Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RamaSchneider t1_j7oxb0l wrote

Act 250 does not now and never has halted development. It has slowed development down from time to time, but that's the worst (or maybe the best) of it.

Local zoning is the governmental culprit.

But the biggest culprit is actually our economic system of rewards. I'm 100% pro-free enterprise and a very loosely controlled economy; but this current version that we call "capitalism" is killing us all - literally. And housing is only a part of that.

We don't have a lack of easy and quick to develop properties. The major problem is that some segments of society have so much extra cash, they can and do buy up for their own personal pleasure the very resources others need to live. This statement is about cause and effect and is not meant to cast moral stones.

But we can't do much about the macro-economics. We have to deal with the symptoms the best we can. So I'd start with tax policy aimed at discouraging non-home steading type house buying and absentee landlords.

8

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j7p7rsk wrote

Spot on.

Slow development is partly to blame. Air bnb is partly to blame.

But the huge surge is rental prices is directly attributable to a surge and consolidation in software based rental pricing industry. Basically they’ve realized it’s more profitable to continually raise rents and have large turnover and higher vacancy. These companies (mostly one) manage enough properties that they’ve dragged all prices up.

We’re not actually short on housing nationally by most metrics. Housing construction isn’t lagging by most metrics. Enough cards are held by theses companies that they can manipulate the market. Adding more housing that are managed this way won’t lower rents.

Edit: I know I give you crap on many of your posts, but I fully agree with many of your takes. It’ll take national legislation to sort out the root causes of this issue.

8

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j7pnapc wrote

National legislation cannot fix this.

1

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j7pntkd wrote

What will? Simply encouraging development won’t fix it if most of the new units are owned by huge companies. That’s like trying to lower gas prices by encouraging opec to drill more…

2

HappilyhiketheHump t1_j7q5hbr wrote

Nope. State government is your best shot at a framework that might work.
National legislation will only make things worse as square pegs don’t fit into round holes.

2

SomeConstructionGuy t1_j7s9myp wrote

I don’t see how Vt state government can address the massive consolidation in algorithmic rental pricing. They don’t have the reach or power. Sure they can address smaller issues such as short term rentals and barriers to development, but those arent the main drivers of the broader housing issues.

I still maintain that it requires regulation of corporate landlords and their pricing practices. That’s an issue for national legislators.

2

goldenlight18 t1_j7phxhd wrote

I disagree with that assessment two-fold. Act 250 can prohibit development by starving a builder of the funds to complete a project through "slowing development". There are some segments of society that have extra cash and try to build something with it, but Act 250 frequently punishes those who try by making it such an onerous and expensive undertaking. Owning land, paying taxes and mortgages, permitting on local & state levels, staff to repeatedly draw up plans to satisfy govt, neighbors, and random interested parties is expensive - let alone funding it without breaking ground for 15 - 20 years or until someone runs out of money or gives up. Thats insane, it disincentives people from building.

If you look at stats put out by the VHFA, people just stopped building in the late 90s, early 2000s (way before 2008). There are also a LOT of people that move here for the "Vermont way of life" and then fight every development that could serve to house people born here to keep their bucolic dream alive. This pushes development to be expensive sprawling messes where someone can get a foothold and run with it instead of smart, mixed use, downtown intensive development.

Which hurts people born in Vermont the most by restricting the number of homes on the market and allowing outside buyers to scoop up what remains, who are then widely resented for an issue they stumbled into. Would recommend reading this article by Seven Days from last year that does a good job at explaining the way NIMBYS wield Act 250 to protect their own housing interests.

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/obstruction-zone-how-vermonts-land-use-regulations-impede-new-development-and-complicate-the-states-housing-crisis/Content?oid=35279122

​

**Edited because the stats are put out by VHFA not VHCB, used the wrong acronym!

6

Necessary_Cat_4801 t1_j7ser2j wrote

Stumbled into? I get where you're going with this and I don't totally disagree but people moving here can't be oblivious to what's going on.

1

goldenlight18 t1_j841vr7 wrote

I mean, have you seen the posts of people looking to move to Vermont who are consulting Reddit? And I would bet that 99% of the people who can afford to cash offer on a home in VT from out of state aren't consulting reddit about where to move their life to and have a vague idea but assume it's like the housing crisis in the rest of the country and not nearly as bad as it is.

1