by Don Keelan

Vermont is rarely noted on page one of the Wall Street Journal. 

It does, on rare occasions, happen: Vermont’s debate to adopt Civil Unions, Governor Howard Dean’s campaign to be his party’s presidential candidate, and of course, the perennial comments from the State’s senior senator are just a few. 

Now add to the above, Jared Mitovich’s October 13, 2025, WSJ’s front-page story, “Leaf-Peeping Tourist Fall Out of Favor with New Englanders.” It is a story that unfolds at the height of nature’s extravaganza, which takes place every fall in Vermont. 

According to Mitovich, some towns in Vermont —specifically Huntington, Promfret, and Reading — wish the invading leaf-peepers would just stay away and go elsewhere to take in the majesty of what nature bestows on Vermont. 

Tourists flocking to the above towns are not welcome. There is a low tolerance for their reported behavior: dumping trash on town roads, defecating on private property, and the most significant local complaint — traffic tie-ups. No one would dispute that the former behavior is unacceptable, and fortunately, it represents a fraction of the 2.5 million visitors who come to Vermont at this time of year. 

Nevertheless, the traffic issue has irked town residents to the point that they have hired temporary police to close roads to leaf-peepers. How welcoming. 

It is not a well-kept secret that a sizable portion of Vermonters would just as soon see that tourists, skiers, second-homeowners, and leaf-peepers by-pass Vermont altogether and go elsewhere. 

The attitude that took place in Huntington, Promfret, and Reading, and its reporting in the WSJ, was unfortunate but not particularly impactful.

What is, however, taking place in many small towns throughout Vermont is a negative attitude toward developing infrastructure for housing. 

The vocal anti-development folks make it clear at selectboard, planning, and zoning meetings: we do not want development and “those kinds of people.” If they are unsuccessful at the approval levels, there is always the courts. The time and money to block a project are of little concern to them. What is important is to maintain the status quo. 

The rural and other selected areas of Vermont that firmly believe in maintaining the status quo in their town are now about to see the price of harboring such a position. 

In January, the Legislature could be changing the makeup of Vermont school districts, with dozens of rural schools up for closure. There are just not enough children to educate because fewer families have kids. Why? Because there was a lack of housing for a workforce whose families would have provided children for the soon-to-be-closed schools. 

In the rural areas, it will not only be the closing of schools. The Green Mountain Care Board may begin the process of closing hospitals that primarily serve the rural communities. Professionals who worked at such hospitals have been withdrawing for years, beds were underutilized, and a positive cash flow position was not materializing. 

If there is good news, none of the above is occurring in Vermont’s more urban areas. New schools are being built, hospitals are expanding, and housing, whether through ownership or renting, while terribly expensive, is available, as well as industry, employment, and young people. 

It is the latter that Governor Phil Scott has been addressing for years. Vermont needs young people to pay taxes and provide services that an aging rural Vermont population will not be able to provide in the future. 

The above was stated more succinctly by Jay Bellows, the Chair of the Vermont State Workforce Development Board, on October 22^ndin the Bennington Banner: “Housing is a key tool for Vermont’s workforce development initiatives. It is essential for Vermont’s economic development. And it is the only way that the state will be able to grow its community development.” 

For years, this columnist has been sounding the alarm about the ever-dwindling ranks of employees in rural Vermont’s sectors of medical/mental health, public safety, tradespeople, educators, retail, and tourist accommodations. Now add to this the dearth of attorneys, especially in southern Vermont. 

Vermont needs to stay off the front page of the WSJ unless, of course, it is a positive story.