Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Evictions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winooski holds public hearing on voter-backed 'just cause' charter change as landlords press for details
Summary
The Winooski City Council opened a public hearing on a voter-backed charter amendment to restrict no-cause evictions. Residents and landlords raised questions about timing, enforcement, rent impacts and definitions; the measure still requires legislative approval and later ordinance drafting.
Get email alerts on the Housing Evictions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Winooski City Council opened a public hearing Monday on a voter-backed charter change that would limit ‘‘no-cause’’ evictions and require a later ordinance if the state legislature approves the change.
Supporters brought the petition to the ballot through a resident-organized campaign; council staff said the state legislature must still act before any local ordinance can be developed.
‘‘This is the first of two public hearings that we’ll be holding on this voter-backed charter change,’’ Jenny (staff member) said, opening the hearing and noting a second hearing scheduled for Feb. 3. She explained that, because of a prior administrative error, the petition must again follow the charter-change process with the legislature.
Landlords at the hearing said the charter language as drafted is broad and raised concerns about several implementation details that were not in the petition text. David Bean, who identified himself as a landlord and realtor in Winooski, asked how the process would proceed and who would draft any ordinance if the legislature approves the charter change. ‘‘If the legislature approves this and they have the authority to change the lingua ... then we have to spend some time crafting ordinance around it and go through our regular public hearings process before adopting something,’’ Jenny replied.
Landlords pressed staff on specific provisions they said appeared in the petition, including requirements to mitigate negative impacts on displaced tenants, ‘‘reasonable relocation expenses,’’ rent-increase limits, a probationary period after initial occupancy, and exceptions for owner move-ins or substantial renovations. Jenny and other staff repeatedly said the petition’s language was broad and would need to be refined by the legislature and, subsequently, in local ordinance drafting.
‘‘I think this language is quite broad and would require a lot of refining through the legislative process and then again through ordinance,’’ Jenny said in response to several questions.
Brian Armstrong, a long-time housing partner in Winooski, told the council he worries the change would disadvantage small, local landlords who provide housing and build wealth. Armstrong described rare but serious tenant behavior—hoarding, threatening conduct—that under current local practice could be addressed with a no-cause eviction as a last-resort tool after other interventions.
‘‘No cause is something that’s used as last resort and is probably, if I had to guess, ... less than 2 or 3% of the evictions that actually hit the court systems. But it serves an extremely valuable tool when goodwill, strong conversations, and all reasonable methods have been tried,’’ Armstrong said.
Staff and council emphasized the multiple steps remaining before any local rules would take effect: legislative action, potential governor approval, and then local ordinance drafting with public hearings, legal review and opportunities for stakeholder input. Jenny said the city would involve staff, the city attorney and housing/planning commissions, and that public hearings on any draft ordinance were required.
Council members and staff acknowledged many outstanding questions—how the city would monitor compliance, who would bear costs of relocation where required by language in the petition, how courts and the municipal role would intersect with eviction procedures, and how ‘‘reasonable’’ terms would be defined. Jenny said council cannot change the exact petition language that voters approved; the language goes to the legislature as submitted by petition.
The council closed the hearing after public comments and scheduled the second hearing on Feb. 3. No formal council action on the charter change was taken at the meeting.
Ending: If the Vermont Legislature approves the charter change, council staff said they would return to the community with a proposed ordinance, legal review and additional public hearings that would define many of the petition’s open terms.

