This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and 开云体育.
The Burlington City Council is seeking more power when it comes to deciding how much notice a landlord needs to give before ending a tenant鈥檚 lease or raising rent.
That鈥檚 the subject of a ballot item city voters will see this Town Meeting Day, on March 4. A 鈥測es鈥� vote on the proposed would empower the council to decide new notice periods for lease terminations in the Queen City, with potential special requirements for elderly, disabled, or low-income renters. Those changes, far from set in stone, could ultimately impact who rent their homes.
Evan Litwin, a Democratic councilor representing part of the city鈥檚 New North End, said he brought forward the measure to provide more stability for renters given Burlington鈥檚 low rental vacancy rate. Last year, that rate was 2.2%, 鈥� well below the 5% threshold that housing experts consider a sign of a healthy market.
鈥淭here鈥檚 just increasing pressure,鈥� Litwin said. 鈥淪o when you give somebody, let鈥檚 say, a 90-day notice, it sounds like a lot of time, but it really is not.鈥�
Burlington鈥檚 city charter currently mandates that landlords give tenants between 90 and 120 days of notice before terminating a tenancy in certain narrowly-defined situations. That鈥檚 in state law. The ballot item would give the city broader control over determining eviction timelines in the future.
Right now, any time Burlington wants to change the notice period for a certain kind of eviction, it needs to get approval from the state Legislature and the governor. The ballot item, if approved, would give the City Council authority to shift rental notice periods at the local level, without needing to seek the greenlight from the state for every change.
In addition to voter approval, the ballot measure itself would need sign-off from state officials, since it鈥檚 a charter change.
The ballot item notes that the council could set different notice periods for renters who meet certain vulnerability criteria.
鈥淚 would say there is a difference between giving a young, healthy person who鈥檚 able bodied, you know, a 90-day notice to find a new space, and, like, someone鈥檚 grandma, right, who needs to find a space that is accessible,鈥� Litwin said.
Jess Hyman, associate director of statewide housing advocacy programs at the Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, said she thinks the ballot measure is well-intentioned. But she expressed concern that creating different notice periods for different groups of people could cause confusion for both landlords and tenants.
鈥淚t can be hard for renters to understand what their rights are. It can be hard for landlords and other housing providers to understand what their responsibilities are,鈥� Hyman said. 鈥淭o add this extra level of complexity might make it harder for whatever the ordinance is to be upheld.鈥� A new certification system might need to be created to determine when a renter qualifies as vulnerable, she added.
Whether the ballot item will make it to this step of detailed policymaking is not a given, Hyman noted, pointing to the fact that tenant protections have not gained much traction at the Statehouse in recent years.
鈥淭here are very few renters who serve in the House and Senate,鈥� Hyman said. 鈥淚 think that鈥檚 one of the things that contributes to the difficulty in passing much-needed tenant protections at a state level.鈥�
The Burlington ballot measure comes as locally-approved 鈥渏ust cause鈥� eviction charter-changes have been stonewalled at the Statehouse, including one approved by Burlington voters in 2021. The measures would place more guardrails on when a landlord can choose to end a lease, and most also limit the amount a landlord can raise the rent when leases roll over.
Litwin said he does not see the current ballot item as a 鈥渟ubstitute鈥� for just cause efforts, which he has previously supported. He noted, however, that he has heard some landlords suggest that longer notice periods might make it more difficult to evict tenants who have caused property damage or sold drugs out of their apartment, concerns that echo prior debates about 鈥渏ust cause鈥� measures.
The Vermont Landlord Association did not respond to an interview request for this story.
Meanwhile, in nearby Winooski, voters will see a 鈥渏ust cause鈥� eviction measure on their ballot again this year. Voters approved the measure , but a technical error has prompted the city to put the item up for a revote on Town Meeting Day. Last go-around, not enough time elapsed between when the issue was warned and the first public hearing held on it, said City Clerk Jenny Willingham.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 why it was recommended that we just put this on the ballot again,鈥� Willingham said.
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
