MONTPELIER – Amid this legislative session’s turmoil over Act 181’s land use revisions to Act 250, adding three tiers and a road rule, and the turmoil of an extended floor debate last week, Rep. Greg Burtt (R-Cabot) scored a win for Republicans.
His two pro-farm amendments to Senate bill S.325, make changes to Act 181, allow more development on rural farming properties.
S.325 “proposes to establish a task force to develop a detailed proposal to create residential opportunity overlay districts, A report of the proposed task force is due December 1, 2026.
Its most controversial provisions eliminate Act 181’s Tier 3 development restrictions and the road rule, requiring Act 250 review of development beyond 800 feet of a road, or with a driveway longer than 2,000 feet.
Democrats had already signalled their support for removing those provisions, in opposition to Gov. Phil Scott’s expressed support for them.
Burtt’s first amendment, allowing homesteading, received wide support with a 142-2 vote. It was added to “strengthen agricultural and forest industries, including homesteading, small-scale agriculture and forestry, and supporting housing, while minimizing conflicts of development with these industries.”
His more controversial second amendment, allowing on-farm businesses to bypass Act 250 provisions. “No permit or permit amendment is required for the construction of improvements for an accessory on-farm business,” it reads.
That amendment was approved with support from local Democrats Rep. Leanne Harple (D-Glover) and Rep. David Yacovone (D-Morrisville). Rep. Richard Bailey (R-Hyde Park) also supported it, while other local Democrats Rep. Mark Mihaly (D-East Calais), Rep. Dan Noyes (D-Wolcott) and Saudia LaMont (D-Morrisville) withheld their support.
Burtt reasoned that granting the permitting exemption for accessory on-farm businesses would include critical farm revenue streams from education-based activities and social events that take place on farm properties.
“This amendment makes it easier for Vermonters in every corner of the state, including our rural towns and counties, to responsibly grow their community, support economic development, and keep and attract working families,” he said.
Harple spoke last, before Burtt’s second amendment was voted on, saying, “I voted yes on this amendment because I cannot fight for local control in education if I am not also willing to fight for local control in housing development. I have faith that our local select boards will be able to make the best decisions for their own communities in terms of zoning and larger-scale housing projects and will also be able to use their own discretion about which projects should be approved and which should not. We all know we need more housing to fill our local schools to keep our communities alive, and so as an advocate for education I have to fight equally as hard for housing.”
The bill had been passed by the Senate before last week’s passage in the House. With the House amendments it has now returned to the Senate to have the two versions reconciled.
Paul Fixx is editor of The Hardwick Gazette and lives in Hardwick.
