[W]hen Adjutant General Gregory Knight visited Gov. Phil Scott’s fifth floor Montpelier office late last month to discuss his plans to improve culture and retention within the Vermont National Guard, the governor was impressed by his commitment.
Knight was “trying to recruit some of our staff to be part-time Guard members,” Scott said in an interview last week, with a laugh.
As the state’s commander-in-chief of the Green Mountain Boys, Scott is Knight’s de-facto boss, and the top civilian overseeing the organization. The governor is a long-time booster of the Guard who supports their controversial F-35 mission, has helped members secure new educational benefits, and believes Vermont should stop taxing military pensions. His racecar at Thunder Road has long featured a splashy Guard logo.
In January, Scott requested that Vermont’s next adjutant general conduct a top-to-bottom review of the Guard’s policies and procedures. His action came in the wake of a seven-part VTDigger series that outlined a culture of impunity in the Guard where sexual misconduct and rowdy drinking were often tolerated. Current and former Guard members said the Guard’s systems for investigating wrongdoing were outdated, and easily exploitable. One official, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Rector, said he was retaliated against after bringing malfeasance by popular leaders to light.
In the run-up to his election, Knight made concrete promises to lawmakers and the governor that he would improve the Guard’s culture and systems of oversight. Now in office, Knight is starting to implement his ideas, including reviewing the case of the whistleblower who brought misconduct to light.
After their hour-and-a-half-long meeting, the governor is feeling confident in Knight’s ability to move the Guard forward.
“Knight takes this job very seriously and he understood my concerns, and I appreciate that,” Scott said. “He’s hit the ground running, he’s seized the moment and he’s actively working on a number of initiatives. All in all I think he’s done a great job in his first few months.”
Knight’s plan
The day after he was sworn in, Knight issued a succinct, one-page memo to everyone in the organization outlining his “command philosophy.”
“We will maintain a high standard of professional conduct and immediately address those not abiding by this standard,” Knight wrote. “Bad behavior, whether language, sexual harassment, or poor performance, is corrosive to our team and impacts readiness. Hold people accountable for their actions and behavior.” He urged members to engage directly with him when issues arose and “make this an organization you would be proud to have your son or daughter join.”
While Knight’s May 1 memo was aspirational and nondescript, he sketched out more details in a letter sent to Scott last month.
That letter, obtained through a public records request, outlines some of Knight’s initial steps to ensure his lofty goal is realized. The document, however, is far from a complete battle plan on how he hopes to make good on his major campaign promise to make the organization more welcoming for women. (A comprehensive report on Knight’s efforts is set to be delivered to the governor on September 30.)
Knight’s letter said the Guard is in the process of implementing new and improved sexual assault prevention trainings for Guard members, and will now hold accountable bystanders of inappropriate behavior who take no action. Guard leaders are also set to consult with outside experts on sexual misconduct, and Knight promised to be more transparent with the governor and lawmakers about the steps taken after specific allegations arise. (In VTDigger’s reporting last year, multiple women said that other Guard members stood by as they were publicly harassed or mistreated.)
Knight’s office is also reaching out to other Guard bureaus to understand how to best bring on a provost marshal, a military police official with investigatory power. Guard officials have also begun planning a military women’s forum, where Knight will listen to the problems of female members. Knight has further pledged to meet with every woman in the organization to hear their thoughts and respond to their concerns.
In his May letter, Knight also alerted Scott to new hiring and promotion procedures that were designed to limit cronyism. He also said he has commenced a review of how disciplinary matters are handled and will “take corrective action where needed.”
Knight’s new rules, policies and initiatives are currently being communicated inside the organization, and every Guard member is expected to give written acknowledgements of these changes by no later than August 15.
In an interview, Knight declined to further elaborate on the letter. He described his general approach to remediating the issues highlighted by VTDigger as “incremental change sustained over time.”
Knight said his top priority in office is boosting recruiting and retention of Guard members. As VTDigger reported last year, the Guard has long struggled to keep its numbers high, and had delayed the discharges of hundreds of Guard members in order to inflate the rolls. Guard sources said Knight, the former deputy chief of staff and personnel for the Army National Guard, helped end this potentially illegal practice, and is now looking to fill between 300 and 350 vacancies.
In an effort that could boost recruitment, Knight has expressed an openness to supporting Guard members of all stripes. He wrote in his command memo that he would work to ensure that “every airmen and soldier receives fair, equitable treatment regardless of color, gender, sexual preference, ethnicity, national origin or background.”
This pronouncement came in the wake of President Donald Trump’s recent ban on transgender troops in the military. Since Trump’s order was issued, five state National Guard units have indicated they will not discharge any transgender troops, nor will they use this identity as means for rejecting a transgender recruit.
Knight and his equal employment manager, Captain Scott Detweiler, offered a somewhat roundabout answer to the question of whether Vermont would also spurn this directive. The two said the decision was largely out of their hands and they would follow the present directive, which does not constitute an official ban on transgender service members.
“According to 2018 policy, any individual identifying as transgender would have to demonstrate that they are mentally and physically stable and have been for 36 months,” Capt. Detweiler said. “Any clinical diagnoses related to their gender identity may preclude them from enlisting at this time.”
Knight said he is also laser-focused on easing the transition for his Guard members into civilian life. He’s looking to improve resources for veterans, eyeing as a model a program called Home Base Iowa that partners potential employers with veterans. He’s looking to increase participation in the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) [burn pit] database, and destigmatize PTSD and other mental health maladies. These latter two priorities are personal for Knight. He lost his best friend, Brig. Gen. Michael Heston, to pancreatic cancer last November. Heston, who earned two Bronze Stars, worked as close as 300 feet from open air burn pits during two tours in Afghanistan.
Knight also said he faced PTSD after coming home, and proclaimed “we need to get more folks help through the vet centers,” which are outpatient clinics run by the VA.
“That’s the place I went to,” Knight said. “I was not the same when I got home. They ask us to do things, and we see things that most people don’t get to see. After six months I didn’t feel right, and I went to the vet center for help. If I can do it, anyone can do it.”
Optimism in Knight’s leadership
With Knight given the power to make good on his pledged reforms, many in and outside of the organization are watching closely. While faith in Knight remains high, some openly admit that it will be difficult to fully reform an entrenched organization like the Vermont Guard.
U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., a consistent champion of the Green Mountain Boys, said Knight insisted in a recent phone conversation that he would work to overhaul the organization.
“He was very emphatic that there’s going to be a real understanding of important issues inside the organization, and a safe way to complain and be heard,” Leahy said. “He told me he would not tolerate bad behavior. He doesn’t want a few people to spoil the good work the Guard does.”
Rep. Tom Stevens, the chair of House Housing, General and Military Affairs Committee, is also encouraged by Knight’s work so far.
“We’ll certainly make sure that he’s changing the culture and implementing these plans, but we have to give him room now to do his work,” said Stevens, D-Waterbury. “I’m pleased that he’s begun following through on his promises.”
Whistleblower case under review
One of Knight’s key campaign pledges was to review the case of Lt. Col. Jeff Rector, who told VTDigger last year that he faced retaliation and an other-than-honorable discharge after investigating two popular Guard leaders for serious indiscretions.
Knight and Rector have known each other for more than 20 years, and consider each other close friends. Last year, Rector communicated frequently with Knight and his de-facto campaign manager, Dan Pipes who both indicated that Rector had been mistreated.
Last August, for instance, after Knight reviewed personnel documents provided by Rector, he reacted, “Wtf. Will catch up with you this weekend.” In a subsequent email, he advised Rector to “keep up the fight.” Knight, who had been working in the Guard’s Human Resources Office [HRO] at the time, also suggested in communications that his office was deeply troubled.
In one note, he told Rector that “my short time in HRO has been…enlightening.” In a subsequent email Knight wrote, “the longer I am in HRO, the more unbelievable stuff I hear. Might be worth a phone call when you have time, am curious if you are aware of some things going on. There’s an HRO twist to this that stinks of cronyism.” (Knight declined to elaborate on this remark, saying instead that new internal hiring practices are being implemented to “mitigate potential bias.”)
According to Rector and his wife, Lisa, Pipes got on a February phone call in which Pipes said, “I’m on your side, I’m aware evidence was destroyed in Jeff’s case, I know the person who was out to get him. On our first day his office will be locked, sealed, and he will be under investigation.” Pipes denies he said this.
At the time, these signals heartened the Rectors, who say their only wish was that Rector get a fair review, and a meeting with Knight.
Yet in an April email, Knight informed Rector that he would not be intervening in his case. “I can only imagine how it has been for you,” Knight wrote Rector. “But, I wanted you to hear it from me.”
“I understand your concerns, but by regulation I must send to [the Air Force Secretary] in this I have no choice,” Knight wrote. “You will have a right to rebut the findings, which I expect you to do.”
Knight would not say in an interview whether any processes were fudged or exploited in Rector’s case, but said he broadly believed in the integrity of the organization’s processes.
Knight and other Vermont Guard members are largely unable to publicly comment on Rector’s case unless he signs a disclosure form permitting them to do so. Rector has declined to sign this form, stating that he believes the Guard will selectively leak and spin information that will damage his pending legal case. The Guard’s position is that Rector’s case is more complex than he suggests, and that the best course of action is to keep it moving ahead through traditional channels. (The channel Rector must navigate next is the Merit Systems Protection Board, which has been hobbled by the Trump administration.)
Last Tuesday, after much jostling back and forth, Rector and Knight met off the base for a short meeting that did not address any specific details of his case. In a statement, Rector said he wished Knight had met with him before making his decision, “an action that was fully his right to do but it certainly was disappointing for me.”
Rector has also been working to meet with the governor’s office, which has also been unsuccessful. Earlier this year, Rector said he outlined twenty “procedural deviations” in his case, and pointed to examples where similar or more serious violations had resulted in less severe punishments for Guard leaders.
“We need to recognize that one person alone cannot change the culture of an entire organization overnight,” Rector said. “I remain hopeful that General Knight and the Legislature can enact future protections to ensure that no Vermont National Guard member faces retaliation for doing the right thing.”
