House committee reviews Senate changes to S.328, takes straw poll to concur

Members of the House Committee on General and Housing reviewed Senate amendments to omnibus housing bill S.328 on May 27 and took a straw poll indicating support to concur.

Cameron Wood, of the Office of Legislative Counsel, detailed about nine instances of change the Senate returned. He said the first amendment would raise the tax credit facility authorization from 10% to 12.5% but would not include a standalone 1% set‑aside for off‑site constructed housing; "the treasurer can do that off‑site constructed housing through the 12 and a half% credit facility," Wood said. The change would leave the treasurer authority intact but not explicitly written into statute.

The Senate also moved the off‑site accelerator pilot from the Department of Housing and Community Development to the treasurer’s office and would require the treasurer to consult a list of stakeholders before issuing funds. Wood said the consultation list already included housing entities such as BHCB, BHFA and DHC and that the Senate proposes adding the Vermont Economic Progress Council to that list.

On VHIP, Wood recalled the House had added statutory authorization to allow partnership organizations to advance funding at the start of a project (VHIP is technically a reimbursement program). "The Senate is proposing to strike that change," he said, noting the Senate expressed concern about risk associated with upfront payments.

Other Senate changes outlined by counsel included adding the word "labor" to municipal plan housing elements so municipalities would analyze regulatory, labor and physical constraints that impede meeting housing targets; members noted workforce challenges are substantial. The Senate also added back certain common‑interest community language, including a provision on vegetable gardens, and revised the effective date language to make a sunset provision effective Jan. 1, 2028.

Committee members asked clarifying questions about where an unrelated item (referred to as item 772 in the discussion) might be placed in the bill and whether the vegetable‑garden language would override association rules on altering common use spaces or removing vegetation. Counsel said the garden language in the returned bill is report language and would not necessarily override separate governing documents that control common‑use areas.

Several members voiced support for concurring. One committee member said, "I will be supporting the bill," while another praised the panel, saying, "This committee is the best committee in the house." The chair then conducted a straw poll on concurrence; members counted eight in favor. The exchange in the transcript indicates this was a straw poll rather than a formal roll‑call vote, after which the committee adjourned.

The transcript does not record a formal roll‑call concurrence or final passage; it documents counsel’s walk‑through of the Senate changes, members’ questions and a straw‑poll show of support. Any formal legislative action, final concurrence or subsequent floor steps are not shown in the transcript.