The House Energy and Environment Committee has spent much of the first half of this session working on an Act 250 modernization bill. As passed out of committee this week on an 8-3-0 vote, it incorporates some of the provisions within the Necessary Updates to Act 250 report. Unfortunately, it does not yet include other important provisions from the significant package of compromises made by stakeholders before the session. These compromises were based on exemptions in smart growth areas, which are implemented alongside protections. When it is presented on the floor, Rural Caucus members have indicated that they plan to propose amendments. After passing through the House, the bill will be considered by the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee, along with the Senate’s version of a housing and Act 250 bill. The five Senators on this committee have the responsibility to implement changes that more effectively balance the efforts invested in this historic compromise.

While there is no single solution to Vermont’s housing crisis, modernizing land use regulations is a crucial step to encourage housing development and meet workforce needs across all income levels. The version of H.687 that the House Environment and Energy Committee approved introduces a vital framework for a tiered, location-based approach to Act 250. However, the current criteria for a smart growth area to qualify for Tier One status are too stringent, likely limiting the number of communities that can receive the exemption benefits.

Additionally, the proposed “road rule” as a new jurisdictional trigger would come into effect years before any area exemptions are approved. This timing means the road rule’s broad application could pose immediate challenges to large-scale housing development in our downtowns, villages, and neighborhood development areas. Implementing this trigger before the Tier One exemptions undermines the compromise agreed upon by stakeholders, and would add additional trigger in places where there has been broad consensus that expedited growth is necessary.

Furthermore, the bill proposes the establishment of an environmental board to decide on appeals to Act 250 decisions, shifting this responsibility from the environmental court. While having a professional board is crucial to ensuring Act 250 becomes a regulatory program that is fair, predictable, and timely throughout the state, assigning it the additional role of hearing appeals may lead to complications, as it would review decisions made by its own staff. This concern echoes the backlash from mayors, town managers, developers, housing advocates, and community leaders when a similar proposal was put forward in 2022, highlighting fears that it could complicate essential housing developments.