Opinion

Moore and Johnson: Vermont’s housing needs require decisive action – step up or step away

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Secretary Julie Moore and Department of Public Service Commissioner Kerrick Johnson

Vermont faces a housing crisis that threatens our economic future and the ability of working families to remain in our state. The cost of housing has skyrocketed with median home prices in Vermont more than doubling in the last 10 years, putting both homeownership and rentals out of reach for many. Vermont needs 30,000 new homes by 2030, requiring 8,000 units per year for the next four years. At current rates, we’ll struggle to hit even 25% of that goal.

In response, Governor Scott recently issued a Housing Executive Order (EO) that directs a set of measured yet impactful steps to accelerate housing development timelines and reduce costs. The Governor’s EO doesn’t eliminate regulatory review or ignore legitimate concerns. It balances the need for affordability with environmental objectives for housing projects in areas identified for development. These are modest, commonsense reforms designed to provide regulatory certainty, moving projects more quickly from planning to construction while maintaining needed protections.

Agency of Natural Resources Secretary
Julie Moore

Sadly, if not predictably, a number of environmental interest groups have responded with reflexive opposition. In voicing their opposition to the EO, environmental advocacy groups have offered no actionable alternatives. They haven’t proposed how to accelerate permitting while maintaining protections. They haven’t suggested which regulations could be modernized or consolidated. They haven’t identified specific areas where housing could be fast-tracked. Instead, they’ve defaulted to criticism without contribution – the easiest position to maintain and the least helpful for Vermonters struggling to find housing.

This matters because housing isn’t an abstract policy debate. These are real problems affecting our neighborhoods, communities, businesses and schools. It’s about whether a teacher can afford to live in the community where they work. It’s about whether a young couple can start a family here instead of moving to New Hampshire or North Carolina. It’s about whether businesses, from the smallest engineering firm to the general store to our beloved universities are able to thrive right here in Vermont. Without housing, we cannot recruit and retain staff for our nursing homes, clinics and hospitals as there simply aren’t places for them to live.

Yet in the face of the Governor’s modest but concrete measures that should reduce the cost and speed the timeline for constructing homes, these interest groups retreat to familiar talking points and procedural objections. Their response reveals an uncomfortable truth: their real interests lie in preserving the existing regulatory barriers rather than meaningful problem-solving.

This dynamic exemplifies what Ezra Klein, an award-winning columnist with the New York Times, explored in his recent work on abundance: our regulatory systems have become so byzantine, so weighted toward one-off objections and appeals rather than progress, that we actively obstruct the very things we claim to want most.

Department of Public Service Commissioner
Kerrick Johnson

We say we need affordable housing, then create endless opportunities for delay. We claim we want walkable downtowns and community schools filled with children and then make land-use policies that limit density and put homeownership out of reach for young families. We declare climate emergencies, then enact policies without regard for the cost of implementation. We bemoan economic stagnation, then strangle development with process.

Within the broader environmental community there is clear expertise and legitimate perspectives. But expertise wielded not to provide constructive input and alternatives but to instead assert picayune process objections is mere obstruction.

Vermont needs an abundance agenda – one that recognizes we can protect our environment while building the housing our communities desperately need. We can say yes to appropriate development while conserving what makes Vermont special. But this requires solving problems rather than simply scoring political points.

To the environmental groups criticizing this Executive Order: please show us your plan. Tell us how you would accelerate housing production. Identify specific regulatory reforms you support. If you cannot or will not, then most Vermonters will understand your opposition for what it really is – political theater performed at the expense of working families searching for places to live and businesses struggling to bring new hires to the state.

Governor Scott has taken action. We stand ready to implement solutions. The question now is whether environmental interest groups who claim to care about Vermont’s future will contribute to solving this crisis or perpetuate the status quo.


Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories: Opinion

9 replies »

  1. The so-called “environmental interest groups” are far more interested in maintaining Vermont as a leftist theme park for the wealthy, particularly those whose primary residence is out of state.

  2. The clown show of Moore and Johnson can be solved very quickly. YOUR FIRED. Now find a real job. Comment from Richard Day.

  3. STOP taxing us to death and maybe some of us could use our own resources to build rather than jump through endless hoops to get our OWN money back from OUR government in the form or a pitance of a grant which is from OUR tax money which goes into a Gov’t department as $$$$$$$$$$ and then this money is reduced as it is strained and sifted through the Gov’t’s grifty sieve to be “awarded” to the few friends of the elected and friends employees. (my opinion – based on my own observations)

  4. Democrats & Progressives make up what I call the ‘three Ds’:

    D – Deception
    D – Destruction
    D – Division

  5. Marxist decoder ring needed for this article.

    We are going to build state subsidized rental properties.
    We are going to import 30k people to take your jobs from out of country.

    We already did this Burlington and want to expand the program.

    In Burlington and Winooski, 50% of the student population is minority…meaning not traditional Vermonters but imports.

    You will not own your house.
    Only connected people will be able to develop.
    We are following the plan of Agenda 2030

    We could care less about your constitution and property rights.

    You will own nothing and be happy, this is who Governor Scott voted for president.

    • Neil, correct to build subsidized rental properties for non citizens who crossed the border border unlawfully

    • You got it. Yet look at how many traditional Vermont residents are still hoping for this Communistic program to gain traction.

      Clueless.

  6. What the south did after the destruction of hurricanes Katrina, Ivan of recent that left many homeless. FEMA trailers were hauled in on large parking areas to house the people. The parking areas had facilities and were successful. They are far cheaper to house the homeless than in VT that put homeless in motels and taxpayers foot the bill. After things settled and people moved on, the trailers were removed and sold. Being here in those times, I’ve seen it. Bottom line, there are a few ways to house the homeless. In VT the taxation does put people on the street, liberal strategy.

  7. Deep six act 250 and all its children, kill the sales tax, bring Vt back to the 1960’s growth era.