Burlington charter amendment on rent notices prompts testimony on housing effects

Burlington councilor Carter Neubieser told the Vermont House Committee on Government Operations & Military Affairs on May 21 that a charter amendment approved by Burlington voters would let the city set notice periods and related conditions for rent increases and lease terminations by ordinance rather than by fixed charter language.

The issue matters, Neubieser said, because local officials want flexibility to set notice requirements that reflect market conditions: "we wanted the city to have the ability to sort of make that call now, but also 10 years from now, 20 years from now." He told the committee the council unanimously placed the amendment on the ballot and it received "just over 65% of the vote."

The measure under review by the committee is tied to H.508, the legislative vehicle to approve amendments to the City of Burlington charter. Proponents told the committee the change removes specific timing (for example, a 90‑day notice referenced in the current charter) and would allow the city council to adopt ordinance provisions for notice periods, special notice for vulnerable populations, and conditions attached to notices.

Peter Tucker of the Vermont Association of Realtors and Angela Zikowski, director of the Vermont Landlords Association and a landlord attorney, each told the committee they were concerned the charter language is broad and could have unintended effects on housing supply and landlord operations. "The solution is building more quite simply," Tucker said, arguing that regulatory limits can affect owners' investment decisions and new construction.

Zikowski outlined operational concerns for housing providers, noting that Vermont currently has a statewide statutory framework for termination notices and that court eviction actions typically take several months: "Court actions currently for evictions are running roughly 4 to 6 months." She warned that extending or varying notice periods locally could require landlords to forego rent for longer before the court process begins and could create legal complications if notices are not drafted precisely.

Zikowski also flagged language in the charter change that would permit "special notice provisions for vulnerable populations, such as older Vermonters, individuals with disabilities, and individuals with low income." She said landlords may not have access to the information required to apply different notice rules and that inaccurate notices can be jurisdictional defects in eviction proceedings: "If your notice isn't correct or there's something wrong with it, even a minor minor detail, the court does not have the legal authority to hear your eviction case."

Councilor Neubieser and other witnesses told the committee Burlington's rental market differs from much of Vermont: he cited a current vacancy rate around "a percent and a half" and said the city has recently seen accelerated new rental construction. Neubieser said the charter change is intended to preserve local control so the city can respond to those local market conditions without returning to the Legislature for repeated charter amendments.

Witnesses also described inspection and enforcement tensions. Tucker recounted conversations with fire‑safety officials who carried out more inspections than expected and faced access challenges; Zikowski noted that both tenant and landlord behaviors can delay inspections. A committee member asked whether local law requires tenants to allow inspections; the panel discussed that local fire and housing inspection authority applies to landlords' obligations to ensure access for inspectors, while tenants' obligations vary.

No formal committee action was recorded during the hearing. Committee members asked the witnesses questions and invited written comments to be submitted for the record.

The committee indicated it will continue consideration of H.508 in later meetings.