Rep. Charlton urges extending S325 'tier‑one' exemptions to 2030 to boost developer confidence
May 06, 2026 | Ways & Means, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Representative Tom Charlton told the House Ways & Means Committee on May 6 that his amendment to S325 would extend temporary "tier‑one" permit exemptions to 2030 to help midsize developers begin critical pre‑planning and meet state housing targets.
Charlton, who said he placed the amendment on the bill, argued that developers need a clear, predictable regulatory path to justify the expense of market studies, engineering and financing. "The amendment that I put forward for 325 extends the tier one exemptions, the temporary exemptions, uh to 2030," he said, adding that without that predictability midsize firms will opt for lower‑risk single‑family subdivisions. He warned of long lead times, giving an example of a 12‑unit affordable project whose on‑site engineering began in 2010.
Why it matters: the change would affect where developers invest and could shift the timing of housing starts that state planning targets peg to 2030. Committee members also noted the amendment could reduce state permit fee revenue by exempting some projects from Act 250 fees, and that the Joint Fiscal Office cannot yet produce a complete fiscal impact for late‑filed floor amendments.
A committee member pressed the point that pushing the deadline out "wouldn't [that] make them less likely to start their planning earlier because they won't have the urgency of needing to finish their planning by 2028?" Charlton responded that developers "will plan for a different project" if the path is unclear and that municipalities with limited staff will need technical assistance to produce future‑land‑use maps expected under Act 181.
Committee context: Ways & Means members repeatedly cautioned they have limited policy jurisdiction over land‑use rules and that the Natural Resources Committee has not yet voted on these amendments. The committee agreed to gather in the well of the House for a straw poll at 1:00 p.m.; no formal Ways & Means vote was taken during this session.
The committee also heard that midsize developers (described in testimony as firms with under about 50 employees) face high upfront costs and staffing constraints that make predictable regulatory windows important to trigger pre‑planning work. Members said the state and regional planning commissions, and the League of Cities and Towns, will play a role in giving smaller municipalities the technical assistance they need to implement future‑land‑use maps.
Charlton, who said he placed the amendment on the bill, argued that developers need a clear, predictable regulatory path to justify the expense of market studies, engineering and financing. "The amendment that I put forward for 325 extends the tier one exemptions, the temporary exemptions, uh to 2030," he said, adding that without that predictability midsize firms will opt for lower‑risk single‑family subdivisions. He warned of long lead times, giving an example of a 12‑unit affordable project whose on‑site engineering began in 2010.
Why it matters: the change would affect where developers invest and could shift the timing of housing starts that state planning targets peg to 2030. Committee members also noted the amendment could reduce state permit fee revenue by exempting some projects from Act 250 fees, and that the Joint Fiscal Office cannot yet produce a complete fiscal impact for late‑filed floor amendments.
A committee member pressed the point that pushing the deadline out "wouldn't [that] make them less likely to start their planning earlier because they won't have the urgency of needing to finish their planning by 2028?" Charlton responded that developers "will plan for a different project" if the path is unclear and that municipalities with limited staff will need technical assistance to produce future‑land‑use maps expected under Act 181.
Committee context: Ways & Means members repeatedly cautioned they have limited policy jurisdiction over land‑use rules and that the Natural Resources Committee has not yet voted on these amendments. The committee agreed to gather in the well of the House for a straw poll at 1:00 p.m.; no formal Ways & Means vote was taken during this session.
The committee also heard that midsize developers (described in testimony as firms with under about 50 employees) face high upfront costs and staffing constraints that make predictable regulatory windows important to trigger pre‑planning work. Members said the state and regional planning commissions, and the League of Cities and Towns, will play a role in giving smaller municipalities the technical assistance they need to implement future‑land‑use maps.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
