Changes started happening rapidly this week as the bulk of the work moved out of committee and onto the House and Senate floors. Nearly every major policy thread of the 2026 session is now being actively reconciled between chambers, and the outcomes of those negotiations will determine whether this session produces durable reform or elegant placeholders. Those negotiations also include the Governor in some instances, such as education reform efforts which were unveiled last night.

Reference-based hospital pricing cleared critical procedural hurdles and is now positioned to become law this session. The property tax yield bill conference committee dug into the mechanics of excess spending exemptions and a one-year renter credit expansion (and the fiscal analysts started raising red flags). The Act 250 conference committee finalized guardrails for accessory on-farm businesses while preserving the road rule repeal. Career technical education reform advanced with unanimous support. And on the Senate floor, a sweeping portfolio of bills moved through final readings, including a permanent ban on crypto kiosks, manufactured housing modernization, and the formal repeal of the Clean Heat Standard's dormant statutory language.

Let's jump in.

This week has that stretch of the session where the clock forces decisions. Senate Education and Senate Finance continued to wrestle with the most consequential education bill of the session, House Ways & Means dove deep into the mechanics of property tax yields and the excess spending adjustment that will shape education finance for years to come, and multiple committees advanced housing production tools while grappling with whether Vermont's housing targets are built on solid ground.

Meanwhile, the House quietly concurred on a chronic absenteeism bill that represents a genuine shift in how Vermont approaches school attendance policy, and S.325 (the Act 181 fix) is headed to a conference committee that will determine the future of Act 250 jurisdiction.

Let's dig in.

Let’s pause for a second and look at 50 years of Act 250 from the perspective of a Vermont professional civil engineer, and Act 250 Land Use Consultant. I did my first land use project in 1973.

The first question, what went wrong in the first 50 years? My opinion, Act 250 killed housing and precluded most of Vermont from having a chance for a vibrant economy.

Vermonters understand the value of balance. We want to protect our forests, fields, rivers, and wildlife. We also want our children and grandchildren to be able to afford a home, find a job, and build a life here. Good public policy should recognize both realities. That is why the debate over Act 181 matters.

The law was intended to strike a grand bargain: encourage more housing and development in designated growth areas while tightening protections for ecologically sensitive parts of the state (conservation more or less). On paper, that sounds reasonable. Direct growth where infrastructure exists. Reduce sprawl. Protect natural resources. Streamline permitting where Vermont wants development to happen.

But as often happens in government, what sounds straight forward in theory can become much messier in practice.

Act 152 makes technical, transitional, and policy changes to Vermont’s land use and regional planning laws to recalibrate implementation of Act 181. In the House proposal of amendment, the bill repeals Act 181’s road-jurisdiction and Tier 3 jurisdiction provisions, delays certain related implementation dates, extends several housing-related exemptions through 2028, and clarifies how Tier 1A and Tier 1B review will work under the new land use planning framework. It also makes changes to regional planning procedures, creates new reporting and oversight requirements, and adds a public engagement process on working lands and natural resource protections.

It was a busy week keeping tabs on the pre-crossover sprint. Vermont's school performance took center stage in Senate Finance's joint hearing on the annual state report card (based on the ESSA accountability dashboard), where Education Secretary Zoie Saunders revealed the stark underperformance in Vermont's schools: no english grades surpassed 60% proficiency, math rarely topped 50%, science ranged in the low 40s, and over half of schools were "not meeting" expectations or declining. Equity gaps widened dramatically with designations nearly doubling for students with disabilities, low-income kids, and English learners. These results prompted the Agency of Education reorganization and initiatives like READ Vermont (Act 139 literacy), COUNT on Vermont (math), and Act 73 graduation standards aim to reverse trends.

H.479 is the House's 2025 comprehensive housing bill aimed at addressing Vermont’s housing shortage through various programs, incentives, and regulatory changes. The legislation amends existing statutes and introduces new initiatives to improve rental housing, support manufactured home communities, enhance infrastructure, protect tenants, and streamline development processes.

The Senate's 2025 housing bill (S.127) is a comprehensive legislative proposal aimed at addressing housing shortages and improving housing accessibility, affordability, and infrastructure in Vermont. The bill amends existing statutes and introduces new programs to incentivize rental housing rehabilitation, manufactured home improvements, infrastructure development, and protections for vulnerable populations. It establishes study committees, funding mechanisms, and regulatory reforms to support housing development, with a focus on low- to moderate-income households, individuals with disabilities, and other marginalized groups.

We heard from developers, both subsidized and market rate, this week that things need to change if we are going to hit our target of 7,000 new units of housing annually. It's not one thing, it's all the things. Lengthy appeals processes delay projects and drives up costs. The cost of materials skyrocketed during Covid and has not come back down. The shortage of labor is really impacting both the cost of doing business as well as construction times. Cost of financing development is also too expensive, particularly for developers as they can face interest rates double that of homeowners to cover construction costs.

The Education establishment provided mixed feedback on Governor Scott's education reform proposal this week. They generally focused on the need to provide "sufficient funds" for education and predictability in funding. Of course, the teachers union already took a shot at the Governor because they rightly concluded that cost-savings would be generated by staffing reductions (both teachers and administrators). We already know that a driving factor in Vermont education spending is our ultra small class sizes; it seems like others are also catching on. They also took the opportunity to attack the 3500 students in tuitioning districts who chose to take their tuition dollars to independent schools.