Vermont Chamber News

The House Environment Committee spent the week taking extensive testimony on S.325, hearing from a wide range of stakeholders. A clear theme emerged: growing concern with how Act 181 is being implemented.

While S.325 to date has focused on timing and technical fixes, the conversation quickly shifted to broader issues of trust, process, and how land use decisions are experienced on the ground.

Act 181 was designed as a collaborative, bottom-up effort, but testimony highlighted a disconnect between that intent and a more top-down implementation, particularly in rulemaking and mapping, where stakeholders were considered only advisory and public engagement happened too late. These conversations ultimately raised further questions regarding land use decisions.

In testimony this week, the Vermont Chamber supported key elements of S.325 that support greater clarity and stability in implementation, including:

• Maintaining interim housing exemptions to avoid disruption
• Improving clarity and predictability in Act 250 jurisdiction
• Continuing progress on Tier 1 designations

The Vermont Chamber supported provisions in S.325 that improve clarity and stability, including maintaining interim housing exemptions, clarifying Act 250 jurisdiction, and advancing Tier 1 designations. At the same time, concerns centered on the role and approach of the Land Use Review Board.

Testimony also signaled a shift in thinking, extending timelines to fix the broken process may no longer be enough to rebuild trust. Alternatives discussed included moving away from the current tiered mapping approach, expanding community-driven engagement outside of the land use review board, and refocusing the Land Use Review Board on consistent, predictable Act 250 administration.

As part of that discussion, a different path forward was raised:

• Stepping away from the tiered mapping approach and rulemaking under the Land Use Review Board
• Establishing a broader intentional community engagement effort to answer the questions at the core of protecting natural resources through a trusted community development organization
• Refocusing the Land Use Review Board on administering Act 250 to ensure a process that is predictable, fair, and timely statewide

S.325 is no longer strictly a technical bill—it has become a focal point for a broader conversation about land use, implementation, and trust in Vermont.

As the legislative session nears adjournment, attention is on what will pass—the budget, the yield bill, the final numbers. But a more consequential question is: what if they don’t?

The impacts aren’t theoretical. Without a signed budget, Vermont risks partial shutdowns, disrupted payments, and long-term credit effects. Without a yield bill, default property tax rates could trigger sharp increases—42.4% for nonhomestead and 13.7% for homestead, about $325 million more than needed for the Education Fund and leaving school districts, employers, and property owners without legislative adjustment to these costs.

This uncertainty doesn’t stay in Montpelier. It stalls planning, delays hiring, and pauses investment—not from lack of will, but lack of clarity. Timing matters. Early decisions create stability; late ones create pressure; no decision creates uncertainty—compounding Vermont’s fiscal and affordability challenges.

These bills are also signals—about alignment, decision-making, and predictability. Over time, those signals shape whether businesses expand, invest, or look elsewhere. The final days of session aren’t just procedural—they influence confidence in Vermont’s economic environment.

It is important to focus on what policy decisions mean in practice—connecting them to real business impacts and advancing a more predictable, affordable future. The budget and yield bill will pass. The question is how: on time with clarity, or late with ripple effects beyond Montpelier.

The House passed H.951, the FY27 budget, following a divided floor vote of 97-40, signaling a growing concern about spending levels and long-term fiscal sustainability.

The $9.3 billion budget is shaped by a constrained fiscal environment with competing priorities across Vermont. As federal support recedes and cost pressures persist, this budget reflects an attempt to balance immediate needs with targeted investments that deliver measurable return and support long-term economic growth.

The budget includes several investments aligned with the Vermont Chamber’s priorities, particularly in housing, workforce development, and economic competitiveness, though gaps remain.

Key Investments That Support Vermont’s Economy:

• $4 million in base funding for the Vermont Housing Improvement Program (VHIP), a proven, high-impact tool for bringing housing units back online and expanding workforce housing supply.
• $800,000 for the Manufactured Home Improvement and Repair Program (MHIR), preserving one of Vermont’s most accessible forms of affordable housing.
• $200,000 for Advance Vermont, supporting upskilling and stronger alignment between education and career pathways.
• $75,000 for the Vermont Professionals of Color Network, advancing efforts to attract and retain a broader, more diverse workforce.
• $150,000 for the International Business Development Office, supporting expansion of Vermont’s global trade and market access. 
• $300,000 in additional funding for the Serve, Earn, Learn Program, connecting Vermonters to workforce participation and training opportunities. 
• $2.32 million for Freedom and Unity Grants, continuing investments in workforce training and economic development.
• 3% base increases for UVM, VSAC, and Vermont State Colleges, supporting Vermont’s higher education system and long-term talent pipeline.
• $350,000 in Down Payment Assistance Program tax credits, supporting pathways to homeownership for moderate-income Vermonters.

These investments reflect programs that deliver measurable returns, expand housing supply, and strengthen Vermont’s workforce pipeline, aligning with key drivers of long-term economic vitality as identified in the Vermont Futures Project Competitiveness Dashboard.

However, not all high-impact economic development tools were fully funded, creating gaps that may limit business growth and workforce attraction. Notably, the Green Mountain Jobs and Retention Program was not funded at a level that fully supports workforce recruitment and retention, weakening a proven tool for attracting and retaining the talent Vermont needs to grow its economy.

A Budget Reflecting Increasing Scarcity

This year’s budget underscores a clear shift: fiscal constraint is now the operating environment. With more than $3 billion in budget growth since 2020, the expiration of federal relief funds, and Vermont’s already high tax burden, options for new revenue are increasingly limited. The split vote in the House reflects growing recognition that spending growth must be paired with economic growth, and that prioritization is no longer optional.

Without addressing the underlying drivers of economic growth, workforce, housing, and business competitiveness, budget pressure will continue to translate into constrained services and limited opportunity. Absent a sustained focus on root causes, this budget will not be an outlier, but part of a continued pattern of difficult tradeoffs in a constrained environment.

What Comes Next

As the budget moves to the Senate, there is an opportunity to further refine priorities and sharpen focus on high-impact investments. The level of division in the House suggests the path to final passage may be complex, with continued debate around sustainability, affordability, and spending levels.

In this environment, directing resources toward programs with demonstrated effectiveness and measurable return will be essential. For Vermont businesses, this budget reinforces a clear reality: long-term economic strength will depend on disciplined investment, a focus on growth, and alignment between spending decisions and the state’s economic capacity.