Lawmakers have scrapped a plan to streamline Act 250 by placing development review in the hands of a professional board.
Instead, House committees have decided to keep the existing system that uses nine citizen commissions to look at how developments impact the environment.
Under the latest version of the bill, Act 250 appeals would still go to the environmental division of Superior Court, instead of straight to the Vermont Supreme Court
More from VPR: [Jan. 8]
The return to the status quo is part of an overall shift in the legislation as House committees moved to take a more incremental approach to revising Act 250, the state鈥檚 50-year-old development review law.
Rep. Amy Sheldon, a Democrat from Middlebury, chairs the Natural Resources Committee. She said she鈥檚 pleased with the latest changes to the bill.
鈥淚 feel better about it," she said. "There鈥檚 a lot that鈥檚 happening in this bill that鈥檚 really important to the future of how we regulate land use in the state of Vermont,鈥� she said. 鈥淎nd I really hope we can move those things forward.鈥�
The bill still development in downtowns and growth centers. It also strengthens protection for upper elevation areas and unbroken forest habitat.
More from VPR: [Feb. 18]
But gone from the bill are controversial provisions that were part of between the Scott administration and the Vermont Natural Resources Council, a statewide environmental group. The two sides met over the summer and proposed legislation that would have eliminated or reduced the role of regional commissions and assigned reviews of major projects to a professional board.
They also supported sending appeals directly to the state Supreme Court.
But because those changes are gone, the Gov. Phil Scott no longer supports the bill according to Peter Walke, the
鈥淲e also understand that there is a long way to go left in the legislative process,鈥� Walke said. 鈥淲e hope to work with the legislature to address the areas of concern.鈥�
The proposal to eliminate or reduce the encountered considerable
More from VPR: [Feb. 13]
To pay for the new professional review process, the bill would have raised fees. But when the bill went to the House Ways and Means Committee late last week, the committee killed the revenue raising piece.
Rep. James McCullough, a Williston Democrat, serves on the Natural Resources Committee, and he said he was glad the committee blocked the controversial professional review board idea.
鈥淣one of the majority really felt good about that,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd whenever you go down the road the wrong way, you can always turn around. And we developed a consensus that Ways and Means helped us turn around.鈥�
