Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. used a Government House briefing Monday to push back against renewed scrutiny surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, outline plans to submit new firearms legislation to the Legislature, and clarify the intent behind two proposed, nonbinding ballot questions tied to road repairs and hospital funding.
The briefing followed Bryan’s recent State of the Territory Address and came amid renewed public discussion after the U.S. Justice Department released millions of pages of records under the federal Epstein Files Transparency Act, including internal memoranda documenting a voluntary FBI interview with former V.I. Attorney General Denise George.
Addressing questions stemming from the recently released Justice Department records, Bryan cautioned that the materials being circulated do not reflect prosecutorial findings or adjudicated facts.
Among the roughly 3.5 million pages released by the U.S. Justice Department, four pages summarize a voluntary interview George gave to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in October 2023. The interview memorandum recounts George’s description of the Virgin Islands’ dealings with Jeffrey Epstein and his estate, as well as other legal disputes involving the government during her tenure.
According to the memo, George told investigators that shortly after her 2019 appointment, Bryan raised Epstein’s request for a waiver of the territory’s 21-day sex-offender reporting requirement — a waiver George said she denied. The memo recounts George’s characterization of subsequent communications with the governor, including text messages and conversations related to the government’s civil litigation against Epstein’s estate and the pace and scope of that case, among other things.
Bryan said Monday that the interview memorandum consists of raw investigative material reflecting one person’s account, and emphasized that it does not establish facts or conclusions by federal prosecutors. He reiterated that his administration granted no concessions or special treatment to Epstein or his estate and characterized renewed attention to the memo as a misrepresentation of the record.
“These are not conclusions. They are not adjudicated facts,” Bryan said, adding that none of the claims are new and that repeating them does not make them true.
Bryan stated unequivocally that the Epstein estate received no concessions from his administration, emphasizing there were no favors, special treatment, or backroom deals. He characterized the renewed attention as a political distraction rather than a substantive issue.
Administration to Submit Firearms Legislation as Federal Lawsuit Continues
Bryan also addressed firearms policy, saying his administration is preparing to submit gun legislation to the Legislature to modernize the territory’s permitting system and bring it into constitutional compliance. His comments come as the U.S. Department of Justice is pursuing a civil lawsuit filed in December against the government of the Virgin Islands, the Virgin Islands Police Department, and Police Commissioner Mario Brooks, alleging that VIPD’s gun permitting practices impose unconstitutional delays and conditions on lawful gun owners.
The federal suit, brought by the Justice Department’s newly created Second Amendment Section, claims that Virgin Islands firearms laws mirror provisions struck down elsewhere by the U.S. Supreme Court and that subjective standards and prolonged processing have rendered the right to bear arms “a virtual nullity” in the territory. Bryan told the Source after the briefing interview that the administration agrees changes are needed and is drafting legislation to eliminate discretionary determinations, streamline licensing, and shift toward registering the individual rather than each firearm — while still barring access for people legally prohibited from possessing guns.
The administration’s proposal would enter a Legislature already considering firearms policy. Sen. Clifford Joseph is the sponsor of Bill No. 36-0144, a sweeping gun-control measure that has drawn sharp public debate and was recently sent back to committee. If transmitted, Bryan’s bill would give lawmakers two distinct approaches before them: the Legislature’s broader restrictions proposal and the administration’s narrower effort to resolve constitutional deficiencies highlighted in the federal lawsuit.
Ballot Questions Framed as Public “Temperature Check” on Roads and Hospitals
Bryan also provided additional detail on two nonbinding “questions” he plans to place on the 2026 General Election ballot, stressing that the items are intended to measure public support — not to enact law directly.
“These are nonbinding,” Bryan said. “They’re really about seeing where people’s temperature is.”
According to Bryan, one question would ask voters whether they would support additional funding mechanisms to address the territory’s deteriorating road conditions, including chronic potholes and long-deferred maintenance. The second would ask whether voters support additional funding mechanisms to stabilize and support the territory’s hospitals, which he said continue to absorb millions of dollars each year in uncompensated care.
Bryan emphasized that the ballot questions would not specify an income tax rate, contribution amount, or funding structure, and would not take effect automatically. Any change in law or funding would require action by the Legislature.
However, speaking after, Bryan said that affirmative votes could serve as a mandate for legislative action, including a proposal originating from his administration.
“If they say yes, I could submit legislation,” Bryan said, explaining that voter approval would provide political direction rather than a binding requirement.
As an example — which he stressed was illustrative, not a proposal — Bryan referenced the possibility of a small, income-based contribution from residents, such as 1 percent, as a way to spread costs broadly rather than relying on emergency appropriations or absorbing deficits after the fact. He said any such mechanism would need to be debated publicly and enacted by lawmakers.
Bryan also acknowledged the timing of the questions, noting that the ballot would fall near the end of his term. He said the goal was to give policymakers — current and future — a clear signal of public priorities.
“The Legislature would still have to act,” he said. “This is about understanding what the people want.”
