Vermont
Northeast Kingdom Senate race reveals fault lines in housing debate
This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and Vermont Public.
For years, a rundown former hotel in the heart of downtown St. Johnsbury had been a prominent eyesore. An out-of-town landlord owned the property, where commercial spaces sat vacant and apartments were “poorly managed,” said Patrick Shattuck, executive director of Rural Edge, the main affordable housing developer in the region.
In 2021, local leaders celebrated the building’s grand reopening as the New Avenue apartments. Rural Edge partnered with affordable housing developer Evernorth to rehab the old hotel, preserving dozens of affordable units and refurbishing retail spaces. Funding streamed in from multiple sources, but a state earmark secured by the region’s powerful senator, Jane Kitchel, helped lock in the project’s future, Shattuck said.
The undertaking turned the crumbling building from a drain on St. Johnsbury to a major asset, he added. “The investment of public funds in that building has changed the entire market for downtown,” Shattuck said.
Sally McCay via Evernorth
/
Courtesy
Earlier this year, Kitchel, a Democrat who has served the Caledonia district for nearly two decades, announced she would retire at the end of her term. During her tenure in the Senate, she has become one of the chamber’s most powerful members; as chair of the Appropriations Committee, she has had an outsized command over the state’s purse strings.
Her departure has teed up the district’s first open race in recent memory. Squaring off are Democratic candidate Amanda Cochrane, the director of a Northeast Kingdom gender-based violence nonprofit and a newcomer to state politics, whom Kitchel tapped to run, and Rep. Scott Beck, R-St. Johnsbury, a longtime conservative legislator, local business owner and teacher.
The contest is one of several Senate races statewide where Republicans see an opportunity to flip a seat in the upper chamber from blue to red, weakening the Legislature’s Democratic supermajority. Republican Gov. Phil Scott has campaigned for Beck, calling him “a compassionate, common sense public servant who is a champion for taxpayers and making Vermont more affordable.”
Like many Vermont races this election season, this one is animated, in part, by promises to tackle the state’s housing woes. Both candidates emphasize the need to bolster the availability and affordability of housing. But their routes for achieving those goals differ, highlighting some of the key partisan rifts in Vermont housing politics.
‘There’s very little available — almost nothing’
Like all areas of Vermont, this corner of the Northeast Kingdom has seen a precipitous rise in both rents and home prices in recent years. Price tags in Caledonia County tend to be significantly lower than in the state as a whole — the median home price there in 2023 was about $232,000, compared to the state median of $325,000, according to the latest Vermont Housing Needs Assessment — but in this relatively impoverished region, residents are still struggling to keep up with costs.
Nearly a third of households in the county are cost-burdened, meaning they pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs — similar to the statewide average, according to the housing needs assessment.
That problem is exacerbated by a shortage of housing, which became even more acute after the region was repeatedly hit by flooding this summer. The deficit is particularly pronounced for rentals: The needs assessment estimates that Caledonia County needs around 900 to 1,000 more rental units to meet demand over the coming five years.
“For rental housing, there’s very little available — almost nothing,” Shattuck said.
How to close the affordability gap
On the campaign trail, Beck has emphasized the need to reduce regulatory hurdles to housing construction, a task the Legislature has honed in on at both the local and state levels in recent years — and where Gov. Scott in particular sees more need to push.
Limiting when and how new housing projects can be appealed by naysayers should be a priority, Beck said in an interview, mentioning proposals backed by the Scott administration this past session that largely got axed by lawmakers. Rules that might be “requiring people to over-engineer or overbuild septic systems” should be looked at, he said, as should opportunities for the state to jumpstart water and sewer infrastructure projects to prime places for new development.
The overarching goal, Beck said, is to close the gap between the cost of construction and what the average Vermonter can pay for a home — by making private development more attractive in Vermont.
“When we’ll know we hit it is when developers actually show up and they go, ‘Hey, I’m going to buy that five acre lot right there. And I’m going to put 25 homes on it,’” Beck said. “That’s not happening right now.”
Cochrane has also emphasized the need to streamline Vermont’s land use rules to make it easier to build new housing. Like Beck, she wants to encourage housing growth by incentivizing increased density in areas that are already developed.
The state shouldn’t “make suburbs where farmland is,” Cochrane said. “I think that would be the wrong approach for Vermont. But to really look at — how can we better use the space that we do have?”
In addition to tackling the rules that govern building, Cochrane has also called for increasing funding for affordable housing initiatives. In contrast, Beck has been outspoken about his belief that funneling more public money into the housing market will actually increase construction costs, making housing more expensive overall.
If the state’s limited construction workforce ends up working on projects made possible with government funds — or working for the few people with large amounts of cash to throw at building a one-off house — then that leaves few workers to build “the home for the family that just wants a place to live, but doesn’t qualify for any government assistance,” Beck said.
Coming off years during which Vermont channeled federal pandemic-era funds into affordable housing projects, the debate over how much the state should continue investing in housing dominated discussion at the Statehouse in 2024, and is likely to arise as a key consideration next year, too.
Beck voted against a long-term affordable housing spending bill backed by House Democrats last session that would have relied on revenue from a new income tax bracket for higher-earners and increased property transfer taxes on properties over $750,000.
“We’re taxing people plenty,” Beck said. “The problem is the cost of housing. The problem, I don’t think, is that we’re not throwing enough public money at it.”
That bill died in the Senate, in part because Kitchel never took it up in her powerful committee. At the time, the moderate Democrat emphasized that the state’s resources for investing in housing were finite.
Cochrane echoed the sentiment that the state can’t bear all of the burden of funding affordable housing, and suggested Vermont needs to also look to federal resources and public-private partnerships to spur development, pointing to the New Avenue project as an example. But the proposed wealth tax is worth returning to, she said.
“The opportunity to look at taxing higher earners in the state is something we should continue to look at and determine if that’s a feasible approach to raise revenue,” she said.
Tackling tenant protections
Another housing issue primed to headline the Statehouse next session is the thorny topic of landlord-tenant law. Last session, lawmakers decided not to advance a set of locally approved measures that would ban landlords from evicting tenants for “no cause.”
In Vermont, landlords can generally decline to renew a tenant’s lease for any reason. The locally approved “just cause” standards prohibit evictions for “no cause,” yet still allow a landlord to evict a tenant because they haven’t paid rent, or they’ve violated their lease. Most also limit the amount a landlord can raise the rent when leases roll over.
Beck believes that abolishing “no cause” evictions will decrease housing availability by discouraging landlords from continuing to rent out properties.
“We want these landlords to add units, not get out of the business because you can’t make any money in it,” he said.
In a Vermont Public candidate questionnaire, Cochrane signaled her support for abolishing “no cause” evictions. In a subsequent interview, she equivocated.
Cochrane echoed Beck’s sentiment that landlords are “a key linchpin in our housing ecosystem.” She and her husband used to rent out an apartment, she said. “It really opened our eyes to the challenges that landlords face,” she said. “When times get tough, people can’t pay their rent, and it can be really hard.”
We want these landlords to add units, not get out of the business because you can’t make any money in it.
Rep. Scott Beck, Caledonia candidate for Senate
On the other hand, she recognizes that low-income renters are hardest hit by Vermont’s housing shortage.
“We also have an obligation to protect renters who, again, are really struggling the most to make ends meet in our state,” she said.
Any future policy tackling evictions would need to balance those nuances, she said.
Campaign cash
The Caledonia district race has been drawing significant campaign donations, leading the Caledonian Record to proclaim last month that the race was “already the most expensive political contest in the region’s history.”
To date, Beck has raked in over $60,000 in campaign contributions, far out-fundraising Cochrane, who has brought in about $30,000, according to the candidates’ latest campaign finance disclosures.
Beck has garnered support from Gov. Scott’s campaign, as well as from some key housing players. The Vermont Realtor PAC donated $1,680 to Beck’s campaign, and several prominent Chittenden County landlords and developers have given funds, including Mark Bove and Eric Farrell.
Cochrane has brought in funds from several lobbying groups, including Vermont Public Interest Research Group, as well as the teachers’ union Vermont-NEA. Several Democratic senators have donated as well, including Sen. Andrew Perchlik, D/P-Washington, the campaign of Sen. Alison Clarkson, D-Windsor, and Kitchel.
Whoever wins the Senate race will have “huge, huge shoes to fill,” said Shattuck, from local developer Rural Edge.
“Sen. Kitchel was so aware of how precious our resources were, the role of being a good steward, but also making wise investments,” he said.
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
Vermont
VT Lottery Gimme 5, Pick 3 results for July 16, 2026
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.
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 July 16, 2026, results for each game:
Winning Gimme 5 numbers from July 16 drawing
08-10-35-36-37
Check Gimme 5 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Pick 3 numbers from July 16 drawing
Day: 4-3-2
Evening: 3-4-4
Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Pick 4 numbers from July 16 drawing
Day: 5-7-1-5
Evening: 6-6-9-0
Check Pick 4 payouts and previous drawings here.
Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from July 16 drawing
09-21-29-52-57, 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.
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
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.
Vermont
A Vermont couple builds an 800-square-foot home on a budget – The Boston Globe
Sam Gabriels and Chrissy Bellmeyer were no strangers to living small. Before they met, Bellmeyer designed and lived in a tiny house on wheels and Gabriels spent four years living out of a van, looping the country to organize pop-up farm-to-table dinners alongside Michelin-starred chefs. So, when the couple bought a half-acre lot in Waitsfield, Vermont’s Mad River Valley in a development called the Waitsfield Ten, where neighbors help each other build, 800 square feet didn’t feel like a constraint.
Architectural designer and builder Andy White of Boreal Design started by creating a simple, 20-by-20-foot box that was drywalled, then painted, in a weekend. Inside it, White built the living spaces as independent, self-supporting platforms arranged at staggered heights. He describes the plan as a counter-clockwise spiral: Down one step from the entry into the living room, up two into the kitchen, up one more into the dining room.
The level variations define each space. “If built traditionally with two floor plates and 9-foot ceilings, the house would feel claustrophobic,” White says. “Here, you experience the full interior volume, with long sightlines from corner to corner.”
Without walls dividing the public spaces, rooms morph to fit current needs and individual elements do double or triple duty. For example, the open cubbies that store Gabriels’s vinyl collection are also perches for overflow dinner party guests in the dining room and extra seating in the living room. Initially, White worried — unnecessarily — that the living room was too small and lacked a wall for a television. The couple got a projector and screen, and noted that the deck expands the experience. The mechanicals and storage are under the floors.
Upstairs, the 8-by-12-foot space in front of the primary bedroom is both a closet/dressing area and mini lounge. In the morning, guests might wander over from the second bedroom to chat; during parties, it’s another spot to hang out. “We’re very open people, so it works for us,” Gabriels says. If things change, the couple could add standard-size French doors to hide their bed. The second bedroom, which already has a pocket door for privacy, could absorb the office nook beside it to become a larger bedroom.
The materials palette celebrates what’s commonly available: nothing is precious, everything is considered. Walls and ceilings throughout are CDX fir plywood — construction-grade sheathing that is normally hidden behind drywall. Structural fir posts, usually buried, are left exposed. The couple planed, sanded, and stained the posts and sanded all the plywood, removing lumberyard stamps. In place of galvanized joist hangers, White used inexpensive angle steel, spray-painted black. Running the length of the staircase and bracketing the bedroom thresholds, it’s the home’s signature accent. It matches the exterior siding — corrugated metal that is distinctive, inexpensive, easy to install, and low-maintenance.

Sustainability was non-negotiable. Fourteen-inch-thick, cellulose-filled walls push the dwelling past passive-house standards for insulation and airtightness. They also leave deep window sills that double as seating, plant shelves, and such. The utility bill for the all-electric home averages just over $100 per month (excluding internet).
Decor-wise, color does the talking. The bright yellow kitchen and pink-tiled bath are odes to homes that Gabriels admired in New Mexico, Oregon, and California. “We took a Pacifico beer bottle cap to Home Depot to find the right canary yellow for the kitchen cabinets,” Bellmeyer says.

White says his construction methods make it easy to add onto the home, although the couple has no plans to do so. Rather, they hope to build an ADU to offer housing to others in the community. “This is a mid-income development, making it cheaper than the median house price but not attainable for everyone,” Bellmeyer says.
Meanwhile, they’re grateful for White’s unconventional approach, fulfilling their wish list within the square footage their budget allowed.
White deflects the praise back onto the couple. “The home wouldn’t have come together the way that it did for anyone else; it’s very much theirs,” he says. “Chrissy and Sam’s vision, willingness to take risks and reimagine typical rooms, informed the design more than any specific space-saving or building strategy.”
Architectural designer and builder: Boreal Design, borealdesignvt.com
Cabinetmaker: Han Hewn, hanhewn.com

Marni Elyse Katz is a contributing editor to the Globe Magazine. Follow her on Instagram @StyleCarrot. Send comments to magazine@globe.com.
Vermont
Ben & Jerry’s Foundation says it will shut down amid legal dispute with parent company – VTDigger
The Ben & Jerry’s Foundation says it will shut down at the end of the year after its corporate parent cut off funding and evicted its three staffers Wednesday. The move leaves $600,000 a year in grants to Vermont organizations, and 40 years of the ice cream brand’s progressive mission, hanging on a judge’s future ruling.
“This is the other foot dropping in terms of the way Magnum is trying to destroy the social values of Ben & Jerry’s,” said Ben Cohen, co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, in an interview Wednesday.
The Vermont-based iconic ice cream brand has been in a legal fight with its parent company, The Magnum Ice Cream Co. — an ice-cream spinoff of the larger corporation Unilever — since November 2024. Ben & Jerry’s alleges that the corporation overreached its control, pushing out the CEO and interfering with the brand’s political views. The question before a judge is whether the corporate parent had the authority to reshape governance and withhold funding from the foundation.
Amid the push-and-pull over governance, Unilever audited the foundation, which is the philanthropic arm of Ben & Jerry’s, in April 2025, finding conflicts of interest and a lack of governance and financial control.
Liz Bankowski, president of the foundation’s board of trustees, said in an interview that Unilever withheld the philanthropy’s funding late last year and ordered foundation staff to vacate its corporate office in South Burlington by July 15 because of governance issues the audit raised. This led the foundation’s leaders to join the ongoing lawsuit, fought by the ice cream brand’s independent board, in an effort to retain funding. The lawsuit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
While the foundation’s leadership is framing the decision to cease operations as the only option after Unilever withheld funding, an unnamed spokesperson for Magnum wrote in a statement to VTDigger that the shuttering is “entirely down to the Trustees and their decision to ignore the findings of an independent audit and failure to put in place basic good governance; much to our dismay.”
Since the audit, the foundation has adopted a conflict of interest policy, but “the bottom line was that unless we changed our board, they were going to continue to withhold funding,” Bankowski said.
Cohen described the audit as “a bunch of trumped-up charges.”
“The foundation has been independently audited every year,” he said. “I think that Magnum was searching in vain for some illegal or unethical activities. I think they found none.”
Since Ben & Jerry’s sold the ice cream business to Unilever in 2000, the corporation has given $60 million to the foundation. The philanthropic arm has operated for 40 years, supporting the ice cream brand’s progressive mission by offering financial backing to social justice organizations across the country. The foundation does not have an endowment and is reliant on the funding its parent company gives annually, outlined in its merger contract.
A chunk of that funding, $600,000 a year, goes to Vermont organizations such as the immigrant farmworker rights organization Migrant Justice and the LGBTQ+ nonprofit Outright Vermont, according to foundation leaders.
“We fill a particular niche that not a lot of other funders fill,” said Rebecca Golden, the foundation’s director of programs, who has worked at the organization for 34 years.
Golden is one of three foundation staffers whose last day in the physical office is Wednesday, following orders from Magnum to vacate. Although Magnum did not directly address its vacate order in its statement to VTDigger, the spokesperson wrote that the foundation’s leaders recently “took the position that its staff are not Ben & Jerry’s employees, despite utilising Ben & Jerry’s offices and systems.”
Golden described the possible shutdown as an “enormous loss” that will not only affect the organizations that the foundation supports but also Ben & Jerry’s employees who “feel very proud of being a part of the foundation.”
“It’s been a really long year, so there’s been a lot of emotions — the whole gamut, as we like to say of the seven stages of grief. But I think at this point we’re sort of in the acceptance phase,” she said.
The Magnum spokesperson indicated that the work of the foundation will continue even if its leaders decide to cease operations at the end of the year, writing that the company is “firmly committed to funding a grant-giving foundation, supported by appropriate governance controls to ensure it is living by its values.”
But Cohen is not confident that Magnum will uphold the values of the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation in the corporation’s continued philanthropic efforts.
“What are they going to fund? I have no idea. My guess is that they would not be looking to fund entities that are opposed to the status quo,” Cohen said.
The foundation’s leaders have pointed to its support of Migrant Justice during a period when the farmworker organization was considering a boycott of Ben & Jerry’s as an example of their commitment to social justice. After immigrant farmworkers raised concerns about working conditions at farms supplying Ben & Jerry’s, the company joined a program that collaborates with farmworkers to strive for fair working conditions.
Political activism has been central to the Ben & Jerry’s brand since its founding. As a part of the ongoing lawsuit, Ben & Jerry’s alleged in a May filing that Magnum has been undercutting its social justice mission in order to “censor, intimidate and purge” the company’s independent board, which Cohen said was created to defend its progressive values.
Three of the board’s members, including one who has been an outspoken critic of Israel, were removed late last year after the parent corporation introduced a new set of governance practices. In its motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Magnum argues that it retains ultimate authority and the brand’s social mission must be nonpartisan.
As the lawsuit awaits a decision, Cohen, who is not a part of the suit, has created a campaign to “free Ben & Jerry’s,” amassing around 160,000 signers for its petition demanding that Magnum sell Ben & Jerry’s to a “group of values-aligned investors.”
“The very values-led business model that built Ben & Jerry’s into this amazing, phenomenal brand is the very thing that Magnum is currently destroying,” Cohen said.
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour agoLADWP begins long-term repairs after West Hollywood water main rupture
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoLivestream: Mayor Sheffield, Detroit health chief to address wildfire smoke threat
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoA sculpture of a giant naked woman goes on sale in San Francisco. Bring a crane
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoNo ‘straight answer’: Why Pioneer Cemetery is the latest battleground at City Hall
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoTSA hosts news conference ahead of World Cup third place match at Miami Stadium
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoICE Boston arrests Barbados national during targeted operations in Attleboro
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoDenver Broncos training camp is 2 weeks away
-
San Diego, CA3 hours agoDaily Business Report: July 17, 2026, San Diego Metro Magazine