This summer we logged miles across Vermont—Derby (7/7), Rutland (7/24), St. Albans (8/13), Quechee (8/19), Barre (9/2), Wilmington (9/9), and Williston (9/22)—to listen. The aim was simple: show up in communities across the state, share what we’ve been working on, and hear directly what’s helping and what’s getting in the way of building more homes. The audience looked different from place to place—planners one day, developers the next, residents and lenders the day after—but the message was consistent: Vermonters want practical, durable ways to add homes in the places we already live, work, and go to school.

Across the tour, we walked through the two big statewide efforts underway: (1) the development of guidelines for the Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP), a new tool to help pay for public infrastructure that unlocks housing; and (2) the map-making process for Act 181, which asks Regional Planning Commissions and municipalities to identify where growth should go. We emphasized that policy only matters if it translates into homes on the ground—and then we listened.

A few themes rose up again and again:

• Infrastructure and financing clarity. Towns and developers are eager for clear, usable templates and guidance so they can evaluate whether a project pencils out. People asked for model infrastructure agreements, plain-English summaries, and examples showing how CHIP can reduce risk without shifting costs onto taxpayers. Municipal capacity came up frequently—especially in smaller towns—alongside appreciation that CHIP dollars can cover some professional assistance. In several conversations, folks also urged stronger state-level infrastructure planning to complement project-by-project tools.
• Permitting predictability. Participants described long timelines and uncertainty—particularly around appeals and state permits—as a major drag on feasibility. Even where zoning has been liberalized, delays compound carrying costs and deter would-be builders. The request wasn’t for shortcuts; it was for transparent, coordinated processes with realistic timelines.
• Wetlands, soils, and environmental compliance. We heard about last-minute delineations, along with frustration that outlier soil standards can force expensive redesigns late in the game. No one argued that environmental protections don’t matter. The ask was clarity, consistency, and early-stage guidance so projects aren’t designed on shifting ground.
• Costs, labor, and construction methods. Construction costs continue to outpace expectations. There’s widespread interest in factory-built and modular approaches—paired with a sober recognition that they’re not magic wands. Communities want in-state capacity, streamlined approvals, and workforce investments that match the scale of need.
• Using what we already have. From the Northeast Kingdom to Central Vermont, people pointed to vacant or underused buildings, small infill sites, and opportunities for adaptive reuse. The message: start with the assets on hand, and make it simpler to bring them back to life. Several attendees called out VHIP as a fantastic tool when it’s aligned with local capacity.
• Local readiness and culture. A number of attendees highlighted the difference it makes when a community has experience working with developers and when public bodies see themselves as facilitators, not just gatekeepers. Education—for selectboards, planning commissions, and the public—was a recurring ask, as was getting more “housing creators at the table.”

Regional flavor colored those themes.

In Franklin County, we heard anxiety about “Tier 3” designations alongside interest in coordinating early with the RPC so maps reflect on-the-ground realities.

In the Upper Valley, participants pressed for practical steps to convert conceptual support into shovels-in-the-ground, and asked how CHIP can help close infrastructure gaps for housing across income levels.

In Central Vermont, the conversation returned to appeals reform and to applying CHIP to infill scale development.

In Chittenden County, municipal leaders focused on implementation details—public hearing requirements, decision points, and the need for explicit standards—while flagging that some towns aren’t yet opting into Tier 1B.

Southern Vermont also flagged concerns about limited Tier 1 areas under current guidance, and urged bringing more builders and lenders into the conversation.

And in the NEK, we heard a strong call to ensure rural voices help shape statewide maps and tools, not just react to them.

If there was a single throughline, it was this: Vermonters are ready to move from big ideas to practical, predictable solutions. They are seeking clear agreements, consistent reviews, and sensible financing. There is also a strong desire to focus building efforts in areas where infrastructure and daily life are already established.

What We’re Doing Next

Our immediate focus is on execution:

• CHIP Guidelines. We’ve been attending weekly meetings throughout the summer to offer input that ensures the final CHIP guidelines are as simple, transparent, and effective as possible. We feel confident that this guidance is on track to meet those goals, and expect them to be finalized by the Vermont Economic Progress Council next month.
• Act 181 map making. We’re plugging into RPC and municipal processes to support pro-housing designations and to raise implementation issues early. At a high-level, the map making process is going well—however, in watching the implementation roll out there are some small details that will need small legislative tweaks to fix.
• 2026 legislative agenda. We’re distilling what we heard into priorities for the next session. We’re not ready to fully share our agenda just yet, but your input on predictability, municipal capacity, and practical costs is shaping our work.

How You Can Plug In

If you couldn’t make a meeting—or if you did and want to keep going—there are a few easy ways to get involved:

• Join our CHIP Working Group to help stress-test guidance and templates: Sign up here.
• Join our Act 181 / Act 250 Working Group to track maps and designations and flag issues early: Sign up here.
• Add your name—or your organization’s—to the Let’s Build Homes coalition and help us grow a broad, durable constituency for more homes: letsbuildhomes.org/coalition.

Thank you to everyone who hosted us, challenged us, and shared their time and expertise. The work ahead is detailed and sometimes slow, but it’s also deeply practical. With clearer rules, steadier processes, and a coalition that spans regions and industries, we can make it easier to build good homes in the right places—so Vermont’s towns and cities stay vibrant, welcoming, and within reach for all.