Connect with us

Vermont

In Vermont, small town meetings grapple with debate on big issues

Published

on

In Vermont, small town meetings grapple with debate on big issues


Tuesday is town meeting day in Vermont. Municipalities in New England and elsewhere are increasingly grappling with major national and international issues at the local level.

JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

JOSEPH PREZIOSO/Getty Images

If you haven’t lived in certain New England towns, it can be hard to fathom their centuries-old direct democracy-style Town Meetings, where everyday residents vote on mundane town business such as funding for schools, snow plows and road repairs.

These days, voters are also being asked to weigh in on national and international issues, for example, demanding the de-funding of ICE, and condemning “the unprovoked attack and start of an illegal and immoral war against Iran.” It’s all fueling a separate – and fierce– debate on what towns ought to be debating.

Advertisement

“When you have people sleepwalking into an authoritarian regime, it’s up to us to sound the alarm,” insists Dan Dewalt, an activist in Newfane, Vermont, one of several communities where residents scrambled to draft a resolution against the Iran war in time for their annual Town Meeting on Tuesday.

Local resolutions are a uniquely effective tactic, activists and experts say, and they’re being used increasingly around New England and beyond, especially as national politics have become so polarized.

“People feel isolated, helpless and hopeless. And when you hear about other people who are just like you taking a stand and representing something that you believe, that gives you not only hope, but it gives you power,” said Dewalt.

Several other Vermont towns will be considering resolutions Tuesday calling for the removal of the president and vice president “for crimes against the U.S. Constitution,” while many others will vote on a pledge to ” to end all support of Israel’s apartheid policies, settler colonialism, and military occupation and aggression.”

A similar divestment resolution passed 46 -15 in Newfane last year, following hours of heated argument over the plight of Palestinians, the security of Israelis, the “inflammatory” language of the resolution – and whether such problems half-a-world away even belong on the agenda of the tiny town of just about 1,650.

Advertisement

“It’s a Town Meeting for town issues,” Newfane resident Walter Hagadorn declared at a recent Select Board meeting, where residents pressed board members to block any future resolutions not directly related to town business.

“You shouldn’t be subject to hours and hours of people virtue signaling” and trying to “hijack Town Meeting,” Hagadorn said.

Others agreed, suggesting activists host a debate on their issues at another time and place, or stage a rally or protest instead.

But Select Board member Katy Johnson-Aplin pushed back, saying that would not have the same impact.

“It doesn’t work the same way,” Johnson-Aplin said. It’s only when the issue is formally taken up at a Town Meeting that “it goes in the newspaper and it’s recorded that the town of Newfane has agreed to have this conversation.”

Advertisement

University of Pennsylvania political science professor Daniel Hopkins has been watching the growing movement of local communities taking a stand on issues far beyond town lines.

“This is a trend we’re seeing increasingly across the 50 states and in a variety of ways but I think it has taken on a new and potentially more concerning edge,” Hopkins said. “I worry that we are in an attention-grabbing, sensation-rewarding media environment in which the kinds of issues that engage us at a national level may further polarize states and localities and make it harder for them to build meaningful coalitions on other issues.”

Indeed, in Newfane, the resolution regarding Israel became so divisive that some residents decided not to even come to last year’s Town Meeting, according to Select Board vice-chair Marion Dowling.

In Burlington, where a similar resolution was proposed, City Council President Ben Traverse says things got so heated, he and his family were getting harassing phone calls and even death threats. Burlington city councilors voted in January to block the question from going to a popular vote.Vermont has a history of “big issue” resolutions, from the push for a Nuclear Arms Freeze in the 1980’s, to calls to ban genetically modified foods in 2003. Dewalt, the Newfane activist, was behind several of them, including calls to impeach then-president George W. Bush in 2006, which got him invited to talk about it on network TV shows, and quoted in The New York Times.

“I can guarantee you if I stood up on my soap box and made a declaration of the exact same wording, I wouldn’t have had anybody asking me questions about it, he said. “We’re not pie-in-the-sky here about the power of our Newfane Town Meetings, but our actions have consistently had an impact.”

Advertisement

But opponents say activists overstate the impact of their resolutions, and their victory. They say it’s disingenuous, for example, to claim the town of Newfane supported the resolution against Israel, when the winning majority of 46 people was less than 3% of town residents.

“I feel like they’re using the town as a vehicle for their personal messages and that bothers me,” says Newfane resident Cris White. “It’s so junior high.”

Traverse, the Burlington City Council president, also takes issue with what he calls the “inflammatory” language of that resolution.

“The question, as presented, approaches this issue in a one-sided and leading way,” Traverse says.

In Vermont, any registered voter can get a resolution on the Town Meeting agenda by collecting signatures from 5% of their town’s voters. While elected city or town officials have the authority to allow or block the resolution, there is no process in place to vet or edit language.

Advertisement

Traverse says it would behoove city leaders and voters to require an official review to ensure that language is fair and neutral, just as many states do with ballot questions. Traverse says he’s not opposed to contentious, big issue resolutions being put to local voters, but the language must be clear and even-handed.



Source link

Vermont

Vermont trooper found justified in fatal Putney shooting

Published

on

Vermont trooper found justified in fatal Putney shooting


MONTPELIER — The Vermont State Police trooper who shot and killed a mentally ill man in Putney last July was justified in his use of fatal force, the Vermont Attorney General’s office said Tuesday afternoon, concluding its almost 12-month investigation into the shooting.

Attorney General Charity Clark, in a lengthy press release, outlined the events of July 6 and 7, 2025, which resulted in the shooting death of Scott Garvey, 55, by Vermont State Police Trooper Peter Romeo. Garvey was not armed with a firearm at the time he was shot; a metal pipe which he used to resemble a rifle, was found near his body.

Clark said she would not be filing criminal charges against Romeo, but expressed sympathy for the Garvey family, which she had met with earlier in the day.

Advertisement

“This event was a tragedy. We cannot imagine the pain that the Garvey family has endured and continues to experience, and our hearts go out to them during this time,” Clark said in a statement.

Shawn Garvey, 61, Scott Garvey’s older brother, said Tuesday the family was dissatisfied but not surprised with the conclusion of the lengthy investigation, which Garvey said basically blamed his brother for his death.

“Do you blame someone with cancer for their death? My brother had a mental illness,” he said.

He said he, his mother and his sister were not surprised at the investigation’s conclusion, and he pointed to the Vermont record of never charging officers in fatal shootings.

Since 1977, he said, there have been 48 cases where police killed someone, he said, and police have always been found justified.

Advertisement

“That 100 percent record is still intact,” he said.

He said the state police did not follow its own policies of de-escalation in such cases, and to seek alternatives to lethal force.

“My brother was by himself, he was sitting in his living room when they barged in,” he said of the police, who did have multiple warrants, including one for his arrest for criminal threatening and disorderly conduct.

Scott Garvey had only moved to Vermont a couple of days earlier from Memphis, Tenn., and he was going to live at the Putney Landing apartment complex, with his elderly mother, Judy. His sister Kara lived nearby in Dummerston.

Garvey had a long history of mental illness, including bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia, and according to earlier statements from his family, it included several psychiatric hospitalizations. The Garvey family said they brought him to Vermont to be closer to family and to get what they hoped would be better mental health care.

Advertisement

Since the shooting, the family has hired a Los Angeles law firm to sue the state of Vermont, and Shawn Garvey has been very active criticizing the state for its handling of the case. Just Monday, Judy Garvey, 85, conducted a vigil outside the Vermont State Police barracks in Westminster, drawing attention to her son’s death, and the lack of action by police.

The attorney general’s office, along with the Washington County State’s Attorney’s office because of the inherent conflict with the Windham County prosecutors’ office, had conducted separate investigations in the July 7, 2025, fatal shooting, with both investigations concluding the use of fatal force was justified and that there would be no criminal charges filed against Romeo.

The AG report included a lengthy narrative and timeline of July 6 and 7, with the focus on July 7, and what it said state police did to de-escalate the situation and bring Scott Garvey under control.

Police believed Garvey was carrying a weapon, which they believed was a rifle, and their efforts to get him to show them his hands were ignored.

Garvey was carrying a metal pipe, which police believed was the barrel of a rifle, and his brother said was his cane. Scott Garvey refused to show his hands to police as requested multiple times, during the fatal confrontation in his apartment, the report stated.

Advertisement

“Trooper Romeo ordered Mr. Garvey to show his hands three times and ordered Mr. Garvey to ‘put it down twice.” When asked what he had seen by Sergeant Hughes, Trooper Romeo responded “I don’t know.” Trooper Romeo again instructed Mr. Garvey to show his hands three times and said “don’t [expletive] do this s***” to Mr. Garvey.

Trooper Romeo again told Sergeant Hughes he was unsure whether the object was a gun when asked by Sergeant Hughes. Mr. Garvey responded by telling Trooper Romeo, “[expletive] you” and to “shoot me in the head,” multiple times while Trooper Romeo further commanded Mr. Garvey to show his hands an additional four times, then to “move,” and then to show his hands three more times.” the report stated.

Police said they spent more than four hours that day either talking to Garvey through the closed door of his apartment or on the telephone, and they were hopeful that he would allow police inside to make sure he didn’t have any weapons.

Police received a search warrant for Garvey’s apartment, as well as an arrest warrant for him and a warrant for an involuntary mental health hearing, and shortly afterward entered Garvey’s apartment with a key.

They encountered Garvey in a dimly-lit downstairs room and according to the timeline outlined by the attorney general’s office, five state troopers, lined up and tried to enter the apartment from both the front and back doors, after discussing various strategies.

Advertisement

Police said they agreed they couldn’t leave Garvey in the apartment complex at Putney Landing, because he had threatened his new neighbors, and told them that voices in his head were telling him to kill them.

Earlier in the day, a Vermont state trooper, along with the police’s embedded mental health clinician, went to apartment 103 to speak to Mr. Garvey, the report stated.

“They spoke with Mr. Garvey through his front door as he refused to open it. At times, Mr. Garvey indicated he had a firearm.

The embedded mental health clinician relayed that Mr. Garvey “said he had a gun” and “if he came out, you would have your guns drawn, and he would have his as well,’” the report stated.

Additional VSP officers arrived and after considering the evidence from the neighbors, determined that there was probable cause to arrest Mr. Garvey, the report stated.

Advertisement

At one point, Garvey had told a mental health screener that he wanted to be killed by the police.

The attorney general’s report did not answer the Garvey family’s questions and furthered its frustration, Shawn Garvey said.

Shawn Garvey said his family had for the past year tried to meet with Gov. Phil Scott to discuss state police training, and had never received a call back or any acknowledgment. He said his family wanted to work with the Vermont government on changes, so that shootings like that don’t happen again.

Garvey said he had worked with Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun, D-Westminster, on proposed legislation to address some of the family’s concerns.

Romeo, who at the time of the shooting had been with the state police for a year, was placed on paid administrative leave after the shooting. After a couple of weeks, he has been working at the Westminster barracks in administration for most of the past year and he is now returned to full duty. He is still assigned to the Westminster barracks.

Advertisement

“Under our policy in effect since 2018, troopers involved in critical incidents initially are placed on a period of administrative leave in the immediate aftermath of an incident, followed by a transition to administrative duty status while a case is under review. Upon a ruling by the Attorney General’s Office that a trooper’s use of deadly force was justified, the trooper returns to full duty. Trooper Romeo remains assigned to the Westminster Barracks,” Adam Silverman, a spokesman for the Vermont State Police wrote in an email Tuesday afternoon.

Contact Susan Smallheer at ssmallheer@reformer.com.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Vermont

Commentary | Vermont Chamber: Vermont is in trouble

Published

on

Commentary | Vermont Chamber: Vermont is in trouble


Not someday in some distant future. Now.

We are aging, shrinking, and pricing out our own children, workers, and entrepreneurs. Schools face consolidation, taxes are climbing, and employers struggle to fill jobs. We’re too dependent on federal funding to support state spending. A housing shortage is driving up prices, slowing economic growth, and leaves young people feeling forced out.

Staying the course is not a viable option. It only gets worse from here if nothing changes.

Advertisement

The cost of scarcity

For decades, Vermont has treated growth as a threat to mitigate. We are living through the consequences of that mindset, and it hits marginalized communities hardest. True equity requires expanding supply rather than fighting over the crumbs of a shrinking economy. Otherwise, people lose hope and leave. This is already happening: Vermont experienced the nation’s largest percent decrease in population last year, becoming the only state losing population to both natural change and net migration.

The data are clear: Over the next decade, Vermont must add roughly 13,500 workers annually just to maintain economic stability. We need 7,500 new homes each year, yet we only permit about 2,500. When we fail to build, we aren’t “preserving” Vermont. We are pricing out multi-generational families, working-class neighbors, and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color Vermonters who represent our state’s fastest-growing demographic. Saying no to growth denies depopulated rural areas the chance to revitalize their communities. A shrinking tax base concentrates economic pressure on fewer people, creating a vicious cycle that erodes even the most resilient communities.

Most Vermonters support more housing and population growth, and policymakers keep saying they intend to follow the will of the people. However, intentions do not house families, fill classrooms, staff hospitals, or make life more affordable. Outcomes do. Right now, tangible outcomes are coming far too slowly or not at all.

It doesn’t have to be this way. We can choose a different path forward.

From roadmap to results

The planning is done. Between the Vermont Futures Project’s Economic Action Plan and the Vermont Business Roundtable’s Systems Innovation Framework, we have the data-informed roadmaps. We know where the hurdles are: a regulatory system that prizes “no” over “how,” and a fiscal trajectory where spending outpaces tax base growth, both exacerbated by unfunded mandates adding layers to an already inefficient system.

Advertisement

Process continues to overshadow results. It is time for outcomes. Future policymakers should focus on these four immediate shifts:

Regulatory Modernization: Move from a culture of “permission” to a culture of “production.” If a project meets established goals, it should be approved in months, not years. Start with “yes” as the default.

Fiscal Stewardship: Align our budget with economic reality. Vermont cannot tax its way out of a shrinking population and a constrained economy. Families and businesses need a predictable environment that allows them to plan, invest, stay, and grow.

Intentional Growth: Actively recruit and retain a diverse, working-age population. Growth funds our schools, supports our healthcare system and sustains our communities, benefiting the people already here.

Accountability: Ensure enacted policies achieve their goals. If the goal is housing, did we build the homes? If it is affordability, did we bring costs down sustainably? Revisit system design and policies if they fail to produce tangible results.

Advertisement

What comes next

Data is not destiny. Vermont’s future is a choice. Let’s choose abundance because Vermonters can no longer afford to choose scarcity. Here’s how you can help.

To the business community: Step forward to share your experiences with the downstream impacts of public policy. Your insights are crucial to modernizing our rules, regulations, and system design, and restoring Vermont’s competitiveness to build an economy where everyone can thrive.

To policymakers: We stand ready to be your partners. The data is clear, our organizations are aligned, and the roadmap is ready. We don’t need endless studies; we need your help to produce results. As the election cycle approaches, remember that accountability is measured by tangible outcomes for Vermonters, not intentions.

To our fellow Vermonters: Say “yes” to the possibilities in your own communities. Welcome new housing, support the local businesses, and champion a growing tax base over rising tax rates. But wanting change is not enough; you must participate to make it happen. Engage with your elected officials, serve on a local board, and turn out to vote for the future you want to see.

Finally, we must all reshape the narrative about Vermont. Share stories about why you love living and working here and why others should consider Vermont too. Your voice can help break the vicious cycle of scarcity. Speak openly about how growth can improve well-being and why you support it.

Advertisement

Growth is not a threat to Vermont; growth is what will save it.



Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

VT Lottery Powerball, Gimme 5 results for June 22, 2026

Published

on


Powerball, Mega Millions jackpots: What to know in case you win

Here’s what to know in case you win the Powerball or Mega Millions jackpot.

Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

The Vermont Lottery offers several draw games for those willing to make a bet to win big.

Advertisement

Those who want to play can enter the MegaBucks and Lucky for Life games as well as the national Powerball and Mega Millions games. Vermont also partners with New Hampshire and Maine for the Tri-State Lottery, which includes the Mega Bucks, Gimme 5 as well as the Pick 3 and Pick 4.

Drawings are held at regular days and times, check the end of this story to see the schedule.

Here’s a look at June 22, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from June 22 drawing

17-19-21-45-48, Powerball: 13, Power Play: 2

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Gimme 5 numbers from June 22 drawing

05-09-18-35-39

Check Gimme 5 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Pick 3 numbers from June 22 drawing

Day: 8-0-1

Evening: 2-1-6

Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Pick 4 numbers from June 22 drawing

Day: 2-8-4-6

Evening: 0-2-1-8

Check Pick 4 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Megabucks Plus numbers from June 22 drawing

12-26-29-34-38, Megaball: 03

Check Megabucks Plus payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from June 22 drawing

07-08-20-24-42, Bonus: 05

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your lottery prize

For Vermont Lottery prizes up to $499, winners can claim their prize at any authorized Vermont Lottery retailer or at the Vermont Lottery Headquarters by presenting the signed winning ticket for validation. Prizes between $500 and $5,000 can be claimed at any M&T Bank location in Vermont during the Vermont Lottery Office’s business hours, which are 8a.m.-4p.m. Monday through Friday, except state holidays.

For prizes over $5,000, claims must be made in person at the Vermont Lottery headquarters. In addition to signing your ticket, you will need to bring a government-issued photo ID, and a completed claim form.

Advertisement

All prize claims must be submitted within one year of the drawing date. For more information on prize claims or to download a Vermont Lottery Claim Form, visit the Vermont Lottery’s FAQ page or contact their customer service line at (802) 479-5686.

Vermont Lottery Headquarters

1311 US Route 302, Suite 100

Barre, VT

05641

Advertisement

When are the Vermont Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 10:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 11 p.m. Tuesday and Friday.
  • Gimme 5: 6:55 p.m. Monday through Friday.
  • Lucky for Life: 10:38 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Megabucks: 7:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 11:15 p.m. daily

What is Vermont Lottery Second Chance?

Vermont’s 2nd Chance lottery lets players enter eligible non-winning instant scratch tickets into a drawing to win cash and/or other prizes. Players must register through the state’s official Lottery website or app. The drawings are held quarterly or are part of an additional promotion, and are done at Pollard Banknote Limited in Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Vermont editor. You can send feedback using this form.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending