Op-Ed: Vermont is not for sale

July 30, 2026  |  By John Bossange

The pro-development advocates finally got it right. Vermont is in trouble but not for the reasons offered in a recent opinion piece authored by the Vermont Futures Project, the Vermont Professionals of Color Network, the Vermont Business Roundtable, the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, Let’s Build Homes and the Lake Champlain Chamber.

Vermont is in trouble because there is a giant “For Sale” sign posted at our borders and our economic policies encourage investors and speculators to purchase available lots and recently built homes.

Vermont is in trouble because no matter what the profit-making industries tell us, a housing shortage, if it even exists, is not the root cause of our problems.

Vermont is in trouble because we're letting anticipated population growth and speculative housing need guide our development policy.

Vermont is in trouble because development advocates rarely account for the long-term upkeep and carrying costs of infrastructure and essential municipal services.

Vermont is in trouble because building more homes does not yield enough revenue to offset tax increases to cover those costs.

Vermont is in trouble because companies like BETA Technologies and OnLogic may struggle to pay future employees enough to move here and afford a mortgage on a new home.

Vermont is in trouble because the development industry too often overlooks the environmental impacts of building on open fields, clear-cutting natural forests and disturbing wetlands.

The development advocates got it right when they wrote “the data is clear,” but then used a deeply flawed analysis to promote their pro-growth, profit-making agenda with their own self-serving data and avoided the facts that Vermonters care about the most.  

Vermonters cannot afford a mortgage on a $750,000 home. That’s a real fact. Our nonprofit organization, Better (not bigger) Vermont, has documented the cost of a new-build home in various communities in Chittenden County, and that’s the average price.  

We are pricing out our next generation because the industry that could make a big difference chooses to build to the open market and not to the working Vermonter’s pocketbook. Why don’t we hear more about that?

Vermonters care deeply about the negative environmental impacts on our clean air, water, soils, the warming planet, and our climate crisis. That should be clear data presented by the development advocates as well. Why has this not been a part of their messaging?

Today there are over 65,000 unoccupied homes in Vermont (19.4%), the second-highest percentage in the nation, many of them owned by investors, second-home owners and out-of-state, part-time residents. We would argue there is no real housing shortage in Vermont.  It is more accurately a wealth distribution problem. That’s an analysis you never read about in the promotional articles written by the development industries. Why not?

Vermonters are rightfully concerned about their property taxes. Building more homes directly increases our taxes because of the short- and long-term costs to build and maintain infrastructure and provide essential municipal services, such as police, fire and schools, which are never fully covered by impact fees or the growth in the grand list. Why is this never mentioned?

The authors of the recent commentary are correct when they state that the “data is clear” about our aging population, just as it is in many other parts of the United States. So, let’s be careful not to view this as a problem we can easily solve. It’s much bigger than Vermont.

Finally, the question is not simply about abundance or scarcity as the pro-development advocates suggest. We should plan to grow carefully, building up from scarcity and not down from anticipated abundance. Yes, we need more cottage industries that fit into the character of our state. But we must never use speculative population growth and theoretical housing needs to build homes. That is a dangerous precedent, and not appropriate for government intervention.

It’s time to slow down and take advantage of this opportunity first to do what is best for Vermont and its citizens. Our rural character, our natural environment, our cities, towns and villages all deserve to be cared for before the financial interests of the development lobbyists and profiteers who try to overwhelm us with more fear, myths and panic. 

Vermont may be in trouble, but not for the reasons argued by the pro-development forces. Our uniquely beautiful state with its abundant natural resources and beauty, and our great citizenry, should never be on the market. 

We are not for sale.

South Burlington resident John Bossange is president of the nonprofit Better (not bigger) Vermont.