By Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale

As we’ve worked to bridge divides on land use, housing, and affordability, I often think about the late Senator Bill Doyle’s famous “Doyle Poll,” filled out by thousands of Vermonters each Town Meeting Day for decades.

Most years, the poll asked some variation of what appears to be a simple question: do you think there is too much, too little, or just enough economic growth in Vermont?

But, year after year, the answer was pretty evenly divided — no matter where you lived.

There’s one thing Vermonters aren’t split on, however: we all want our children and grandchildren to be able to afford to live here.

That’s what matters most. And it’s how I approach conversations about land use, housing, and the future of our communities.

Lately, though, I’ve heard from many Vermonters who feel like the system isn’t working for them — and worse, that the system is working against them.

People want to build a home for their family, start or grow a small business, or adapt their land for a changing economy. Instead, they’re running into permitting processes that are too expensive, too slow, and too hard to navigate.

That frustration is real. And if we don’t acknowledge it, we won’t fix it.

This isn’t about being anti-regulation, as Vermont has long led the way on smart growth. We’ve made deliberate choices — from banning billboards to passing Act 250 — that protect what makes this place special.

But those protections were never meant to preserve Vermont in amber.

When we passed the HOME Act and Act 181, many of us were trying to return to Act 250’s original principle: compact village centers surrounded by working lands.

Instead, over time, layers of permitting, litigation, and bureaucracy have made those village centers feel exclusive, while working lands are becoming harder for working people to access.

Today, Vermont has one of the highest rates of second homeownership in the country and one of the most serious housing shortages. We are losing farms, losing local industry, and losing the next generation of our workforce.

The status quo has not been working. That’s why we acted.

But now, parts of Act 181 — especially the rollout of the tier system — are not working the way they were intended. Instead of bringing clarity and local planning, they are creating confusion and concern about top-down decisions.

That’s not what we set out to do. And it’s why we are slowing the process down and making changes.

Some have chosen to turn to political division at this critical moment instead of focusing on solutions.

In a recent conversation with Senator Anne Watson and members of the Rural Caucus, I raised a concern about Tier 2 in the three-tier land use mapping process: “We need to figure out Tier 2, because what is the no man’s land that is Tier 2?”

Though an admittedly uninspiring statement, I wasn’t talking about land or people. I was talking about a gap in the law.

Because when the rules aren’t clear, the system makes the decision for you — and right now, that system often favors the wrong kind of development.

Tier 2 is shaped by the “10x5x5” rule: if you build 10 units within a five-mile radius over five years, you fall into Act 250 jurisdiction. I’ve been working to change that because it limits small developers from meeting the full potential of their hometown housing projects.

It makes it harder to build clusters of homes that keep communities together and older Vermonters near their families, and instead leads to scattered development — bigger lots, more second homes, and fewer opportunities for working families.

We’ve ended up with a system where small projects can feel just as hard as large ones — and where people trying to do the right thing often don’t have the resources to succeed.

That’s not what Act 250 was meant to do. And it’s not what Vermonters are asking for.

What I’ve heard across the state is a call for balance:

Protect what makes Vermont special.
Respect people’s ability to use their land.
Create real paths for people to stay.

That’s what we’re working to fix.

S.325, which passed unanimously out of the Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee — including with support from the Senate Minority Leader — gives us the time to do that.

It delays implementation by two to four years so we can fix the maps and tier designations to make sure they work on the ground and do not threaten Vermonters’ livelihoods and way of life.

It keeps commonsense housing exemptions in place so communities can keep building homes — not just in downtowns and village centers, but where people already live.

And it creates more room for Vermonters to be part of the process — because no one should feel decisions are being made about their land without their voice.

This isn’t about urban versus rural. Every part of Vermont depends on working lands, housing, open space, and economic opportunity.

In my own family, I’ve seen both sides of that reality — my husband grew up on farmland in Chittenden County that still produces hay and maple, and pastures horses. His mother laments the manufacturing jobs she grew up near in Orleans that once supported entire communities but have steadily disappeared.

Different parts of the state, same truth: we need all land uses to keep all parts of our state whole.

We need farmland and food security.
We need jobs and economic opportunity.
And we need them everywhere.

That’s what Vermonters are asking for.

And it brings me back to where I started.

We may not all agree on how fast we grow. But we do agree on this: we want our kids and grandkids to be able to stay.

If we focus on that — and listen to each other along the way — we can get this right.

We must get this right. For the generations before us and the generations to come.

The author is a state senator for Chittenden County. She is the Senate Majority Leader.