By STEVEN JUPITER
BRANDON—At a combative early-morning meeting on Thursday, May 1 at Brandon Town Hall, the Trustees of Public Funds (TPF) faced intense accusations of impropriety and mismanagement. The allegations came from a group of town residents determined to make clear to TPF, and to the public, that they believe TPF have violated their fiduciary duty to the town.
TPF manages a fund originally bequeathed to Brandon by Shirley Farr, one of the town’s wealthiest residents when she died in the 1950s (her former home is now the Lilac Inn on Park Street). Vermont law stipulates that money left to municipalities must be managed by independently elected trustees.
These elected trustees are generally known as Trustees of Public Funds and are tasked with managing the bequests and distributing the income the trusts generate according to the original terms of the donors’ wills. In Brandon, the three elected Trustees are currently Laura Miner, Tanner Romano, and Courtney Satz, all of whom have served multiple terms as trustees.
The allegations leveled against TPF fell into two different, albeit related, categories. First, a general concern that TPF have strayed too far from the original terms of Farr’s bequest in the distribution of the trust’s income. Second, a specific accusation that TPF have engaged in self-dealing by distributing income from the trust to entities with which the trustees are personally involved.
Town Manager Seth Hopkins was first to address the trustees. Reading a prepared statement, he held that Ms. Farr’s will stipulated explicitly that the bequest go to the town of Brandon as a municipality and not to non-municipal organizations or entities based in Brandon. All requests to TPF for funding must, he said, come from the municipality. Moreover, he held that the income from the trust must be used first and foremost for municipal sewage and sanitation.
Mr. Hopkins based his assertion on the language of Farr’s will, which stated that two-twentieths of her estate would be left to “the town of Brandon, Vermont, to be used by it primarily for proper sewage disposal, drainage of swamps and other sanitary improvements and any amounts not needed and expended for such purposes shall be used for spraying trees or in the general improvement of the village in ways not sufficiently provided for by taxation.”
Mr. Hopkins argued that “the town of Brandon, Vermont” could mean only the municipality and that any grants awarded to non-municipal entities therefore violated the terms of the trust.
Recently, TPF has awarded thousands of dollars in grants to numerous non-municipal entities, including The Reporter, the Brandon Museum, the Forest Dale Cemetery, and the Brandon Free Public Library, among others.
“The Trustees cannot elect to distribute money from the trust, no matter how deserving they deem the recipient, if Miss Farr’s bequest does not speak to [the] purpose [of the request]”, said Mr. Hopkins. “This is important because only the Town of Brandon itself exists to serve every taxpayer, every resident, every family living under its jurisdiction without limitation of benefit,” he continued. Non-municipal entities, he stated, served only subsets of the Brandon community and thus should not be entitled to funds that Ms. Farr intended for the benefit of all.
Mr. Hopkins then requested that TPF take some time to reconsider their approach to the trust and undertake a “fundamental reordering” of their role in managing it.
After Mr. Hopkins’ statement, Mr. Romano asked whether Mr. Hopkins intended that TPF entertain only funding requests that come directly from the town.
“Yes,” replied Mr. Hopkins. “Through me.” He reiterated that “the town” referenced in Ms. Farr’s will was the official municipality only and could not be interpreted to include non-municipal organizations.
The town of Brandon currently spends over $1,000,000 annually to run its wastewater treatment facility on Union Street and maintain its sewer lines. Mr. Hopkins argued that all the annual income from the trust, which usually totals between $20K and $30K per year, could easily go toward reducing the burden on taxpayers.
After Mr. Hopkins returned to his seat, other members of the community addressed the Trustees to express their displeasure and even anger. Several attendees called for the mass resignation of the Trustees, accusing them of having failed their constituents by diverting the income of the trust away from sewer- and sanitation-related purposes. One attendee even suggested that the Vermont Attorney General open an investigation into breach of fiduciary duty and “clear malfeasance.”
The Trustees did not respond at length but did note that they believed their management of the trust had been in accordance with legal guidance they had received from Brandon attorney James Leary after Mr. Leary had reviewed Ms. Farr’s will in 2019. Before 2019, the will had not been reviewed by an attorney since 1975, said Mr. Romano.
The Trustees were also criticized for holding their public meetings in non-public spaces and at inconvenient times, making it difficult for the public to attend and monitor TPF’s activities. The May 1 meeting, for example, had originally been slated to take place at the offices of Naylor & Breen, of which Mr. Romano is a principle, until public pressure compelled TPF to move the meeting to the Selectboard meeting room at Brandon Town Hall.
The Trustees noted that attendance at the May 1 meeting far exceeded what they were accustomed to, with roughly 15 people in the room at 8:30 a.m.
A more specific accusation against TPF was reiterated at the meeting as well. A particular TPF grant of $20K for a feasibility study for a new community recreation center had already become a matter of concern for many Brandon residents because Mr. Romano was personally involved in the project for which the study was intended.
The community center project, known as Valley Community Center (VCC) and estimated to cost over $12 million to construct, was made public last fall when Mr. Romano approached the Otter Valley school board about acquiring a 10-acre parcel of unused school property on which to build VCC.
TPF had committed a total of $20K toward a feasibility study for the project, although TPF says only $10K of that amount was ultimately disbursed for expenses incurred before the project ground to a halt after a public vote denied VCC the ability to acquire the 10-acre site at the OVUU School Board annual meeting in February.
Hundreds of people attended that meeting specifically to vote against the proposal. If it had gone forward, VCC would have had two years to secure funding for the construction or the land would remain with the school district. Additionally, VCC would have had to approach all the constituent towns VCC intended to serve in order to secure their financial participation. A successful vote in February would not have committed any town to any financial contribution or obligation toward the project.
Nonetheless, Mr. Romano’s involvement in VCC—he was the point person for the project at the February school board meeting—raised concerns that he was acting unethically by voting to award $20K for a feasibility study for a project he was personally involved with.
Moreover, residents were concerned that if the project had gone ahead, Mr. Romano would stand to personally profit because of his co-ownership of Naylor & Breen, one of the most prominent construction companies in Vermont. Some residents claimed that the VCC project was designed to benefit Naylor & Breen and Mr. Romano.
Mr. Romano has stated that the request for the $20K came from the Otter Valley Activities Association and that VCC had not even organized at that point. He has also stated that if VCC had approached TPF for any additional funds after his involvement, he would have recused himself from those deliberations and votes.
An ethics complaint has been filed with the state against Mr. Romano. The state’s ethics law tasks the local Selectboard with investigating ethics violations by local officials. The results of the Brandon Selectboard’s investigation have not yet been made public.
Brandon Selectboard members Doug Bailey and Cecil Reniche-Smith also addressed the Trustees, though in a more supportive tone. Mr. Bailey encouraged the Trustees to “hang in there” and to “take the opportunity to reboot.” Ms. Reniche-Smith stated that not everyone present at the meeting held the same sentiments about TPF. Ms. Reniche-Smith is one of two Selectboard members who have been investigating the ethics complaint. The other is Jeff Haylon, who was also present at the May 1 meeting.
The Trustees moved to adjourn the meeting without considering the funding requests that were on the agenda: a request from the town for the wastewater treatment facility and a request from the Brandon United Methodist Church for remediation of its bell tower. The Trustees stated that despite their belief that they had acted in accordance with the terms of the trust, it would be inappropriate to consider any new requests until they had additional clarity on their obligations and constraints under the terms of Shirley Farr’s will.
TPF have scheduled another public meeting for Thursday, May 15 at 5:30 p.m. in the downstairs meeting room at the Brandon Town Hall. The agenda for that meeting is posted on the Brandon town website. It makes clear that the Trustees plan to address the allegations made on May 1.
The Trustees also plan to read a statement at the May 15 meeting. A copy of the statement was made available to The Reporter.
In this statement, the Trustees stated that they will consider all the feedback provided by the community. However, they reject Mr. Hopkins’ belief that only the town can request money from TPF, stating that this position “directly contradicts the Last Will and Testament of Ms. Farr.” They also said they were surprised by Mr. Hopkins’ stance, since the current Trustees manage the trust as it has been managed “for the last 65 years.”
Finally, the Trustees stated that they were “greatly disappointed in the personal attacks that were demonstrated” at the May 1 meeting and that they were concerned such behavior would dissuade others from seeking public office. They asked town leadership to establish a public forum where officials can receive constructive feedback without “deterring hardworking individuals who are looking to give back to our community.”
