Split testimony as committee weighs H.772 changes to eviction timelines and tenant protections

The Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs Committee spent the later portion of its session on H.772, a package of landlord-tenant changes that would shorten certain eviction timelines and alter notice and fee provisions.

Cameron Wood of the Office of Legislative Counsel opened with a legal briefing, saying a landlord could, in principle, set security deposits differently for objective risk-based categories but warning that differential treatment risks discrimination claims if such policies have disparate impacts. He also noted draft cross-references and a correction to a termination-notice line in the current draft language.

Tenant advocates urged caution. Jess Heyman, associate director of statewide housing advocacy programs at CBOO, asked lawmakers to restore $200,000 for fair-housing education and to fund $600,000 for landlord-liaison positions that offer neutral mediation and problem-solving. "These educational offerings and landlord liaison positions help prevent conflict, reduce evictions and promote housing stability," Heyman said, adding that shortened eviction timelines will make it harder for tenants to find legal representation or emergency financial assistance.

Jean Murray, an attorney with Vermont Legal Aid, told the committee Vermont is in a housing crisis — she testified that roughly 30% of households rent, rents have increased substantially in recent years and vacancy rates are near historic lows — and said H.772 would risk increasing homelessness by limiting tenants’ ability to access counsel and time-sensitive supports. "There is no evidence that evicting tenants faster will address Vermont’s housing crisis," Murray said.

Housing providers, including Elizabeth Bridgewater of the Windham and Windsor Housing Trust and other nonprofit owners, described units "taken over" by people selling drugs and creating dangerous conditions for the tenant who had been victimized and for neighbors. They supported targeted tools in the bill: a no-trespass provision that can bar third parties who are neither on the lease nor entitled to occupy a unit, and an expedited hearing route in the most dangerous cases. "In many of these incidents tenants are victims who are too frightened to ask for help," Bridgewater said, arguing that no-trespass authority and faster remedies can protect victims and other residents.

Several providers described substantial new security spending and rising operational strain — some sites are now deemed unsafe for staff entry — and asked for complementary state resources for resident services, security and tenant support.

Committee members pressed for balance. Some expressed interest in targeted, expedited remedies for demonstrably dangerous behavior if paired with tenant protections such as right-to-counsel, clearer notice rules and a brief implementation delay so courts, landlords and service providers can prepare. Lawmakers also discussed housing-court options, eviction-diversion programs and investments in prevention rather than faster removals.

What happens next: The committee signaled more hearings and potential edits; it also requested further information on where education and landlord-liaison funds appear in House budget materials and asked presenters to provide examples of local outcomes and data on court timelines.