Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Act250 Tier Discussion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PAC discusses municipal choices under Act 181 and Act 250; staff capacity emerges as key constraint
Summary
CCRPC staff and municipal representatives discussed whether to opt into Tier 1A or Tier 1B under Act 250 reforms, with several towns citing limited staff capacity and questions about handling existing Act 250 conditions.
CCRPC staff opened a forum Feb. 12 for municipalities to discuss whether to opt into Tier 1A or Tier 1B under the state’s Act 250 changes and the related Act 181 housing requirements. Taylor Newton, CCRPC planning program director, framed the conversation around two municipal concerns: the loss of Act 250 review thresholds and the regulatory "backfill" towns would need to adopt if Act 250 jurisdiction were removed.
Newton asked for general thoughts; Kate McCarthy offered two exercises to help communities understand Act 250’s role. Several municipal representatives said staff capacity is the chief constraint. "The staff capacity issue is where Shelburne is stopped," Aaron DeNamur said. Melinda Scott said Williston is considering a mixed approach—Tier 1A in its growth center, Tier 1B elsewhere—but questioned how to enforce Act 250-like conditions that are not currently in municipal bylaws.
Darren Schibler provided the statutory reference explaining how municipal panels may modify or remove Act 250 conditions in Tier 1A areas (24 V.S.A. § 4460(g) & (h)) and noted decisions will be visible to the Land Use Review Board, which can appeal. Participants also raised questions about priority housing projects and whether they would retain prioritized status if municipalities assume Tier 1A responsibility.
Charlie Baker confirmed that CCRPC will publish a public-facing Future Land Use (FLU) map soon and that municipalities should expect public engagement ahead of identifying Tier 1B areas by summer; those municipal identifications should precede CCRPC’s public hearing process in January 2026. Staff agreed to seek data on priority housing projects and to provide a soils-suitability map link to help municipalities assess septic suitability.
The discussion produced no formal votes. CCRPC staff recommended forming working groups so municipalities that are "Tier 1A curious" can explore tradeoffs before deciding whether to opt in.
