Katherine Partington is co-owner of Weatherhead Hollow, a 1792 Vermont Farmstead that hosts artist residencies, country getaways, events and weddings.
GUILFORD-We went through an eight-year Act 250 review process in Vermont. We ultimately received the permit, but the process itself felt punitive the entire time.
That experience is why we’re paying close attention to how Act 181 is being rolled out.
Because once again, it feels ... unclear.
And that’s a problem.
How a law is implemented matters just as much as what it says.
When you work with a fire department on safety codes, they’ll often walk your building with you, point things out, and help you understand the requirements and get into compliance early on.
That’s a system designed to guide people to success. (And a big thank you to the Vermont’s Division of Fire and Safety for how they approach this work!)
Our experience with Act 250 didn’t feel that way — and our concern is that Act 181 could follow a similar path if clarity and guidance aren’t prioritized early.
* * *
Right now, I think a lot of Vermonters are asking the same questions:
What does compliance actually look like?
Where is the guidance?
Will this be collaborative — or reactive?
And what does enforcement look like in practice?
Because if the system is unclear, the risk isn’t just confusion — it’s costly mistakes and potential enforcement actions.
And for people trying to build, invest, or even just stay here, that matters.
* * *
I am not against reasonable regulation meant to protect our land, our wildlife, and our communities.
But I am asking for clarity, transparency, and a process that works with people — not against them.
If there are clear resources, guidance, or examples already available on how Act 181 will be implemented and enforced in practice, we would genuinely appreciate being pointed to them.
Not another round of community meetings — we attended many during our Act 250 process that led to little clarity. What’s needed is clear, written guidance, including when Act 250 applies and a transparent breakdown of potential enforcement costs, so people aren’t left navigating that uncertainty on their own.
* * *
Vermont is already facing rising costs, from property taxes to housing.
If new systems add uncertainty or unexpected financial risk, it raises a bigger question:
Can people realistically afford to live and build here long-term?
And in an aging state, why would anyone want to move here if they don’t know how zoning and land use actually work?
Because in reality, no place is truly “no zone” in Vermont — there are always layers of regulation to navigate.
This Voices Viewpoint was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.