Vermont
Auditor finds state bungled oversight of Jay Peak EB-5 projects in massive fraud
State Auditor Doug Hoffer released a 69-page report on the Jay Peak EB-5 fraud last week that finds state oversight of foreign investor funded projects in the Northeast Kingdom was marked by “misplaced trust, unfortunate decision-making, lengthy delays and missed opportunities to prevent or minimize fraud.”
The Jay Peak fraud is the largest in Vermont’s history and involved hundreds of investors from around the world who were offered a path to a Green Card in exchange for a $500,000 investment to create jobs in an economically depressed region of the United States − in this case Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom − under the federal EB-5 program.
Jay Peak President Bill Stenger traveled the world to meet with investors, ultimately raising about $400 million for eight projects at Jay Peak and Burke Mountain ski resorts, as well as in Newport. Federal prosecutors found more than $200 million of those funds were misused, with up to $37 million going into the pocket of Jay Peak owner Ariel Quiros.
Quiros attorney Bill Kelly was found to have received up to $4 million in investors’ money that was “not legitimately earned.” Both Quiros and Kelly pled guilty to a multi-year wire fraud scheme and concealing material facts in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency. Quiros also pled guilty to money laundering.
Stenger pled guilty to a single felony count of knowingly and willfully submitting false documents to the Vermont Regional Center (VRC), the state-sponsored entity through which all EB-5 projects were approved. Stenger was not convicted of illegally taking investors’ money, but the government argued he too had a financial motive beyond the “glory” of delivering unprecedented economic development to the Northeast Kingdom, as he was expecting to receive a stake in Jay Peak Resort, as well as more than $1 million from another EB-5 project in Newport.
“Three individuals were ultimately convicted of felony offenses related to the fraud, the State’s reputation was bruised by national press coverage, and in July Vermont taxpayers learned they would foot the $16.5 million bill of a global settlement reached between the Vermont Attorney General and a group of EB-5 investors,” Hoffer wrote in a newsletter accompanying the release of the report.
‘Structural design flaw’ sets state up for mishandling oversight of Jay Peak EB-5 projects
The Vermont Regional Center gave a veneer of legitimacy to the Jay Peak EB-5 projects that Hoffer said was ultimately unjustified because of a “structural design flaw” in the way the VRC was set up.
When the Vermont Regional Center was created, oversight was given to the Agency of Commerce and Community Development, which had an immediate conflict of interest, as it was both promoting the EB-5 program and regulating it. To make matters worse, then Gov. Peter Shumlin participated in a promotional video for Jay Peak in which he said the state was auditing the resort’s EB-5 projects, which was not the case.
Hoffer reports the ACCD didn’t find out about the video until two years after it was being shown to potential foreign investors “with this misleading and confusing claim about the State’s due diligence.”
More: A ski resort, a dream and greed: How a $350M fraud happened in Vermont’s poorest region
“The (Vermont Regional Center) did not print a retraction on its website to clarify that the State was not performing financial audits of EB-5 projects, but instead merely reviewing and signing off on project-related employment data,” Hoffer wrote in his newsletter.
$13 million in missing EB-5 funds fails to trigger investigation by state authorities
Hoffer said the state also failed to require audits when concerns about Jay Peak’s EB-5 projects were raised by Douglas Hulme of Rapid Visas USA, a Florida firm that created and promoted the original Jay Peak securities offering materials. Rapid Visas ended its relationship with Jay Peak in 2012, saying it no longer had confidence in the accuracy of representations made by Jay Peak or in the financial status of and disclosures of the partnerships.
“In a telephone call the firm told the ACCD Secretary (Lawrence Miller) that $13 million was missing from Jay Peak’s bank accounts,” Hoffer wrote. “The hint of fraud offered an opportunity for ACCD to seek help from the (Vermont Department of Financial Regulation). They didn’t.”
Instead, Hoffer wrote, Miller asked Stenger about the allegations.
“Stenger denied them and offered records in defense,” Hoffer wrote. “The ACCD Secretary said he was satisfied with the documentation Stenger provided and dropped the matter. With so much at stake, though, due diligence should have included more than a review by a non-auditor of records hand-selected by Stenger. In fact, the U.S. Attorney later determined that the records Stenger provided covered up how the defendants misused investor funds.”
Hoffer: There are other situations where state agencies have conflicts of interest that could cause problems
The ACCD didn’t involve the Department of Financial Regulation in oversight of the Jay Peak EB-5 projects until late in December 2014. Once the DFR began investigating, along with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the massive fraud in the Northeast Kingdom began to unravel, leading to the convictions of Quiros, Stenger and Kelly.
“Unfortunately, EB-5 is not the only program for which Vermont’s state government has assigned a state agency duties that present similar conflicts,” Hoffer concludes in his newsletter. “Farm-based water quality combines both promotion and enforcement in the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets. Economic development grants are frequently promoted, then reviewed and funded, by ACCD.”
Hoffer calls on state officials and legislators to “dedicate themselves to reforming system flaws like these wherever they occur.”
Contact Dan D’Ambrosio at 660-1841 or ddambrosi@gannett.com. Follow him on X @DanDambrosioVT.
Vermont
Springfield man charged with fentanyl trafficking in Vermont
WESTMINSTER, VT. (WWLP) – Two suspects, including a man from Springfield, were arrested in Vermont in connection with drug possession and trafficking.
Vermont State Police stated that at approximately 12:37 p.m. on Thursday, a trooper observed a motor vehicle violation on I-91 in Westminster and conducted a traffic stop. It was discovered that the passenger, identified as 48-year-old Kenneth Piller of Los Angeles, California, was wanted for drug-related offenses.
The driver, identified as 21-year-old Chantz Dudley of Springfield, Mass., was also detained, and both suspects were brought to the State Police Barracks.
Troopers seized the vehicle and executed a search warrant, during which time they located suspected crack cocaine and fentanyl. Piller was turned over to Rutland City Police custody, and Dudley was sent to the Southern State Correctional Facility in place of $30,000 bail.
Dudley was charged with possession of cocaine 1oz+, fentanyl trafficking, and transporting fentanyl into the state.
Local News Headlines
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Download the 22News Plus app on your TV to watch live-streaming newscasts and video on demand.
Vermont
State audit finds delays and gaps in Vermont’s food and lodging inspections – VTDigger
The Office of the State Auditor found significant shortcomings with how the Vermont Department of Health reviews complaints related to food and lodging establishments, according to a recent report.
The report is the first audit of four planned for the coming months by Auditor Doug Hoffer and his staff, part of an effort to assess how the state government responds to Vermonters’ complaints.
The department’s Food and Lodging program is responsible for ensuring that Vermont restaurants, hotels, and other similar establishments, follow the state’s health and sanitation regulations and protocols. The program provides licenses and inspects more than 6,000 food establishments and regulates lodging facilities, while addressing the complaints it receives from the public.
The audit selected 45 complaints for review out of the 1,081 complaints the program received between 2022 and 2024. The types of complaints that come in include allegations of unsanitary conditions, bed bug infestations, inadequate cooking and contaminated food equipment. Inspectors have to first verify if the complaints are true, and if so, recommend corrective actions.
However, the audit found that inspections were not always conducted within the required timeframe, and, in some cases, inspectors did not follow up to verify if the problems were resolved. Of the complaints reviewed, 16 of them were not investigated in the timeframe required. Seven out of the 10 complaints with more serious allegations were not investigated within the required two days. Two of them were not investigated at all.
Additionally, inspectors closed 18 of the 26 complaints that required corrective actions without confirming if the problems had been resolved. Hoffer said this does not necessarily mean that the owner of the establishment did not address the problem but that the inspectors did not visit the place again to check if they did.
“If you’re calling for a corrective action for a serious problem, you need to make sure that it’s been done and documented, and they were kind of short on that,” Hoffer said.
The audit also found that the Department of Health doesn’t measure the performance of the Food and Lodging program, which is a state requirement. The program is also missing specific policies and procedures for handling complaints.
Hoffer said the auditor’s office will follow up in one year and again in three years to see if the department has implemented their recommendations to improve the program.
The public complaint system evaluated in the audit is just one part of the work carried out by the program, according to Liz Wirsing, the senior program manager for Food and Lodging.
“The report evaluated a small sample of the hundreds of complaints that we receive and follow up on every year, so sometimes other priorities have to take precedence for protecting public health,” Wirsing said.
Still the recommendations are helpful, and the program is already working on implementing them, she said.
“We appreciate the public reaching out to us and sharing their concern,” Wirsing said, adding that people should continue to file complaints. “It’s important information, and it does help alert us sometimes to things that need some follow-up.”
Vermont
Vermont state employees’ union files labor complaint over Gov. Phil Scott’s return-to-office plan — and sues – VTDigger
The union representing Vermont state employees is turning to two legal venues to challenge Gov. Phil Scott’s order that many of its members return to the office in person.
On Nov. 10, the Vermont State Employees’ Association filed a charge with the state’s Labor Relations Board alleging the Scott administration skirted a union demand to enter formal bargaining over the return-to-work plan, in violation of labor protection laws. The plan will require many employees to come into the office at least three days a week.
The union also filed a separate grievance with the Labor Relations Board arguing that parts of the plan violated the collective bargaining agreement it has in place with the state.
READ MORE
Then, on Nov. 12, the union filed a lawsuit in Washington County Superior civil court asking a judge to bar the Scott administration from implementing its workplace plan — set to take effect Dec. 1 — until the labor board adjudicates the union’s complaints.
The union wrote in its lawsuit that “neither the unfair labor practice charge nor the grievance is capable of being decided” by the labor board before Dec. 1. The suit seeks a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction that allows state employees to continue working remotely.
Steve Howard, the union’s executive director, said in an interview Wednesday that he hoped the suit would at least slow the implementation of the governor’s directive. He said he thought a hearing could be held on the lawsuit as soon as next week.
The legal challenges mark a significant escalation in the monthslong fight between the union and the administration over the plan to have state workers, with some exceptions, return to the office. The union contends that the hybrid work mandate will cause experienced employees to quit, decreasing the quality of state departments’ work.
At the same time, administration officials say that the order will improve government services by boosting collaboration and helping to preserve institutional knowledge. They’ve argued Vermonters want government workers to be present in-person.
In a statement Thursday, Amanda Wheeler, a spokesperson for the governor’s office, said the union’s legal challenges had no impact on Scott’s support for the plan.
“The Administration’s decision to implement this standard is well within our authority,” Wheeler wrote. “The Governor’s position on returning to a hybrid work standard has not changed, he continues to believe human connection is an important part of employee engagement, as well as team building and learning from each other.”
According to court filings, after the administration formally announced its return-to-work plans in late August, it wrote to the union in September requesting a meeting to discuss the plans and hear the union’s concerns. In that letter, which is attached to the lawsuit, John Berard, the state’s director of labor relations, said the plan did not need to be the subject of formal bargaining. That’s because the planned hybrid work requirement was permissible under an existing teleworking policy for state employees, he said.
READ MORE
But the union doesn’t see it that way. In court filings, the union contends state leaders agreed to remote working arrangements for their employees, starting at the outset of the Covid-19 pandemic, that did not fall under the stipulations of the teleworking policy. Those arrangements “have become an established condition of employment which the State is not free to change” without entering formal bargaining, the union wrote in an Oct. 24 letter to the state. It demanded, in that letter, that bargaining take place.
Berard then wrote the union back Nov. 10 saying the state’s position had remained unchanged, according to court filings. That’s the same day the union filed its challenges with the state Labor Relations Board.
The legal challenges are set to play out as the state has expanded its workspace ahead of the planned return to office for many employees. On Monday, it signed leases for three new office spaces in the privately owned Pilgrim Park complex in Waterbury, which records show would be used by workers at the state Agency of Human Services.
That agency has been facing a shortage of office space at the nearby Waterbury State Office Complex, where much of its operations are based. The shortage could delay the restart of in-person work for some employees past Dec. 1, officials said previously.
The state is set to pay about $2.3 million to lease the new office space over the next five years, according to the leases.
-
Business6 days ago
Fire survivors can use this new portal to rebuild faster and save money
-
World4 days agoFrance and Germany support simplification push for digital rules
-
News5 days agoCourt documents shed light on Indiana shooting that sparked stand-your-ground debate
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week ago
Here is how Rethink Coalition envisions future improvements to I-65/I-70 South split
-
World1 week ago2% of Russian global oil supply affected following Ukrainian attack
-
World5 days agoCalls for answers grow over Canada’s interrogation of Israel critic
-
Austin, TX1 week agoWoman dies after vehicle veers off road, hits her at East Austin bus stop
-
Business4 days ago
Amazon’s Zoox offers free robotaxi rides in San Francisco

