillside, do not violate the town plan or town documents and do not have “adverse regional impact.” The town agreed to support the Melones’ various iterations of Apple Hill and Chelsea solar projects under consideration by the Public Utility Commission and the Vermont Supreme Court, as long as the projects maintain the same footprint or less.

“The town, having had an opportunity to fully review and assess the solar projects, agrees that it is not under any duress (economic or otherwise) and stipulates and agrees that the projects are in a ‘preferred area,’” the settlement stated.

Under the terms of the agreement, the Melones agreed to drop six lawsuits against the town, including an Open Meeting Law complaint and appeals regarding the Bennington High School redevelopment project —  a yearslong plan to transform the vacant building into affordable housing, office spaces and a hub for child care and community resources under a private-public partnership.

The father-son duo also agreed not to file or threaten any lawsuit regarding the redevelopment project or the “validity of the Town Plan” against Bennington. 

The town supported different versions of the solar development plans in 2018 after making changes based on public input in which the Melones agreed to drop the legal challenge to the town’s energy plan, damage claims and allegations of constitutional rights violations. But, the Public Utility Commission rejected those versions of projects.

‘Critical juncture’

Lawsuits the Melones filed against the town regarding the Bennington High project placed pressure on the town to support the solar projects, according to court documents filed by the town’s attorney and local officials. 

In a now-dropped lawsuit, Thomas Melone under PLH Vineyard Sky LLC, challenged the town’s support for the Bennington High School redevelopment, calling it a “municipal waste” due to an alleged lack of site remediation and the funding structure of the project.

The complaint, filed May 2 in the Superior Court, also argued the town’s 10-year tax stabilization agreement for the $54 million project violated the Vermont Constitution’s proportional taxation clause by shifting the tax burden to residents. 

In a May 26 affidavit, project developer Zak Hale said a lead bank investor who was set to provide $15 million was spooked by the pending lawsuit and paused funding on May 21. According to Hale, the lawsuit came at a “critical juncture,” jeopardizing construction just after it began on May 20. Hale wrote that the project could collapse, putting him at risk of bankruptcy and the town at risk of losing $1.5 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds. 

Assistant Town Manager Dan Monks wrote in a separate affidavit that Melone had filed repeated lawsuits to pressure Bennington into supporting his solar projects, most of which courts have found baseless. Monks said Melone indicated he would withdraw the complaint if the town backed his plans and the “meritless complaint” threatened the future of the project unless it was resolved. 

On May 20, town attorney Merrill Bent filed an emergency motion to stay discovery in the civil case before the Vermont Superior Court, asserting that the lawsuits challenging the Bennington High School redevelopment was part of a “spate of litigation against the town” to gain state approval of the solar projects.

This litigation waged against the town included seven state court and three federal court actions and “meritless accusations” against the town’s counsel and town officials, Bent wrote. According to the motion filed by Bent, the Melones also engaged in “ongoing, repeat threats to bury the town in lawsuits” under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the False Claims Act.

“The Plaintiff, along with its counsel, Thomas Melone, continue to weaponize the courts against the Town of Bennington in their singularly focused effort to force the Town to support their solar projects,” Bent wrote.

The community’s response

At the June 9 meeting, Leazer expressed disbelief after learning Bennington settled with the Melones, saying it’s apparent that “the Benn High redevelopment project was the major catalyst to ratification.”

“Essentially, if not ratified, the solar developer would continue to sue the town and delay the Benn High redevelopment project indefinitely, because the solar developer can, because their pockets are deep and they are attorneys,” Leazer said. 

Leazer also expressed concern that the Melones could sue the town again if the agreement is nullified. Under the terms of the settlement, if the Bennington High project falls through or is not finished by the end of the year, both sides would be allowed to sue each other over any unrelated issues.

Smith said the Melones can also sue the town again if the town does not begin the process of reclassifying the parcel as rural residential within 10 days of ratification under the terms of the agreement. The Select Board has referred the discussion to the town’s planning commission, which plans to meet June 18. 

Peter Lawrence, a retired attorney and Apple Hill resident, raised concerns at the June 9 meeting about how the settlement was ratified. He said the meeting violated Vermont’s Open Meeting Law by not disclosing the agreement to the public before ratification and not allowing the public to offer comment at the meeting.

Lawrence urged the Select Board to rescind its decision and hold another meeting “at which the public can be fully informed of all the details of the matter being considered and there be opportunity for public comment.” 

But Monks said at the June 3 meeting that settlements deliberated in executive sessions are exempt from the law and are required to be negotiated outside of the public, so agreement could not be disclosed unless it was approved. Board member Ed Woods added that the meeting agenda was only warned for the ratification vote, not for public comment, so the board could not open the meeting for public discussion.

Thomas Melone said he’s pleased the disputes with the town have been resolved.

“My view is that the open meeting law was satisfied,” he wrote in a statement to VTDigger. “The Select Board took the vote in a public meeting and my view is that with respect to litigation that is all that is required under section 313 (of the Vermont statute).”

Bill Knight, Bennington resident and president of the Apple Hill Homeowners Association, said at the June 9 meeting that the two solar farms will be an eyesore for the town, as the elevation of the plot would make development visible from tourist attractions such as the Bennington Battle monument, the Mount Anthony Country Club and Welcome Center.

Thomas Melone said the last time the Public Utility Commission denied the petition for a Certificate of Public Good, it was due to the project fence’s partial visibility during off-leaf seasons. “That is no longer the case,” he wrote in an email. He added that concerns that the projects will be visible from the Welcome Center are “simply counterfactual.”

State Rep. Mary Morrissey, R-Bennington, said she was concerned the agreement did not stipulate the plans the solar developers could implement. She said the area is contaminated with PFOA, also known as perfluorooctanoic acid, and that previous iterations of the solar development plan included blasting the ledge of the area which would further spread PFOA into the air. 

The Bennington region has the most severe PFAS contamination problem in the state, and PFOA groundwater and soil contamination has spread and increased over time in the area, according to research published this year. 

Melone said he thinks the PFOA issues were addressed in testimony submitted to the Public Utility Commission in 2018 by a senior hydrologist, who studied the groundwater and soil and concluded that the projects were unlikely to cause PFOA levels to rise in Apple Hill’s residential drinking water wells. 

A Public Utility Commission final order in September 2018 recommended the commission find no evidence that the projects would exacerbate PFOA groundwater contamination, but denied the Certificate of Public Good. 

Smith said the commission is tasked with making the final decisions regarding the solar projects. After years of rejections by the commission and the Vermont Supreme Court, Smith said the efforts of the developer to gain town support “does not mean that the projects will ultimately be approved.”

Resident Lora Block expressed concern that the Bennington Select Board and Planning Commission may reclassify the site and that the Public Utility Commission could reverse its stance to support the projects if the zoning is changed. 

“The town has certain aesthetic standards, and this sort of development will be visible from everywhere, from the highway and from the Bennington monument and from the beautiful golf course,” Block said. “The reason why we’re trying to prevent these solar farms is not because we’re against solar, but because the siting of these are against our town plan.”

Clarification: This story has been updated to clarify the conditions under which the town and solar developer could resume legal action, and the correct title of the Public Utility Commission.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Bennington settles with solar developer, sparking community uproar.

After years of groundwork, a treatment center for opioid use disorder is set to open on Depot Street in downtown Bennington this week. 

The opening will be a “real game changer for Bennington,” expanding access to methadone treatment and opioid use disorder recovery services in the region, said Kelly Dougherty, deputy commissioner of the Vermont Department of Health.

The department has sought to open an opioid treatment program in Bennington for many years, but the Covid-19 pandemic and challenges finding a provider and location stalled progress, Dougherty said. The department is grateful to work with the Bay Area Addiction Research Treatment program as the operator of the Bennington-based center offering medication-assisted recovery treatments, counseling and other support services, she said. 

The Bay Area Addiction Treatment program runs similar centers in Berlin, St. Albans, St. Johnsbury and Newport.

The Vermont Department of Health provided a $3.9 million grant to help cover startup and operational costs of the program’s Bennington center. The grant will also help cover the cost of treatment for those without insurance through July 2026. The department does not want health insurance to be a barrier to access recovery resources, Dougherty said. 

The center plans to open for clients starting Thursday, assuming its first shipment of medication arrives Wednesday as planned, she said. 

Opioid treatment centers like this one must meet specific federal guidelines and safety measures, such as Drug Enforcement Agency regulations, so the department is glad the team has made it through “all those hurdles” and that the project is “going to be opening very soon,”  Dougherty said. 

Placing the center in downtown Bennington is intended to make  the path to recovery easier and  prevent further loss of lives to opioid use disorder in the region, Dougherty said. According to Department of Health data, rates of opioid-related death of Bennington County residents have fluctuated over the past decade, “but certainly there is a high need in the Bennington area,” she said. 

Vermont’s model for opioid use disorder treatment follows the design of a “hub and spokes,” Dougherty said. Hubs are where people can regularly access methadone to treat opioid use disorder. Spokes are primary care providers, where people can be prescribed buprenorphine and transition to longer-term treatment, she said. 

While Bennington has several spokes or primary care providers, Bennington Town Manager Stuart Hurd said residents have had to travel long distances to Brattleboro, Rutland or North Adams, Massachusetts, to receive methadone treatment. Now, locals can stay in their community while on the path to recovery, he said.  

Lorna Mattern, chief executive officer of Bennington’s United Counseling Service, said health service providers and advocates in the region have been asking for a hub location in Bennington for more than five years. Mattern said the United Counseling Service is glad the community has access to methadone treatment locally.

“With access to treatment in their own community, individuals in recovery can lead fuller, more stable lives — free from the burden of daily out-of-town travel,” Mattern wrote in an email statement to VTDigger. “This means they can stay close to home, maintain employment, and spend more meaningful time with their families, all while receiving the support they need on their recovery journey.”

Bennington Select Board Chair Tom Haley said the new treatment center was a long time coming and can help break down roadblocks to residents receiving necessary medicine. 

“We — like every other town in the country — are struggling with ways to help people with substance use disorder, and this is just one more way that we’re going to be able to do that,” Haley said. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Opioid use disorder treatment center poised to open in downtown Bennington.