Trustees agree to seek legal guidance following public concerns over grants and adherence to legacy bequest
Public Raises Concerns Over Use of Farr Trust Funds
A May 1 meeting of the Brandon Trustees of Public Funds drew unusually high public interest and highlighted lingering questions about how a decades-old trust should be managed to best serve the town in accordance with the donor’s wishes.
At issue was the use of funds left to Brandon by longtime resident Shirley Farr, whose will directed that her bequest be used first for sewage, drainage, and sanitary improvements. Any remaining funds, Farr specified, were to be used for “spraying trees” — historically a mosquito control measure — and for other general improvements not sufficiently provided for by taxation.
In recent years, the trustees have expanded grantmaking to include a range of community organizations and projects. Some residents at the meeting questioned whether this broader interpretation fits Farr’s stated intent.
Town Officials Call for Narrower Interpretation
Brandon Selectboard Chair Seth Hopkins, speaking at the meeting, urged trustees to limit discretionary awards and ensure funds are distributed in strict accordance with Farr’s instructions. He emphasized that only the Town of Brandon itself — as a municipal entity — should request funds from the trust.
“What I am asking of the Trustees is a fundamental reordering of what their role is,” Hopkins said. “I submit that your role is to manage with prudence the funds entrusted to you, keep them safe, optimize the return, and make them available to the Town of Brandon when and only when the Town of Brandon requests funds for a purpose identified in Miss Farr’s will.”
Trustees offered limited responses to many of the questions, citing Vermont Open Meeting Law restrictions on deliberation outside public meetings. They agreed to seek updated legal guidance and return for a follow-up public session.
Public Questions Over Past Grants and Conflicts of Interest
Some concerns focused on prior grants issued for projects beyond traditional infrastructure, such as a 2023 award to the Otter Valley Activities Association (OVAA) for a community center feasibility study. That project later evolved into the Valley Community Center (VCC) proposal, which became controversial after voters rejected the plan.
During the meeting, resident Vicki Disorda raised concerns about the potential for conflicts of interest. She questioned trustee Tanner Romano directly about his involvement in both the VCC and the Trustees of Public Funds.
“There have been a couple of references to the VCC, and you keep saying that you’re not the VCC,” Disorda said. “I recognize the board chair as the individual who presented at Otter Valley representing the VCC. And by giving the VCC money from the trustees and being on both boards, wouldn’t that serve as a direct conflict of interest?”
Romano responded that the original grant was awarded before the VCC formally existed.
“The VCC was not even a contemplated thing when the trust received the application for the feasibility study for a community center,” he said. “The VCC came to light after that fact, and I joined that group later to volunteer my time.”
Following Romano’s remarks, trustee Laurie Miner added a point of clarification.
“The original funding request came from the Otter Valley Activities Association,” Miner noted.
While the exchange did not result in any immediate action, it underscored ongoing concerns among residents about the decision-making process and how trustees interpret the trust’s restrictions.
A Legacy Rooted in Public Service and Practical Needs
Shirley Farr, a prominent Brandon resident in the early and mid-20th century, left a lasting mark on the town she called home. Farr served in the Vermont Legislature and was active in local civic life, contributing time and resources to public health, sanitation, and mosquito control efforts in Brandon. She also donated land to the state, including Branbury Beach and surrounding forest.
Her bequest to the town, originally valued at approximately $200,000 and since grown through careful investment, was intended to address Brandon’s essential needs. Farr directed that trust funds should first support sewer, drainage, and sanitation projects. Any remaining funds were earmarked for spraying trees — then a common mosquito abatement method — and other improvements that were not otherwise funded through local taxes.
Today, the trust remains central to Brandon’s public works funding discussions and is at the center of debates about balancing donor intent with evolving community needs.
Next Steps
The Trustees agreed to seek legal advice before making any further decisions regarding future grants. A follow-up public meeting will be scheduled to share that guidance and continue the discussion about how best to manage the trust in a way that respects Farr’s wishes and serves the town.
For now, the debate reflects the challenges of administering a legacy bequest in a changing community. As Brandon residents and trustees alike seek clarity, all parties appear to agree on at least one point: ensuring that Shirley Farr’s gift continues to support the town in the manner she intended.
Dave Soulia | FYIVT
You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Parler (@fyivt) | Gab | Instagram
#fyivt #BrandonVT #TrusteesOfPublicFunds #ShirleyFarr
Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!
Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!
Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!
Leave a Reply