Public meeting to discuss VT's environmental protection rules this Thursday
ESSEX JUNCTION, Vt. (ABC22/FOX44) – Vermont's Act 250 has been credited for the state's flourishing green spaces and forests. But it's also been criticized as exacerbating the housing crisis by making it harder to build in Vermont's urban areas. On Thursday community members will have the chance to comment on what level of development should be able to proceed before requiring an environmental review.
The state's Land Use Review Board (LURB) is asking for public input on what parts of the state should qualify as critical natural resource areas, and what projects can go ahead in these areas before requiring a special permit under Act 250.
Vermont's Act 250 was passed all the way back in 1970, at a time when the state's population was growing more quickly than the national average. It directed towns in the state to consider environmental impacts before approving new developments. At times, environmental groups have criticized Act 250 for not going far enough to protect habitats from fragmentation due to development and climate change, and it has been amended several times.
In one such amendment, the Vermont state legislature passed Act 181 last year, which reforms some of Act 250's requirements, allowing more exemptions in downtowns and village centers to expedite development, while allowing fewer in critical natural resource areas. Governor Phil Scott vetoed Act 181, saying it did not go far enough to resolve the state's housing shortage, but the legislature overrode his veto.
VT Governor calls for action on housing legislation
Governor Scott appointed the current five members of the Land Use Review Board earlier this year. Unlike its forerunner the Natural Resources Board, all of the LURB board members are professionals in the fields of land use, zoning law, and civil engineering.
This meeting is a step in a longer process that will lead to further public engagement through January 2026 with an eye to the new land use and permit rules coming into effect at the end of next year. In addition to public input, the LURB is also working with a group of stakeholders, which include members of environmental organizations and business groups.
The meeting will take place on Thursday, May 22, from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m., at 111 West Street, Building 2, Essex Junction. Attendees can join either in person or remotely using Microsoft Teams, with information available on the meeting agenda.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
NH House passes bill to ban cell phones in schools
CONCORD, N.H. (ABC22/FOX44) – Officials in the New Hampshire House have voted to pass bill SB 206, which would ban the use of cell phones in school through a 'bell-to-bell' policy. This bill, as amended by the House, defines 'bell-to-bell' as 'from when the first bell rings to start instructional time until the dismissal bell rings to end the academic school day, with approved exceptions determined by the superintendent or their designee with respect to student medical, disability, or language proficiency need.' Governor Kelly Ayotte said yesterday in a statement that she is 'glad to see the House pass this today' and thanked them 'for taking action'. 'Screens are distraction for students and a barrier for teachers to do their jobs. A bell-to-bell ban on cell phones in the classroom will help kids focus on learning and let teachers do what they do best without being the phone police. I'm glad to see the House pass this today and thank them for taking action to help deliver a best-in-class education for all of New Hampshire's students.' Governor Ayotte has yet to make a final decision on the bill. If it goes into effect, SB 206 will likely take effect in time for the 2025-2026 school year. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Trump ties his legacy to steamrolling Musk on his megabill
President Donald Trump's second-term success rests in large part on signing his megabill as soon as possible. He's acting accordingly. At the heart of Trump's ugly row with former right-hand man Elon Musk is the Tesla CEO's public lambasting of the 'big, beautiful' legislation. Beyond that, the president is laboring behind the scenes to quell dissent while publicly lobbying GOP senators in meetings, gaggles and his social media feed, even amidst the battle with Musk. Trump's team is working furiously to keep the bill going on other fronts, too: seeking to discredit Congress's nonpartisan scorekeeper while savaging Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for resisting the bill and its debt ceiling increase. After a shock-and-awe run of asserting executive power — much of it now tied up in the courts — Trump's full attention is now on the Capitol, where lawmaking is in short supply this year. It's an acknowledgment that his fate, and his party's in the midterms, is now inextricably linked to the megabill. 'Failure would be not just a blow to the country and economically, but also a blow politically to all of us. We won't fail,' Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a member of party leadership, told Semafor. She spoke recently to Trump, saying of his role: 'He knows his powers of persuasion are pretty strong.' Other than rollbacks of Biden-era regulations and a handful of other bills, the Republican Congress has not produced much for Trump to sign. In part that's by design, since Trump always wanted his top priorities stitched together into one piece of legislation. It's a high-risk, high-reward strategy. His second-term legacy is now in the hands of the Senate's 53-seat majority; it's going to take a lot of muscle for him to get the bill through, whether that's by July 4, as his team wants, or deeper into the year. 'He wants his deal closed,' said Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who met privately with Trump earlier this week to discuss Scott's pursuit of steeper spending cuts. 'I want to get a bill done. I want to get the economy going,' Scott said, signaling he's ready to get to yes despite conservative frustration with the megabill's deficit impact. 'I like his agenda, but I want to balance the budget.' Trump's work is starting to pay some dividends on the gargantuan legislation, which touches everything from tax cuts to health care to artificial intelligence, a sprawling legislative patchwork that is both difficult to explain and easy for Democrats to attack. The president is clearly quieting one of the loudest critics of the effort, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. Johnson spoke to Trump privately this week and attended a White House meeting on Wednesday with Senate Finance Committee Republicans. The Wisconsinite said it's apparent that Trump was paying close attention to his media tour trashing the bill; Trump told Finance panel Republicans that Democrats are comparatively united compared to the GOP. 'I'm taking to heart that he'd like me to be a little more positive. I think that's appropriate. There's a lot of good stuff in the bill; it doesn't increase taxes,' Johnson said of finding more spending cuts. 'I probably have been too negative.' Scott said he's open to finding spending cuts through other means, like next year's government funding talks — though that will be tough to achieve given how much leverage Democrats are likely to have. And Johnson said he understands it's not realistic to completely bend the deficit curve all on one bill. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa said Trump's talks with senators are too sensitive to even talk about. 'I don't think I can comment on any of that stuff,' Grassley said of Wednesday's Finance panel confab. 'They don't even let us take our telephones into that meeting.' Among Senate Republican critics of the House-passed megabill, Trump has largely kept his fire trained on Paul. The libertarian-leaning Kentuckian has drawn rhetorical fire from Trump's staff and Trump himself, who called Paul's ideas 'crazy.' (Paul has also amplified Musk's criticisms of the bill.) Trump and Paul had a private conversation last week about the bill. Asked if the tenor was more cordial than the president's public fusillades, Paul responded it 'was about the same.' On the other side of the spectrum are Republicans who dislike some of the House-passed bill's changes to Medicaid. That camp includes Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who speaks to Trump frequently about avoiding benefit cuts, and moderate Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Murkowski said Thursday she's in close contact with the administration and Senate Majority Leader John Thune about her state's issues with implementing work requirements and eligibility verification for Medicaid. 'Folks in the administration and the president himself know that I'm going to make sure that Alaska's interests are represented,' Murkowski said. 'If it works for Alaska, he's not going to need to pressure me.' The White House official affirmed the administration's media strategy is almost entirely focused on the bill, from TV hits to press calls to lobbying individual members. 'The president is very confident about where this bill is headed. Obviously there's a process that has to take place, but the entire team feels good about where this is going,' the official said. Trump wooed House holdouts to support the bill during a visit to the Capitol and a meeting at the White House. Senators don't succumb as easily to strong-arming; they serve six-year terms, meaning that some will next appear on a ballot after Trump leaves office. The good news for Trump is he can lose three of them and still pass the bill. If he continues making progress on the party's right flank, and if Thune can quell moderates' Medicaid concerns, Trump could have the bill on his desk by August recess or even before. Senators are split on whether they can hit the White House's July 4 target, but leaders always try to set aspirational goals to motivate their members. Then Republicans can move on to a similarly herculean task: Building a midterm campaign around tax cuts and defending Democrats' attacks on their health care changes. No amount of presidential fury or social-media posts is likely to dislodge Paul from his central case against the megabill: it increases the debt ceiling. 'They say you're not over the target if you're not getting flak,' Paul told Semafor on Thursday. 'There's one inescapable fact of this bill: If you raise the debt ceiling $5 trillion, you are responsible … this is no longer Biden spending, this is Republican spending.' A White House official said the reason the president has focused solely on Paul is it appears he's 'the only one who can't be moved on it.' Still, Paul has left the door open to supporting the bill if Trump and GOP leaders remove the debt limit increase. That's a victory of sorts in itself: Paul is among the least likely Republicans to succumb to pressure from Trump. Dating back to the president's first term, Paul was often a lonely 'no' on his priorities and some of his nominees.
2 days ago
Judge and lawmakers question the Trump administration's plan to gut Job Corps centers
Members of Congress and a federal judge are questioning the Trump administration's plan to shut down Job Corps centers nationwide and halt a residential career training program for low-income youth that was established more than 50 years ago. The Department of Labor last week announced a nationwide 'pause of operations' for dozens of Job Corps centers run by private contractors. The department cited an internal review that concluded the program was costly and had a low success rate. The review also identified safety issues at the residential campuses. The Department of Labor said it would transition students and staff out of the locations by June 30. The program was designed for teenagers and young adults who struggled to finish high school in traditional school settings and then go on to obtain training and find jobs. Participants received tuition-free housing, meals and health care. Critics have argued that closing the campuses would leave young people homeless and deprive them of opportunities and hope. They also maintained the Trump administration did not have legal authority to suspend Job Corps because it was created by Congress. Lawmakers asked Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer about the decision when she appeared before the House Education and Workforce Committee on Thursday. 'Job Corps, which you know has bipartisan support in Congress, trains young, low-income people, and helps them find good-paying jobs and provides housing for a population that might otherwise be without a home,' U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott said. Scott, a Virginia Democrat, read from a letter Chavez-DeRemer wrote in support of Job Corps last year. The letter said the program increased participants' employment and wages, and decreased their reliance on public benefits. 'You've made a starkly abrupt shift from a champion to a destroyer of this important program,' said Democratic Rep. Suzanne Bonamici of Oregon, adding that students in her district were distraught. In response, Chavez-DeRemer said she recognized that only an act of Congress could eliminate Job Corps. She said the Labor Department had instead used its authority to halt the program's operations but planned to comply with a federal court order that temporarily blocked the action. U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter of New York issued a temporary restraining order on Wednesday that prohibited the Labor Department from terminating jobs, removing students from the 99 contractor-run centers or eliminating the Job Corps program without congressional authorization. The order was sought as part of a lawsuit filed Tuesday by the National Job Corps Association, a trade group which includes business, labor, volunteer and community organizations. The group alleged the Labor Department's decision would have disastrous consequences, including displacing tens of thousands of vulnerable young people and forcing mass layoffs. During Thursday's House committee hearing, Scott asked several Job Corps students in attendance to stand. 'These students were on their way to getting a good job and earning a living wage. On behalf of them, I urge you to immediately reverse the decision to effectively shut down all Job Corps centers,' Scott said. Chavez-DeRemer responded that the Trump administration wanted to eliminate ineffective training interventions. The report released in April by the Labor Department's Employment and Training Administration said Job Corps operated at a $140 million deficit during the last fiscal year and had an average graduation rate of under 39%. 'Our recently released Job Corps transparency report showed that in 2023 alone, more than 14,000 serious incidents were reported at the Job Corps centers, including cases of sexual assault, physical violence, and drug use,' Chavez-DeRemer said. 'This program is failing to deliver safe and successful outcomes our young people deserve.' The National Job Corps Association maintained the statistics were misleading. It said the 14,000 serious incidents included power outages, inclement weather, athletic injuries that required treatment and adult students leaving campus without prior approva. The group also said that Job Corps' graduation rates have historically been above 60%, but were depressed by COVID-19 policies during the year the Labor Department reviewed. Seth Harris, senior fellow at the Burnes Center for Social Change at Northeastern University, said in an interview that Job Corps is wildly popular on Capitol Hill. He recalled having to slow down Job Corps due to funding challenges when he served as acting secretary of labor during former President Barack Obama's administration. 'I got angry calls from elected members of the House and Senate on both sides of the aisle,' Harris said. The Job Corps program was designed to help young people who were not succeeding in school or who had left school without a place to go, placing them in a residential setting outside their community and providing them with vocational training, he said. The Labor Department shutting down Job Corps would be illegal because there's a process outlined for closing down the centers which includes publishing performance data, justifying the closure and allowing time for public comment and remediation, he said. 'This is plainly illegal,' Harris said. 'But it is entirely on brand for Donald Trump to beat up on poor kids, largely kids of color, who are trying to make their lives better.'
