Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Hi. Great. Welcome back to Southern Economic Development. Oh, we are after that very stimulating conversation before, we are gonna have another stimulating conversation because this committee, the senate committees have a deadline of January 29, next Thursday, for submission of a housing bill. I mean, for a committee bill. And because we don't yet have a housing bill that has been sent to this committee, this is protecting our truckers' by creating a a community housing bill that has elements of housing housing that we hope will affect our housing prices in in substantive ways. And it is we're beginning with many of the housing proposals that are in front of this committee that we anticipate coming or that are in other bills and proposals. This is a combination of things. And our my hope today is that Cam and Ellen very thoughtfully have put together many of the proposals in front of senate at the moment. And I think we wanna just take a very high look today at what some of them are. Kesha's bill may be introduced and may be sent to this committee today if that

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I was like, I want to introduce.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I truly don't know when. We don't know when. Day. And the challenge Is everything today?

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: That's 03:05. It's also already in the hallway.

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: It's in the hallway because I looked online,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: and I Okay. We don't know where it's gonna be sent. And so we are doing this work, will help us as we look at both Acesha's bills and other bills. But this has a combination of a number of requests from the administration, from legislature, from task forces, which have met over the summer. So this has a a combination of needs that have been articulated, and we're gonna go through it and at at a high level just to show you what's in it, and then we'll be discussing it and deciding what we wanna keep or not keep next next week for introduction, and then we'll continue to work on it. And then the bill will be sent to us. This is not a finished bill by any means. This is a draft of what we may or may not want to act on. Is that my hope clear? So Cam and Ellen, I just wanna begin by saying thank you help for helping us meet this deadline and put these pieces together. So, Cam, why don't you begin? Sure.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Good morning. Cameron Wood, office of legislative council. Madam Chair, would you like me to pull it up on the screen, or are you all okay with your paper?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: It's posted online if people want to follow along.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Great. I won't Jerry, have it

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: in front of us if people wanna write note. What what would you prefer to tell people? I I think this is fine. Okay.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So what you have in front of you is draft request number 26Dash0748. This has been organized as was mentioned, madam chair. It's been organized as a committee of dental. So a bill coming out of this committee. If you remember, we did multiple committee bills last year, including their bill related to housing. So similar start. It doesn't have a bill number. It just has a drafting request number until you all approve it and it gets introduced. I will also comment at the at the beginning because this has been pulled together, you know, over the past few days. It has not gone through our editing process, so that's why I have a watermark here of unedited draft. But I will also comment a lot of the language here has been pulled from other bills that have been introduced or, as was mentioned, are are in the process of being introduced hopefully today, etcetera.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Because when I think I'll be wondering with each section where it came from.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: K.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Like, who proposed it?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I will Okay. The for the chair. Okay.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So we're gonna start with the first section, which is labeled housing targets. This is going to add a section within the chapter in title 24 for regional and municipal plans, and Sorry. Specifically, this is gonna add 24 BSA four three eight eight, which would go in the subchapter under municipal development plans. So we're talking about municipal plans here, and I'm just gonna walk through. I will try to be relatively high level and Very

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: high level.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right. What the purpose of the subchapter is in it.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Correct. So this came from just to start off with the answer to the question, this came from a bill that has already been introduced, s two sixty seven, and that was introduced by senators Beck, Brennan, Brock, Baltimore.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: This is a piece of the administration's proposal. Oh, and we don't have my understanding. Correct. So what I have what we have done here is pulled the house in pieces out of bills that's not in San Luis. And then I don't know if those bills are gonna be active, so I've we have taken tried to take the housing pieces out. But this is the governor's Correct. But for us to just Yeah. I felt it needed

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I just don't know the number for me.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: What bill?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: This is the number. That's fine. This is from the administration.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Administration. Excuse 5. 267. 267.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yes. This is just this is from the administration. That's all I need to pull, and they have talked about it. Alex has talked about these things here. Right. Okay. It's not they haven't been discussed.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Municipal Plan has to include analysis of regulatory and fiscal constraint preventing the municipality from developing sufficient housing to meet the regional housing targets developed pursuant to the regional housing targets. That's primarily what this section is about. The rest of the section has some specificity over what the municipality has to include in doing this analysis, including looking at existing and projected housing needs of the Subdivision 1 to provide regulations that allow for the number of housing units that are needed. They have to looking at page two now, there has to be a quantification of the needed housing types under a, under b, an inventory of sites that are available to meet those targets, an analysis of the constraints to housing developments. Under d, a detailed description of what actions the jurisdiction may take, including updates to their zoning or bylaws, and updates to their infrastructure, including water and sewer capacity to meet those targets. The municipality can incorporate by reference other housing needs assessments that have been adopted. Moving to the top of page three, if the legislative body determines that they cannot meet those housing targets, the legislative body has to establish the minimum number of housing units that may be improved, developed, or rehabilitated during the plan period, and the actions that the legislative body will take to remove those constraints to develop that number of units, and then progress towards the construction of those units must be documented at each municipal plan adoption, renewal, or readoption. For these municipal plans, you have a lot of information here on the housing targets that need to be met, and some very detailed analysis and requirements for the municipality of how they're going to get there.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And the question I have, and we will as we take these sections off, if we decide we wanna take these sections off, is the date by which this needs to come to know. Who does this go to? These are And and by what's the date that they that means valid has to complete this plan. Okay. So we're we're already doing some of this work in the regional plans. And the mapping that we're doing, we know that work has to be done by December 26. Does this align with that? That's a the date is a question.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And I would just comment. My companion, Ellen, maybe have answered some of the questions and she jumps in the chair. So but happy to come back.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: She knows I just have to

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I don't know if there's specific dates that these have to be met. I think this will be an ongoing requirement for a municipality. If any point of municipality chooses to develop their own municipal plans, then it's going to be required to to go

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: through the process of percentage of communities that don't have municipal plan and The kingdom has not completed their regional housing target. So Maybe others have not. Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. So bottom of page three, we're looking at the next section here. Section two is gonna be tax credits and tax credit for affordable housing. And so really the key language is moving towards the top of page five. This is for the excuse me. I should say the bottom of page four. The down payment assistance program. So this is the program that's administered by the Vermont Housing Finance Agency. This is one of their, you know, tax credits that they're able to provide to raise funds for multiple different housing programs.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We just heard about this program. We just had robust discussion. Perfect. Perfect. So what you'll see at

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the top of page five, what we're doing is we're extending the tax credits authorized to fund this program through 2031. So moving from 2630.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right. And just to remind everybody, she I had anticipated this at $2.50 a year, and she's asking for $3.50 a year.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It is currently at $2.50. Correct. So if you wanted to increase those tax credits, you would need to amend them.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And that's her request. No. Not

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the governor's questions. Correct. I

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: don't remember the reason yet.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Sorry. Let me you know, will say where this came from s February.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yep. Minus This administration ask.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Understanding this was an administrative ask, whether it's limited to five years and whether there is agreement to increase. I don't know whether it's in the budget.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Will have to we passed economic development bill that she generated also now for us that we have done I just can't remember if

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: this is in the government's budget. I'll I'll double check it. Okay. Moving to the next section, section three on page five. This a a similar type of proposal to this was also in an s two sixty seven. Correct. So this is an on-site construction accelerator pilot program. One thing I will mention, what's not in here is I believe the administration was asking for $6,000,000 to administer this program. That is not currently in this language. Right. But the substance of the pilot itself is here for use officer review. This would have the agency of commerce and community development in collaboration with BGS. So there'd slight tweaks to what the administration proposed. BGS being added as a collaborator here is one of them. But they would work to develop a pilot program and work with a municipality who's willing to partner with them Right. Really to it's a sub b is really what you wanna focus on, to consider the following elements, trying to do bulk purchasing for a single development site or an aggregation of multiple development sites, streamlining regulatory processes, creating a loan loss reserve for construction, utilizing off-site construction, establishing a statewide procurement consortium for bulk orders, aligning local and state permitting, and creating and adopting an off-site building tool. Any insights into why DPS is a collaboration? The I worked on this language with some some individuals in this body, and the thought there was when you're doing that bulk purchasing because BGS for the states, they kind of oversee the German. Yeah. They do both. They provide for the state. They could. That's what we'd be exploring is, you know, if you want multiple developers or multiple sites, if you're wanting to do some sort of off-site construction, is there is it possible or feasible to do bulk purchasing on behalf of those entities to get better purchasing from Also, they own they own a lot

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: of land, and I spoke to commissioner Farrell today. They're also in discussion about state land that's underused for perhaps, well, and might be used for housing. There may be state land that's appropriate for this kind of construction work or this kind of program.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I'll just say I'm skeptical, and I would support this for former school sites that need to be turned to something else. That's probably what I would

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: support this year. So let's So You know what? I'd really appreciate it if we can all just be open minded about this, hear it all before we make judgments. And just you know, this is a start with a very tight deadline of trying to get the housing asks that I'm aware of that are housing into a bill so that we can at least be protected to this and have our interest represented in our room. But we'll need to know what the what Absolutely. There is a there's a lot more work to be done on this, and we'll when we if we decide to move forward on some of these sections, we will get lots of testimony, whatever we need.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So what you'll see is, you know, on the top of page six in the sub c, so we kinda get back to to your question there, it's also working with the state treasurer to identify the feasibility of the state providing a guarantee for facilitating these full premises. Right. Then you have D, as part of the pilot, a municipality willing to participate. You have municipal planning grants to be made available for the participating municipality, and then there's a report required 11/15/2028 with findings and recommendations. The report shall include information on whether to enact a statewide building code for off-site construction. Moving into the next few sections here, they're gonna be related to common interest communities. So section four is kind of a cross reference about application of this section retroactively to entities that currently exist. Section five on page seven. So what we have here is and and Senator Ram Hinsdale, if I may, this came from your draft bill, which really just want to introduce today. So this, in sub A here on the bottom of page seven, moving to the top of page eight, this would restrict trying to be careful with my words here, right? It's gonna prohibit a common interest community from restricting unit owners in that common interest community from being able to lease those units out to other individuals. So short term rental?

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: No. Lease is not short term.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: This is just to lease, so think about it for a longer term rental business. So when you get to page eight, it says that they can prohibit subleasing, so we're not talking about subleasing. Under the sub three on page eight, we're not talking about transient occupancy, and then under the sub four, we're not talking about short term rents. Got it. Common interest communities could still prohibit all of those things.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And common interest communities, just to remind us, are homeownership association.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Essentially, Condominiums. Condominiums. What you would typically think is a home ownership association under our title. They're specifically called common interest communities. So, again, we are This is just saying they can't prohibit the unit owner from leasing their unit for a residential lease.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Residential

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: lease. Month to month. What's not? What bill number did this come from? This came from senator Ram Hinsdale.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: 305. We got a number today.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: It's going to get a number today hopefully. Hopefully will be sent somewhere.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: You can look online it's not there. It's on paper.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. So on the bottom of page eight under the sub B, the other key piece here is what you'll see family, childcare, homes. So this is section five. We this is the bottom of page eight, section five sub b. So as I just talked about with the leasing, similar language here to say that a common interest community cannot prohibit an individual from, moving to the top of page nine, look at line four, operating a family child care home within the unit owner's units. And so then there's just some key pieces here saying that this doesn't, the entity, if you're operating a childcare home, you still need to comply with requirements of what a childcare home must comply with. You would still comply with any zoning requirements, land use requirements, etcetera, outside of that. So that's just some additional And

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I think the chair of education.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Section six. Okay. I'm gonna section so section six and seven, they're highlighted blue here because this is just gonna need to be some cleanup if you all want to move forward with this. I just wasn't able to do it before I brought you a draft. They're the This is in a separate bill. I believe it was introduced to you all by Senator Perchleks Mhmm. Yesterday. So This is

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the EV? Yes, ma'am. Okay.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So so they're highlighted in blue, so I'll need to fix some statutory references because they're referencing the same new sections in law that we just went through with the the

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Well, this exists as a separate bill. We could always act on it as separate bill. It did have because we have other areas of common interest housing in this bill, I just thought, it makes some sense. What

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: you'll see is then in section six, it's just a similar cross reference that you have in section four. So that will just need to be cleaned up a little bit as we move this forward. The key piece here is gonna be section seven under page 10. So as you all got the introduction yesterday, this would essentially A common interest community would be required to allow an individual to establish electric vehicle supply equipment within their area or the area that they own. This was a discussion, I believe, in 2024. Damian, I believe, presented this bill last time it was introduced. He has a lot of knowledge in the space much more so than I do. So if you wanted to kinda deep dive on the electric vehicle supply aspects of this, I'd probably, you know And

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: it was slightly frickless worth right to charge as opposed to this is very focused on a a a property we own.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So key differences in what we've discussed in 2024 is this is only applicable to common interest communities. The bill that you reviewed in 2024 also applied to land boards and rentals. That has been stripped out. Some additional pieces that were removed. The previous bill that was introduced last by the NEM referred to TOU feeders, that has been removed, and then it also required, if I recall, it required the individual to maintain some sort of level of insurance to cover the electrical vehicle supply equipment, and that has been removed. So it's been narrowed down a little bit, but similar to what was introduced, Okay. We can come back and talk because there is a little bit of detail here about the process by which some of that applies, how, you know, individual, the townish community has a certain time frame. They are required to approve roof, otherwise, it's deemed to approve. You know, the individual who's installing it has to pay for it, any damage to the common elements, etcetera. So there's a lot of that down here that we can get into, but that is that section. Right. So I'm gonna get you all the way to page 14. I'm just doing a quick check, right? Yeah. Page 14, section eight is mobile home lot rent. So you all have a bill on your wall related to this, so that's where this came from. The call number is S34. It's

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: on

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the wall. This was discussed last year as possible admission in your committee bill for housing, so it's included here word for word is what's there in S34. This is a recollection. We did use some discussion about this last year. If a mobile home park owner proposes a lot rent increase that is more than one percentage point above the CPI index. So you get CPI plus one percentage. If the mobile home park owner proposes a lot rent increase above that, it goes through a process of mediation and then potentially into court. Right. What this bill would do is it would say that a mobile home park owner cannot increase lot rent above CPI plus 1%. So it puts a hard cap on that.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Remind me where to keep it.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: S34 me. Senator White introduced it, among others. Yeah. Alberta renewal is co sponsored by she was in the public. Okay. So that is the section eight, excuse me. We get to section nine on page 16. This is amending the Vermont Economic Development Authority.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: Is Sorry, David. Section eight. This is yours. Yeah. We were associated with it. What if there are improvements, enhancements?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So That that can be a surcharge or a very focused infrastructure improvement charge. The challenge we're facing is the lot rents increasing at a rate that are unsustainable by by in many mobile home parks. And this is trying to get at a way to stabilize lot rent increases, which are particularly hitting our income stabilized communities that are often in Where's the language about the

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: whatever you call it, the I can survive it. I'll

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: just say I didn't know we could do this, and it will it it will run into the same economic issues as rent control, where that doesn't you you then can't regulate how much a new person is renting at, and they could increase the law rent on someone new, which is the kind of economic

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I appreciate that part of what we ran into last year. Right. I I just felt we needed to discuss it, but then let's see if we can come up with a creature situation. No. No. It's Well, we we already established a way that they limited. So Well, mediation. Not Yeah. But sadly, it always seems to go down to the

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: They can also just sell. Right, the lot.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: In a separate section that is not in this

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I mean, well, if they rent it, then they don't.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: No. They don't. They rent the lot. They don't

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I'm saying the mobile home park owner could just sell the park. Yep. They could.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So, Denise, I will give you the statutory section in a previous section. In six two five one, there is a subsection in there that says that a mobile home park owner can charge a surcharge for infrastructure that would be separate from the law. Yes. That was right. We've already had existing law. Yes, sir. Okay. Page 16, section nine, as a Vermont Economic Development Authority, what this section is going to do is amend the definition of an eligible facility or an eligible project. As I described, Rita, it's the companion organization through the Vermont Housing Finance Agency focused on economic development. However, there are some provisions in current law that do allow the Vermont Economic Development Authority to assist in financing certain housing initiatives. Believe it's related to long term residential care. You all added that a few years ago. What this is going to do, you'll see on page 17, it's adding a new subdivision of the definition of an eligible eligible facility for which they can provide financing, and it states after consultation with and with deference to the Vermont Housing Finance Agency on applications that are eligible for financing from both the authority and the agency, The Vermont Economic Development Authority can provide joint financing with a financing lender for multiunit housing developments of five or more units. So it's expanding the scope of projects that FEDA can help finance to include multi unit housing development for five or more when requested by a financing lender. But they would have to consult with BHFA first. Right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. Why five eighty two program?

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: The request, my apologies, my understanding is this request came from VIDA,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So that would probably

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: be a question

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: They presented this, I think, on the day that you have a mic. I don't remember what I'm saying. Yeah.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: So, I'm not against this. I'm not hearing anybody, that is concerned with it, but I just wanna, you know, channel my inner something wrong. It seems like

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: That would be louder.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: If we're gonna use state dollars for this, I I I'm fine with the five more units, but it's about density too, higher density. So five units on 50 acres is not necessarily where I want our other state capacity.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Oh, think the four units on a quarter of an acre is great.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. So

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: I'm not against this. I'm not here against the current,

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: but that might be an We will ask John. We'll have John back.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Thank you.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Moving on. Yeah. This is my last section, and then I'm gonna pass it over to Ellen. Bottom of page 17, section 10, service, supportive housing. If you recall last year in your housing bill, there was a study committee that was created to try to develop a state plan to create a plan for housing individuals who receive Medicaid funded development disability services, etcetera.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: This is for our intellectually developmentally disabled, but for conceivably for more service supported housing. And this came out of our Act sixty nine task force, which Anne Donahue and I served on together.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So there was the task force. There was a report created. Happy to provide that report to you all if if you don't have it. I haven't been able to cross reference It's

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: on our report. It's on our website. Okay.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I did not I did not have the time to compare this specific request to what was in the report, but I will do so. But what this would do is it would create a task force that will go into statute. So this wouldn't just be a one time. This would be an ongoing task force that you all could reveal at some point if you so choose. This would create it under a subchapter within the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board. Right. Creates a task force quote, this is the bottom of page 17, line twenty twenty one. We monitor and report annually on the development of housing for individuals who receive Medicaid funded development and state services. That reflects the diversity of needs expressed by those individuals. Task force membership here on B. You're not going go through it line by line. Pathforce has

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: to meet at least

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: monthly. Executive Director of Vermont Development and Disabilities Council, which has me as the chair. The task force reports annually to you all, and it has the administrative technical legal assistance of Department of Aging and Independent Living, and that members of the task force not otherwise compensated can be entitled to per diem. I'm gonna flag a few things for you that you all need to consider if you move this section forward. As it's drafted based on the information that came to me of how to try to draft it into legislative language, it's currently under the oversight of the Vermont Housing Conservation Board, but it is shared by the executive director of the Vermont Development Disabilities Council, and it's being staffed by the Department of Aging and Independent Living. So there is a lot of multiple, yes, separate entities that appear to be overseeing and guiding it, so you just may wanna clean that up if you're doing the Okay, I have to. Second thing is I'll just comment, if you're going to provide compensation to individuals who are not otherwise paid, you're going to need to

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: to Yeah.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Where that funding is gonna come from.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yeah. And this doesn't have legislators on it, so I'm not sure that pay is an appropriate thing for us

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Just something you will need to consider. Yeah. I'm gonna jump to the very end real quick just to comment.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: On that list, it looks somewhat familiar.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Have we seen this before? It's similar to what the task force It's in task force report.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. And

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: so then I'm just gonna mention before I hand it over to Ellen that there are positions at the end of this, page 29. There's three positions going to the Department of Housing and Community Development. That is coming from s two sixty seven.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: That is the administration's ask, and the question is, it was I believe these are in oh, I don't remember if they're in the governor's budget or not.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And then there is created a in Department of Disabilities Aging and Living One full time classified position. I've highlighted it in blue because you may want to speak to the individuals who are proposing this position about what the position is. There would need to be clarity on what position we're creating. Typically, we will put either it's exempt or we'll put the actual position title of what positions can be created. So you may wanna speak to the requester for the advocates there. And then I'll mention there are some appropriations here, 250,000 for municipal and regional planning resilience funds. I believe this is in S two sixty seven. And then there is 5,000,000 to the Department of Housing and Community Development's base budget for funding BHIP. And then there's 3,000,000 to Vermont Housing Conservation Board for the purpose of providing the support for this housing for those who receive Medicaid funding bill, I just suppose.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So I just wanna mention on the BHIP money to frankly, it is has been put in the base, but we saw it put in the base last year in the end. So I I I I think for those of us who support VHIP, it's really important to get it stably anchored in the base budget. And what's why going to the president's budgets? I can't It's something flush. This is what the administration asked for, and I I'm happy with the advance.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And we have to know we have to look at the entire housing and see if it takes money

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: from other housing budgets. Right.

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: And we will let's we will

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: have GFO in to discuss that.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So you may wanna also ask them about funding for those positions. I included positions, but not funding for those positions. We'll get GFO in to discuss that. Okay. You want this or you got it? I'm gonna have it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Pam, thank you. You're welcome. And just on other housing related pieces, they're in the economic development bill. The Brownfield money and the tax credits are in the economic development bill. That's what they're looking at. Then I hope we'll have a

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: draft circulate for that. And so there's a lot of detail there. Obviously, we went over quickly, especially with the homeowners or communities that I would need to come back and talk to you about if they didn't have any of those things forward to come. But for now. Right. Thank you.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Pam, that was terrific. Thank you very much. I'm sorry, Peter. Hello.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Ellen Jakowski, Office of Legislative Counsel. So, the section I drafted start at the bottom of page 19, section 11, and so the language is on page 20. This first section is amending 24 VSA 4412. This is municipal zoning. The first provision on page 20 came from Senator Ram Hinsdale's bill. This is being very clear that mobile homes, modular homes, and prefabricated housing cannot be excluded from any district in a municipality that allows year round residential development rights. Further down on page 20, so currently no bylaw shall have the effect of excluding multi unit or multi family dwellings from the municipality, and in any district that allows year round residential development, duplexes shall be a permitted use with the same dimensional standard as the single family dwelling unit. It's changing from an allowed use to a permitted use.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: We're going whack a mole until they let us do this

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: by right. So, you have considered this change previously when you were working on this section.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It's And gone back and

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I think it left this committee as permitted, and then it somehow got changed. So loud is that right, Kesha?

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I mean, all I know is I'd like to hear from environmental court and our partners who keep getting stuck in administrative or appeals processes but I don't believe that's what we intended. To me, a lot of this is trying to clarify what we have intended in the past with thyroid development. Right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So to that point, I've asked Ellen at some point, probably not today, but to do a discussion because I think we think a lot more that we passed was actually allowed by right. And in fact, we have. It's it's been allowed, and that's why we've had so many appeals and and and we dispel these pushbacks. St. Albans, I think, is a good example, but there are many.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: There are many. That's right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: That I know about and that Kesha probably didn't see the going back. But the so this would really anchor it as a.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: We're working on that.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Just to be certain, this does not, this would not prevent a community from having a variety of other regulations that aren't specifically designed to exclude mobile homeowners so it's not circumventing all the other regulations.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Remember, we're talking about manufactured housing.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: So this would just not prevent them or would prevent them from literally excluding manufactured homes, any other regulation they have about block coverage, driveways, driveway distances, all those things still apply.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yes. Yeah, setbacks.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: They just can't explicitly state.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And right, manufactured does not automatically mean mobile faces less regulation because it is not tethered to the ground. Manufactured housing is now often connected to the ground. It's just prefabricated off-site. It's our off-site prefabs that we've been talking about already.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Or it could be mobile. And also, so the statute already prohibits towns from banning these forms of polemic, poker forms of poem. This is further clarifying that they are allowed in any residential district. Mhmm. And so, there may have been some towns that limited mobile and prefabricated homes to one zoning district only. And so this is allowing, this is requiring that towns allow them in other residential districts. All residential. Yes. All residential. Yes. So if I

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: can make this kind of, actually, need move chairs. So I want to make this kind of a practical application like Woodstock wanted to keep the character of their downtown and someone wanted to put a mobile home not a replacated home a mobile home into a particular lawn, this would not allow that type of exception prohibition.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So it would still allow the municipality to apply its other design standards and lot standards, so like lot coverage and setbacks, but they couldn't fully exclude residential districts.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: On the mere fact that they are mobile or manufactured? Yes. They can restrict on other mechanisms.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And they cannot, they can no longer restrict by character of the neighborhoods. Right.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: That's not an appealable, that's,

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: you can't appeal a municipality's decision based on the character.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right. We can't. Did that in the whole end, I think.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. So the net result? Yeah.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: To figure out where the net result is, Woodstock did not prohibit the installation of a Manufactured home. Manufactured home. I'm trying to

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: use your words, there's mobile home. More manufactured home.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: I'm not talking about that, I'm really talking about a mobile home. I want to make this very specific so I understand the concept of what this is this is.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Other aspects of municipal zoning and design review and all the other things they put in place are in place, but they could not prohibit putting in with all the other policies. You

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: say that you're going to rely on all these other exclusionary bylaws or whatever it is, municipality, facts of municipality. What are we, what is the doubt of fact? Really, I'm trying to get to the end of sentence. What's the punchline here?

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: We have huge charitable trusts come in and talk about that. They've been working on ensuring there isn't future discrimination against manufactured housing as well because that has become a great solution to lower the cost of housing.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: I understand why I

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: think what's I think what you're asking is, in a historic downtown, could you just even if you had the right setbacks and everything else, could you put a mobile home in the middle of a historic town? Yes. If if they could afford a lot, and the problem is with many of those 10 towns is that that, you know, you're not necessarily gonna put a mobile home on a lot that costs $2,000,000.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: So that's the exclusion by economic conditions.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Exactly. That already exists.

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: Well, I

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I think we're having, like, an ineligant conversation about one being a a mobile home in a historic downtown.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Like Yeah.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: It is That isn't the that isn't the point of this.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: Well, I'm trying to figure what the point is.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Well, let's have I mean, are we doing that right now?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We we're gonna have that conversation when we take up this section up, but I think for David's answer right now is yes. It it enables a all towns in Vermont, at least the way it's drafted down, they are able to given all the other things they require, they must allow, the ability for somebody to put in a manufactured house. And I think I hope yeah. And we will discuss that further.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Put in a manufactured home provided it doesn't have wheels. But wood stock could require two stories for higher efficiencies

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: if the man could have been one two

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: stories then it would be prohibited and that's not a

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: bargaining thing. Clearly this needs a lot of clarification. Sure. I understand what it means.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: If we can't, we don't right now. We're just we're just getting introduced. This is a piece of vocation's bill, which we may or may not get. Right.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: So And we have we have tried to accomplish this in the past.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We did. And but we let it go through as allowed and not as permanent. And it's is the difference, David. The the town at the moment is able to appeal and say, no. We don't want this for a variety of reasons. Ella? So

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: on page 21, still in 4412, one of the provisions you added in the Home Act is here on line three in any district that is served by municipal water and sewer infrastructure that allows residential development, multiunit dwellings with four or fewer units shall be permitted, permitted use on the same size lot as a single family dwelling. It's striking the clause that was also added that said unless the district specifically requires multiunit structures that have more than four dwelling units. So, this was something that sort of undoes the requirement that towns allow for bulk unit dwellings with up to four units. They can instead allow not to do those small unit development that instead require more than four units. So, I think it was sub You may have I believe what you said to me was that it was subverting what you were trying

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: to do with the four unit buttons. I think that's what Kesha's intent

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: No, you This is not

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: in Kesha's intent. You and I talked about this. Yes.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Intent with this, but

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: we can maybe Discuss this from you. Yeah.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Section 12 on page 21, this is from Senator Rutland Hillsville. This is about the definition of areas served by municipal water and sewer infrastructure. It's adding the language that it's an area within one quarter mile of a road with water and sewer lines where there's capacity or capacity could be added to accommodate housing.

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: This

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: definition is quite long, it goes on for the next page and a half, but there are other caveats that are part of it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: This also has, because this is a lot of space. Well, mean it goes to your concern about that.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: We said where there he said a long water and sewer capacity, and I truly did not I mean, I was getting asked by federal municipalities to look at individual situation and what our legislative intent was. And I didn't want to speak for our legislative intent so we can look at this, but that's what I thought we meant. I mean, we were having projects where they said, well, there's a sewer line, but the water's in the road and it's not on the land, and that's gonna prevent any new connections for on a on a road that has water and sewer, and that's I don't

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: think what we intended.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Pressurized line isn't necessarily accessible so these are the long point of accesses where the pumps should You

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: could prohibit everything on Route 7 by saying they don't have

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: a water hookup right now.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: It'd be helpful to understand how this is different than current state.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So do remember, do remember two years ago we talked about that road that had water and sewer all the way up and there was no development until they got to the top where the water and sewer was supposed Right. Yes. Right. This would enable that density along that entire And

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: to be fair about that issue, we have we said in the HOME Act at least, if you have said no housing could go on this piece between those two areas, like this is a park or whatever, But you can't say, oh, it can be single family homes, but we're not letting you have a a water sewer hookup for

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: other things. If it's going through forest or if it's going through conserved land, it's still conserved land. I mean, it's

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: You cannot be denied access to water and sewer based on That's true. That was what I thought we tried to. Right.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Alright. The next change is on page or the next section is on page 23. Section 13. This is also from Senator Rutland's bill. Union labor. So any residential housing construction that uses union labor for construction may exceed a density bonus, by an additional 20%. So this would be number of units can be, increased if you're using union labor.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And this is obviously I mean, it would be very interesting to know in this state, there's almost no union labor used on individual homes. There is. Not only Not individual. But this is mostly getting at our much bigger housing developments. And I know there's also interest in at prevailing wage too on these, but union labor assumes prevailing wage, I believe.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: This, for me, is one sentence

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: around which I hope we

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: have many conversations. Yep. Union labor for construction, density, Yep. Density all the density.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Pushing density is what we have been hoping for in the it's rather small areas where it's actually may fall to the job.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: I have questions on this about qualifications, like how much, 50% of the labor, do they just need to hire one union for one small contract? Not against this.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I think the union would love to come in.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Think more than one thing. Yeah.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Thanks. Alright. So still on page 23, section 14. This is language this is extending the interim exemptions under Act two fifty. So this was in the administration bill. Senator Ram Hinsdale, I can't remember if it's also in here.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I would've been really proud

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: of myself when I put it in,

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: but don't think I did. I'm And then, so in addition, these

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I would've said twenty thirty.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. So the administration said twenty thirty. I admit after We

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: did yeah. We just did it for this for further discussion, but I I I do think that we're hopeful that we're gonna have everything in place, and I think to extend it beyond what are we what we have for work to be done. Thanks.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Why sense, but not Why January instead

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: of July? Good questions for discussion For December.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Well, July, we do a lot of, like, financial awards. Mean, our our

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: our state budget is July, but, you know, year end is Construction and.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So currently in the statute there are multiple exemptions for housing units under Act two fifty. Under the statute currently it's either 01/01/2027 or 07/01/2027. There's a mixture in the statute. So this first one is for the priority housing projects. So extending the sunset until 01/01/2029. On page 24, it goes on to say, It's the construction of a priority housing project or the related subdivision. So that's currently not in the statute. It's just the housing unit itself. That's exactly from Act 15, not the subdivision margin, which may or may not trigger Act two fifteen. Section Wait. Wait. I'm at the top of page 24 for that. Okay. So the year being extended and it also included Wait. Because So we're excluding I mean,

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: so many of the fights after the home act were Overwhelmed by division. Yeah. So I We're fixing that. That is three of Thank you. That's three of 10.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Section 15 does a similar thing, which is, again, there's the temporary exemption for construction of accessory dwelling units, so extending that until 01/01/2029. Additionally, page 25, the sunset on the exemption for converting a commercial structure to 29 units of housing from Martin Burek. Again, JR1 twenty twenty nine. And then further down on page 25, the other interim housing exemptions, are for up to 75 units in a new town center, growth center, or neighborhood development area. Again, 01/01/2029.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Still consider myself a little new rep here. But one thing I'll say about January that gives me concern is, it just doesn't give that legislature much time to react if there's, like, a lot of looming pressure to extend it, whereas July gives the whole legislature just breathing time.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: This is fiscal time.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: So July

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: administration's proposal, and we can certainly discuss it. I take we've taken on board January as a challenge.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Same further down on the page for 50 units of housing in a village center with one quarter mile. And then in this page as well, it's also saying it's the construction of housing projects and mixed use development that can be accepted under these provisions. Additionally, on page 26, there is a change. This was in the administration fill. The exemption currently is for up to 50 units of housing. And I'm looking at line eight on page 26, in areas located within a census, an urbanized area with over 50,000 residents, and currently it says and within one quarter mile of transit, they're changing that to or within one quarter mile of transit route. There is only one urbanized area in the state. It is part of Chittenden County, and so this would be extending it to up to 50 units of housing are exempt within one quarter mile of an area of a transit route, which presumably there are other transit routes in the state.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And what qualifies a transit?

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: There is a definition in statute.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. And obviously, we'd have to explore that fully because everything is a transit route to something for something.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It is talking about public transportation. Yeah. Next, on page 26, again, extending until 01/01/2029, this is for the housing exemption, any housing constructed within a downtown development area with permanent zoning in subdivision, sewer and water. That's any construction. So giving the same date extension to all of the intra housing exemptions under Act two thirty. On page 27, this now is shifting to, change it to tier one B and tier one A. Can I just make

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: sure I understand, I just wanna, because we have like

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: a little background part of it?

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: All of the extensions in the governor's bill were requested for 2030. Correct. But you you and you left at those and made the chair decision of 2020. I I just wanna make

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: sure that's Yeah. Correct. Yes. Okay. Just because, again, we are this is all in play. The LERB is getting all the maps by '26. We will they will build the action in '27. It does strike me that two years beyond the the time where we've asked everyone to have everything in place just just seems long. That's all. And everybody says there's so many projects in play. We've asked the land we've asked to see how many of the, you know, the interim exemptions are working. They are. We've asked for examples of them so we can see and appreciate what's going on and what the lag times are.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Well, I'll just say from the testimony last week, I am increasingly concerned about the trajectory and direction of the LERB and I do think they need some guardrails hone them in. So I am much more supportive of a longer timeline because I'm really worried that with what the LERB might put into effect and what's blooming out there, it's going create more uncertainty for a lot of different fronts. So I love the idea of 2030. I'm think these exemptions are working. So I'm glad we're gonna have work to discussion on this.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yeah. This is

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: itself is getting actually motivating me to want to extend this for

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: a long time. I think there's such early days at the moment that we

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: It's I hate when you say early days, I'm like three years now.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yeah. Okay. Let's let's keep going.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Alright. So on page 27, section 16, this is first is tier one b. So, Act two fifty, tier 1B created in Act 181. So, this is changing from, currently for tier 1B, a municipality has to opt in. They have to ask the Regional Planning Commission to include it in the regional map. This is changing it to opt out. So, the municipality has not requested to opt out of having the area mapped for tier one B. A municipality may request to opt out by submitting a resolution passed by the municipality to the district, to the regional commission and central.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I believe Just remind everybody about 1A. 1A is That's the next part. Yeah, sorry. Yeah, that's not correct.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And I was gonna say, I think this is in both the administration bill and Senator

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Rutland's bill.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. And then the next section, section 17, is related to tier one a. So tier one a has a separate process. Municipalities themselves apply for tier one a. Tier one b is handled by the Regional Planning Commission, but tier 1A is about the municipality and what is required of them to get the tier 1A exception. This is adding language that says a municipality has to have municipal staff, regional planning commission staff, or other contracted capacity adequate to support basically a zoning program, they have to be able to administer zoning permits in there. In the area that, this is, I think, just clarification that regional planning commission staff and contractor capacity are some of the forms that labor for municipal boards can take.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Maybe some of the public. Would this also be a section where we might look at underscoring our intent around permanent up to 50 exemptions in tier one a? What I'm hearing is this this back and forth between the LERB and municipalities that they still have to manage all of these Act two fifty permits and exemptions versus what I thought our intent was, which is to say, now we've determined this is an area where the land use question is settled. Is there, are there legal reasons we can't just exempt them all from Act two fifty? So the way that it was structured in Act 181

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: is that the municipality was supposed to take the permit conditions out of an existing Act two fifty permit and put it into the municipal permit so that then they would enforce it through the municipal permit through their authority there.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: So I feel like that happened after they left this committee. I'm not

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: sure where it happened, but that is, I believe, what some is a sort of prohibiting factor for some towns. And we need to hear from them, and we have some towns

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I just wanna know if it's this section of the audit. I don't know.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It's in well, the authority part part of the authority is in the section that we've got. It's also in the municipal sections. Okay. But

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I wanna benefit them to get tier one a, not make it a difficulty. Like, make it more if this is supposed to be

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: we wanna just With more g and able, With less stuff to do. On on the other hand, while we you also if you're gonna take it, oh, how much is involved? Because often, these are projects that were done. Once they're done, there there isn't refuge in

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the the Ministry of Brain Labs. This project's take twenty, thirty, forty years.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: So they continue to be forced to track this.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And they still have a puddles involved. So Well Anyway,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I think we should appreciate what this actually means Yeah. In terms of an additional burden.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And we I've suggested some.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yes. We have. Let's try let's just make sure we get the all those things, which we'll do on this section. Paul. Paul O'Connor.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Good. Why don't you?

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So the last section is on page 28, section 18. Section 18. So, this is actually back in the Act two fifty in terms of exemptions. This should probably be merged with actually one of the earlier sections. So, it's striking the reference for In tier one B areas, when they are approved, there will be an exemption for up to 50 units of housing, and it currently says on a tractor tract of land involving 10 or more acres, or 10 acres or less, so it's removing that restriction so it will not be on a specific parcel size.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Where's the stomach roof? Is this your bill?

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I'm not. Is this act tension and densifying things?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Actually, I and I think that's why it's in a different set.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Well, it would have either came from the administration's bill or Or occasions. Yeah. So I I'm I'm not sure.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. But And then the There's one last change on page 29.

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: I I will say

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: 50 units on 10 acres or less can be a bit hard to achieve. I mean, we heard from Orleans where they were making them do half an acre for each mobile phone that they wanted to put in place. So I don't remember if this is mine. I may have been trying to solve a problem and don't recognize the language, but I'm very open to this.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Yeah. Not all acres are the same, so I think somebody can't fill

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: up Of course. Exactly. Proposing. Yeah. Generally. So we get acres that aren't appropriate. Oh, okay.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And then it says it still says 10 acres or less for mixed.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: So I just have a big

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: question mark with the Yeah. Here, but we're gonna do Okay. Then we go to the positions that the administration has asked for, and then the department's So,

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: on page 29, there's one last provision. It's striking the language, fill in this section, that neither Land Use Review Board nor the agency of adaptive resources shall enforce permits, existing Act two fifty permits, unless the area designation is revoked or the municipality has taken no action to enforce a permit. It's shrinking that language. So I guess it's giving back the authority of the board to enforce Act two fifty permits?

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: I'd love testimony from people

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: that understand the implications of this. Yeah.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: I don't follow that section.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Well, or we don't really follow. I mean, we don't fully understand. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Ellen. So we have outlines of sections that, I'm just curious what sections people are interested in as you look at it this weekend. Appreciate hearing and we will take on Tuesday. We will either be also looking at patients bill and then really walking and or walking through this and making sure we have what we want, don't want, if it's in draftable form. And we aren't going be able to understand it all fully necessarily, but it will be we will have further discussion on

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: this once we know more as of you are you scheduling a look at the governor's budget request for housing? Yes.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Great. We're gonna have JFO come in and and explain what's in and what's out and how it aligns with the housing purpose. The loss. But we tried to include the major housing asks that were in both the administration's bill, in Kesha's bill, on the wall. And And I

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: have to say it's hard

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: to know what's not here from my bill. Oh, but most of

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the stuff that's in SNRE is not you know, the stuff that and just like with the administration, their bill got sent there. So I try to pull out the housing piece. I appreciate you putting tier one a and b Yeah. In here. Well, we don't wanna fight about that.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Lurbgargren hasn't stopped my mind, so sure. I'm assuming it's over there, but I'd love

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: to know what their

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: needs are.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: The appeals. It needs to

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: come back. Yep. Appeals is starting over there, and then we'll get it.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: And and you have so it is moving in natural resources. Yes. That's That's

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I mean, people have been

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: asking me, and I'm like, I actually Okay.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I've got that's the plan.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: So you think we'll get it in two weeks? Three.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We're gonna have three weeks, they get three weeks. That was the whole. So people who you

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: know that We could also look at some of those issues.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We could, but we're gonna have our own work cut out here. And we have a lot of other things. Have big cannabis as a filler, as I recall next week, we're going to be hearing about some of And that is enough. We have a lot of work, both in economic development, in cannabis, in housing, in economic development.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: as I will remind us, all we have a big jurisdiction in this community. There are a couple of requests that I would say are still wanting to be developed and honed. There's a homeownership an additional homeownership piece that if we can narrow a little bit more fully, we might wanna include. Megan, do you wanna take five minutes just to remind everybody what that might be Sure. Just because it's a it's an area I would if we can narrow it, it it just can raise some concerns about how broad it is.

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Megan, it's all

[Megan Sullivan (Vermont Chamber of Commerce)]: Thank you, Ellen.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Of government goes to the

[Megan Sullivan (Vermont Chamber of Commerce)]: run chamber of commerce. So this one is about the HOME Act's restricted homeowners association, state covenants moving forward from restricting the ability to build something like an ADU or an additional unit of housing. That doesn't affect all those HOA's fee covenants that are currently in place, and they are extensive around the state, and they are in places where we've said this is where we want to bill, but it is actually illegal to bill in those without updating bylaws or updating gate covenants. This would be a small stick approach of saying for those HOAs in those areas, if those places are going to be applying to any state grants for assistance on wastewater funding or infrastructure funding, that state grants would have additional scoring metrics that would you would remove points if you are not actually helping with the state's priorities of allowing housing to build. It doesn't mean that people have to build housing. In an HOA, you say, could Okay, well, we're just not going to go for that state funded because we don't want do it in our bylaws. So it doesn't mandate anything, but it's just a way to show that if you're applying for state funding, you're going to lose points if you're not actually helping the state priorities or

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: open to that. So I'm hoping you would count maybe in the next couple days really on that. The other piece I am just going to flag that's not in here, that the administration that Alex is particularly keen on is the fly right designs. And that we also can look at including, as you'll recall, it's the the they are developing 10 designs that communities could incorporate, and if they incorporate them, then they they basically it's like an exemption, and they and they go. Yeah. We need more testimony and I can't remember why we didn't include it, but it's certainly up for discussion. It's something that we'd be interested

[Megan Sullivan (Vermont Chamber of Commerce)]: While I'm here, can I make one quick point of question about the tier one a why? Like what does the municipality need to take over? And that is typically because if in an existing Act two fifty on a property, they might have said, you get this approval, but with that are these strings. You have to do X, Y, and Z. You have to maintain these things. Right. In perpetuity. In perpetuity. So, without having to come back or you have to come back for a minor adjustment or maybe depending on what is. So, that's what the town bylaws might not say that same thing. And so I think there are some who fear that if you just say this area is now exempt, that those pieces that had been agreed to, are now not going to be enforced. Now, I am not saying that is a good thing or a bad thing. Somebody wants to move forward with the development and the town is saying, yes, go forward.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: We can just now pause.

[Megan Sullivan (Vermont Chamber of Commerce)]: But it's that inheriting somebody else's regulation that I think is where our tides are. Like, we don't have the capacity to enforce what the state has mandated. We're focused on are

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: some of your parents. So I think there's a going forward there's a going forward requirement that might be different from the past approvals and that past passed act two fifty approvals. Well, I this raises for me that

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: I wanna make sure people don't rush to include

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: all

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: of this before the effective date.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: No.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: 2025. Like, I don't want them to go put in their bylaws now that they prohibit certain things so that when this law takes effect, they have

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I already know what you're

[Sen. David Weeks (Clerk)]: talking The HOA piece? Yeah. You already have that moving forward. We have that. But when '24 passed. Okay. The effective date of the home passed, I think, was So they Yeah. Okay. So anything that was built after in 2024, 2025. They

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: could not put in the All new Okay. Wait. Ham, are still here?

[Ellen Czajkowski (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Ham, are still here? Yeah.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Member)]: Could they I don't remember his childcare piece was, like, they just can't do it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Doesn't matter. So You've ever said you can.

[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So that is a piece that I would need to come back and talk with the committee about because those provisions, the leasing, the child care, and the EV charging all have provisions making them retroactive, and you do have some constitutional issues

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: that we'll need to discuss with the committee about doing that. For it. Yeah. Well, we are ready for it. That's why we're here. Okay. Think I think we are here. Thank goodness. It's given us a lot of thoughts for the weekend. And for next week, we'll see you next week. Thank you. Have a great weekend offline.