A PAC with missing money, unfiled reports, and unanswered questions
by Dave Soulia on FYIVT.com
Rutland Forward, a registered political action committee (PAC), has positioned itself as a driving force in local elections. However, a review of their campaign finance records raises serious concerns, including missing filings, financial shortfalls, and unreported expenditures.
Key Questions Raised by the Data
- Where is their 2025 campaign finance report?
- How did they spend nearly $11,000 in 2024 while only reporting $4,000 in donations?
- Why do several of their endorsed candidates have incomplete or questionable financial disclosures?
For a group that claims to support transparency and civic engagement, their own financial records tell a different story.
Rutland Forward’s Financial Discrepancies: Missing Filings, Negative Balances, and Unaccounted-for Expenses
Campaign Finance History
- 2022 (General Election) – $5,185 in donations, $3,997 in expenditures
- 2023 (Rutland Annual Meeting) – No listing
- 2024 (Annual Meeting) – $4,000 in donations, $10,973.46 in expenditures, ending with a negative balance of -$6,973.46
- 2025 – No listing
- 2026 (General Election) – $0 reported
Rutland Forward has yet to file a 2025 campaign finance report, despite actively supporting candidates in the upcoming election.
Unreported Mailers and Political Events
- Rutland Forward, in cooperation with its endorsed candidates, announced it is hosting a ‘Rock the Vote’ event in February 2024.
- There is no campaign finance report listing any expenses related to this event.
- Multiple sources report receiving mailers from Rutland Forward.
- While the PAC has reported expenditures for postcards in the past, its 2025 financial records remain missing.
- Only one recorded expenditure to the Rutland Herald—$1,400 in 2024.
- Despite being an active PAC since 2021, this is the only recorded payment to the city’s primary newspaper.
Campaign Finance Law: What Vermont Says About PAC Coordination
Vermont law places strict regulations on Political Action Committees (PACs) to prevent excessive influence over elections. One key provision states:
“When a political party or a PAC that recruits or endorses candidates conducts an activity that primarily benefits six or fewer candidates associated with the party or PAC, the law will presume that the expenditure is related and count it as a contribution. The party or PAC can overcome this presumption by demonstrating that the expenditure was not facilitated, solicited, or approved by the candidates who benefited from it.”
This means that if a PAC’s spending directly supports six or fewer candidates, it is automatically presumed to be coordinated. The burden is on the PAC to prove that its spending was truly independent.
However, this does NOT mean that spending on seven or more candidates automatically makes a PAC’s actions legal.
If a PAC’s spending is closely tied to a specific group of candidates—regardless of whether there are six, seven, or ten—the state can still investigate whether the PAC and candidates coordinated their spending.
Coordinated expenditures are considered contributions and must be reported as such
If a PAC structures its donations in a way that avoids triggering automatic legal presumptions, but still acts in close coordination with candidates, that can still be a campaign finance violation.
In 2022, Rutland Forward provided financial support to exactly seven candidates, appearing to push the boundaries of Vermont’s campaign finance law. The fact that their donations were structured just above the “six or fewer” rule raises serious ethical questions. If their 2025 funding is again concentrated on a select group of candidates, their financial structure deserves further scrutiny.
Who Is Paying for Rutland Forward?
According to the Rutland Forward website, the following candidates have directly funded the PAC:
- Anna Tadio (Alderman candidate)
- Michael Talbott (Alderman candidate)
- Gina Grove (Alderman candidate)
- Sara Doenges (School Board candidate)
- Marybeth Lennox-Levins (School Board candidate)
- Jennifer Rondinone (School Board candidate)
If these candidates are financially supporting the PAC, how much of Rutland Forward’s spending directly benefited their campaigns? Are these payments properly reported as campaign expenditures? According to the Secretary of State’s Campaign Finance page, as of February 2025, none of those candidates were recorded as having donated to Rutland Forward.
With Rutland Forward’s missing financial disclosures, these questions remain unanswered.
We Reached Out to Rutland Forward for Comment
On Wednesday, February 18, FYIVT contacted Rutland Forward via email, requesting clarification on the following:
- Where is Rutland Forward’s 2025 campaign finance filing?
- How did the PAC spend $10,973.46 in 2024 while only reporting $4,000 in donations?
- Why are there no filings for expenses related to mailers or political events?
- Did Rutland Forward financially assist any candidates beyond what was disclosed?
As of publication, Rutland Forward has not responded to our request. If they respond, this article will be updated with their comments.
What Happens Next?
Rutland Forward has positioned itself as a major player in local elections, yet its own financial transparency is lacking.
With unaccounted-for spending, missing finance reports, and candidates failing to disclose key expenditures, Rutland residents deserve answers.
FYIVT has spoken with the Vermont Secretary of State’s Campaign Finance Division and the Vermont Attorney General’s Office regarding these findings. We have not received follow-ups to our conversations as of publication, but we will update readers as more information becomes available.
Stay tuned. On Thursday morning at 6 AM, FYIVT will release an even deeper investigation into how political funding in Rutland may extend beyond Vermont—raising questions about out-of-state money and PAC coordination.