Everyone around him says he got screwed, but Jeremy Dodge still doesn’t have an unkind word to say about his neighbor to the east.
“He is a fantastic person, don’t get me wrong,” Dodge says of the neighbor, Gov. Peter Shumlin. “He’s helped me a lot, at different times, when no one else would.”
Dodge, a stick-like man with kind eyes, no teeth and a stutter that renders him nearly incomprehensible, pauses for a second.
“I would like to just say I’ve had more time to think about what I did,” Dodge continues. “I screwed up. I should’ve found a way to find somebody, somehow, to help.”
On a drizzly Thursday evening in East Montpelier, Dodge once again explained to an uninvited reporter what led him to sell his family’s 16-acre property to the governor last fall, just days before it was scheduled to go to tax sale. He’s been doing this since late last week, when a WCAX-TV van arrived at his house unbidden to ask about a real estate deal Dodge says he didn’t fully understand and now regrets.
“A guy and girl hopped out. I immediately thought they were Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons,” Dodge says with a chuckle. “They said they received an anonymous call.”
On Wednesday, Dodge’s story hit the front page of the Barre-Montpelier Times Argus and the Rutland Herald. That night, WCAX ran its first report on the saga. Vermont’s political world has been atwitter ever since, with the Democratic governor’s tongue-wagging critics suggesting — mostly off-the-record — that the multimillionaire businessman and real estate collector had taken advantage of a neighbor in need.
“I hope that he’s able to account for what happened, because it doesn’t appear to be something we would do here in this state of Vermont — not to one of our vulnerable citizens,” Lt. Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican, said Thursday. “I just feel that we, as elected officials, have to hold ourselves to a higher standard — and I hope the governor can defend his position.”
The situation even attracted the attention of federal agents, though it is unclear precisely what they were investigating and whether they are continuing to do so. An FBI agent who interviewed a friend of Dodge’s earlier this week declined to comment Thursday. A spokeswoman for the bureau’s Albany division, which covers Vermont, directed inquiries to U.S. Attorney Tristram Coffin.
“What I can confirm is that the FBI followed up on a tip and there’s no active investigation in our office,” Coffin said Thursday.
After defending the deal in a series of written statements earlier this week, Shumlin moved Thursday to quell the controversy. In yet another statement, he indicated he would allow Dodge to remain in his house past their mutually agreed-upon deadline.
“As I have said, I was saddened and disappointed that Jerry Dodge now regrets our agreement. I see and talk with Jerry frequently, and yet first heard about this from the press,” Shumlin said. “When Jerry asked for my help to avoid the tax sale, I agreed, and I want to see this through to a good resolution. If that means Jerry stays in the house beyond July 15, that’s fine with me.”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Yes, everyone who reads VTDigger knows you and all of your opinions on everything, and knows that you are a shill for Shumlin. And, yes, of course your pro-Shumlin bias is relevant when you’re defending him and attacking Olsen!
You don’t know me. And I am not accusing Oliver Olsen of being anti-Shumlin. He IS anti-Shumlin. Whether or not I am a shill for Shumlin, as you accuse me of being, has nothing to do with anything. Nice try, though
You accuse Olsen of being anti-Shumlin. The shoe is on the other foot. You have never been anything but a shill for Shumlin.
No one is talking about the high property taxes, complicated valuation system subject to local control and added penalties, costs which are unconstitutional but unsettled law. No one sees it is not the buyer’s fault, it is the town. Why did this man think he would be evicted? What did the town do for him but label him “Filthy” I see no such thing. That is a judgment call. Town officials had no right to assess his property as filthy. Property rights are the bottom line here and limitations on taxation.
Too bad Gov. Shumlin actually cared for this man (as opposed to his family and friends who’ve all turned their collective backs on Dodge). Had Gov. Shumlin simply bought the property and put Dodge out there wouldn’t be a story here. Dodge had a right to sell the place; Shumlin has the right to buy it. Remember it was Dodge who approached Shumlin in this deal Shumlin didn’t go looking for this.
Also, notice that this story broke because a reporter got an anonymous tip. Of course, we’ll never know just who that source was but it does seem like a coincidence that a letter immediately appeared from former Republican operative and State Rep., Oliver Olsen; one who harbors great animosity towards Gov. Shumlin.
As is generally the case, there are at least two sides to this story.
Shumlin has been doing deals like this in Putney all along, screwing people left and right. Remember Shumlin has a god in Money and works for the powers that thieve, why else would he claim himself to be a green governor and refuse to back a state public bank while keeping all state business in TD Bank North, the major Tar sands investor?
i.e., … , it makes one wonder whether the land deal in question would pass muster and be of the *higher ethical* standard ascribed to by the likes of George Aiken and other top Vermont political leaders who have followed since him? …
Viewing one of the photos provided within the new WCAX news report aired this evening ( http://www.wcax.com/story/2241… ), the portrait of former Governor and U.S. Senator George Aiken can be observed within the background hanging on the wall of Governor Shumlin’s office.
Since Governor Peter Shumlin is always talking about him in one context or another, it makes one wonder whether the land deal in question would pass muster and be of the standard ascribed to by the likes of George Aiken and other top Vermont political leaders who have followed since him?: i.e.,
Back when there were still those who knew better about how to comport themselves concerning such matters and did not need laws or policies to be on the books in order to help keep themselves in check and do the right thing on behalf of both neighbors in need and also in general terms as well.
Morgan W. Brown
Montpelier
Bogus. Rescind the sale, in court if need be. Jeremy was eligible for income sensitivity, which all rich people know (and many use), and Shumlin of course knew it. Shumlin also knew the tax sale laws, yet he let Jeremy believe he was in imminent danger of being homeless? Jeremy was preyed upon by a shyster. Hopefully a kind lawyer will take the case and get this man’s family homestead back! Then someone show him how to use the system, and Rebuild Together or Habitat for Humanity: please help him fix up his home. Shame on Governor Shumlin.
“The sale price included $9,000 representing the value of the rent Shumlin said he was saving Dodge by allowing him to remain in the home from November through July,…”
-Times Argus story http://timesargus.com/article/…
Dodge became his tenant and tenant’s have specific rights. If Governor Shumlin allowed him to remain in squalid housing, Shumlin may have violated laws related to rental housing in Vermont.
http://healthvermont.gov/regs/…
Normally the Town Health Officer would be expected to enforce these regulations, but it seems that East Montepelier’s only action was to enthusiastically and immediately cut the Governor’s taxes. The State Health Department might also have authority in this matter but I suppose someone from the Press would have to prod them into getting involved.
It is troubling that the property was sent to tax auction when it’s owner was simply an overwhelmed man but that as soon as the Governor became owner they decided to slash the tax assessment.
It’s nice that Governor Shumlin is going to allow this man to stay in the home longer, will our Governor also fulfill his legal responsibilities to see that his tenant has a safe, clean and sanitary home?