[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6223685,"mediaKeyId","3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a","parentId",3567465,"title","VHFA off‑site modular housing study to proceed without full budget allocation, committee told","audioSeconds",87,"startMs",1157000,"endMs",1244000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a&start=1157&end=1244","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a/thumbnail_1157000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6223685/Vermont/VHFA-offsite-modular-housing-study-to-proceed-without-full-budget-allocation-committee-told","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6223685-498e645b9863856750a869010df7bc5d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968667&Signature=mx9lxJimUQYblu5PRyraVbDvLLQXuzLv9k8PpzxSg4niXggE7u-xbI4C~bgId5XuXx0g6X2LGMv2-Gm6jkT4OunlkUrhExRvP1GwqoCNZqzLQYlDCQVojX-6BnBh-HORp~nx4USd41Z1TGvDPol4eGAqIDocJxEOC4eGmCIx2BoFvUDcDvRwysUSYY4XatsgZgaH3HYlBR6vHngsnAyVQu-UmtiTMxyrkNEjV7o~FXr3ollmUDXeRdYtcuysnHJF4YFgmHOxxfWiYWz3yTsLJgMHUMlAOWAdIABUhx95DlUyg1BC3vqT-p87rM39Dwogh0acouraixpOIkWVbwW3cQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-28T20:52:00Z","article","The committee discussed a VHFA study on off‑site modular home construction that was included in an earlier draft but lost its appropriation during the budget process. Lawmakers said they still wanted VHFA to complete the work and agreed to keep the study language in the bill while clarifying schedule and resource language.

Background: VHFA had proposed a study to explore financing, in‑state fabrication capacity, and the role the state could play as a guarantor for factory‑built homes. Legislators said the agency had requested funding to accelerate the work but that the appropriation was reduced in the budget.

Agency response and next steps: Committee members reported VHFA told them it would still produce the study but on a slower timeline absent the earlier appropriation. Committee negotiators proposed removing a statutory phrase that would make the study conditional on “sufficient resources,” or changing a statutory “shall” to a permissive “may,” so the bill recognizes the study without mandating an unfunded schedule.

Quote and clarification: Committee members said the language should acknowledge VHFA’s capacity constraints while signaling legislative interest in the work.

Ending: The committee agreed to preserve the study directive in the draft language and to work with VHFA to adjust timing so the work can proceed without a new immediate appropriation.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","S.127 Committee of Conference - 2025-05-28 - 4:50PM","oneSentenceSummary","The conference committee heard that a VHFA study on off‑site modular home construction was funded in the budget but that initial funds were cut; VHFA says it will proceed with a delayed schedule and the committee agreed to retain the study language while removing a \"provided sufficient resources\" qualifier from the bill text.","taxTitle","Commerce & Economic Development, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",36720,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6223688,"Committee backs narrow task force on visitability language, seeks fire safety input",409,221000,630000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a&start=221&end=630","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a/thumbnail_221000.jpg","/articles/6223688/Vermont/Committee-backs-narrow-task-force-on-visitability-language-seeks-fire-safety-input","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6223688-3c31c6eeb83da07acc426e5dc4dc8529/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968667&Signature=R1vyAWBFkwmtnpnuELufi6bhQcQ302J8v72bIg1qiMXZQ5ZWS6yYiglRrNSxIgd-Hkm5tPUr1-YIME7Q-rPYO6Z4oMZi-p-IH0sNg8HZCPibbMG2m4aOuztHaVoksHIlv~G~Ozv2fYkTs2K8Ei0NK~L5Z-FKwoCzwi1SKee40xUmXkQulMcqgmRtkrA24InBkn1PiGvKCG002oLtcZRgZh-DO0ysZIgsiuRvF8E2T38Mh9j3Sw3p0B-OJLNRhdkOQcg3PNp~VXRWlhvvWyTb5Gl5mEGV-Y60K8EJgxqDOO4QZ7gywlPtnfAwKtpViYO6~zL0P1iJ8RtdcTonD4y7DA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the conference committee said they had agreed to include a narrow panel — requested by housing agencies — to define technical terms used across housing statutes, such as \"visitability\" and \"universal design.\" Lawmakers described the panel as limited to producing consensus definitions, not broad new standards.

Why it matters: Several state statutes and program rules use terms that local governments, builders and agencies interpret differently. Committee members said a short, narrowly scoped body could clarify terminology that appears in multiple funding and regulatory programs and reduce downstream confusion.

Fire safety and ADA oversight: Committee members asked whether the Division of Fire Safety had been consulted and whether its construction and life‑safety rules were compatible with any new visitability language. Mike Deroscher, speaking for the division, said he had reached out to Representative Burrows with materials about the division’s role, including chairing the accessibility board and promulgating ADA rules, and that he had provided construction requirements used during residential construction. “I reached out to Representative Burrows and provided her with a lot of information pertaining to how much the division of fire safety does in this arena, including chairing the accessibility board and promulgating ADA rules. I sent her our rules and some requirements we require during construction of all residential occupancies,” Deroscher said.

Scope and funding: Committee members noted the language had been requested by VHFA and that the program concept was funded in the budget at a level that the House draft had reflected; negotiators said they intended to retain a narrowly scoped definition workstream rather than a broad new regulatory regime.

Ending: The committee agreed to keep the narrow definition panel in the draft and to confirm the Division of Fire Safety’s participation and any adjustments to language before finalizing statutory text.","Conference negotiators agreed to include a narrow, definition‑focused committee to standardize terms such as \"visitability\" and \"universal design\" in state housing statutes, and they asked the Division of Fire Safety to confirm its role and review construction rules referenced in the draft.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6223694,"Conference committee moves to bar Social Security number requirement on rental intake forms",830,771000,1601000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a&start=771&end=1601","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a/thumbnail_771000.jpg","/articles/6223694/Vermont/Conference-committee-moves-to-bar-Social-Security-number-requirement-on-rental-intake-forms","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6223694-e5f08f11221a71b565cd7fce31f549b3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968667&Signature=RFWAKQV-83GEZyP3xdWjey-ahZLx6kjA4IqWf0UhPGAJ5Lwv18GtHdIK4aio9AOUgaRo9VqfJ18DuZcCqJwE4tCSm8kV0x7blHxwhLLyn5KgLFV8lFDAdg~6nkIod6yh0445uhdQxG9QrfA~SyQ3jwONq~K8UC1lf4m7YSw~uSLL5AOz3O-Q4SSzQWVf~~yCu4b6LpkuUgLV-SCXA22bKjtw8vaeYq5fCKKSGS~sypofwEOOXu~mP6lT1Xh9xGibXASKaichvvuEYL4biWFTA8OY1cqDNiIzjW1BrfxTA8gupF94RxS54BgqfSKtda5WS4ojfJ9142w~jWbhikOHtg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Conference negotiators discussed a provision intended to bar rental application forms from requiring Social Security numbers, a change the sponsors said is intended to protect immigrants and other applicants who lack or will not provide an SSN.

Negotiators described a working approach that would require a landlord’s form to accept a set of alternative identity documents rather than mandating a Social Security number. Committee members said they would draft language that prevents a form from requiring an SSN and instead lists acceptable categories of government‑issued proof of identity or eligibility.

Why it matters: Advocates for immigrant tenants said requiring an SSN creates a barrier to housing and can force people to disclose immigration status. Landlord groups said they need reliable identity and screening information, and lawmakers signaled they would try to balance those interests by specifying acceptable alternatives and avoiding subjective determinations by landlords.

What was discussed: Committee members debated whether to make the change mandatory or to require only that landlords accept multiple forms of identification. They also discussed crafting clear, objective language so landlords can update their existing forms (for example, removing a “*Social Security number” field) without adding unreasonable burdens. Members agreed to work on precise statutory wording and to consult migrant‑advocacy groups and landlord representatives.

Ending: The conference committee asked Legislative Council staff to draft statutory language for a prohibition on requiring Social Security numbers on rental application forms and to circulate that language for stakeholder input before the next session.","Lawmakers discussed language intended to prevent landlords from requiring prospective tenants to supply Social Security numbers on standard application forms and to accommodate tenants who lack a Social Security number or who prefer alternative government‑issued ID.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6223699,"Conference committee narrows but disputes key details of CHIP, TIF cap and oversight",2678,2000,2680000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a&start=2&end=2680","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3567465-8f446ed23e2364d43e2014fb7a6d1d6a/thumbnail_2000.jpg","/articles/6223699/Vermont/Conference-committee-narrows-but-disputes-key-details-of-CHIP-TIF-cap-and-oversight","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6223699-fbc2853784cbddc5d956b27508f6f370/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968667&Signature=OahvHPpNJ44ra0d06aucM-rVk1kAb14Y82QZwNmCSGN8nKrNHBNjnif28zsasupc8bQVyix2IA8S-lpHTuT496Njwfg6hWKbErhf9b2qISddYTS8a9fFQVF~X94Pwnd6vLDfsOq~Ec3RjikVd8QBObFakU2-8H0MLXcmDOhwFqemNHLYFtjRnqaEG63A2Uq1S5jy3T1UMFbCgjxtH3w1fEqr1BCIwuFN8SYzn2FScuY8kprG2NvsjKYHoMPbTp16IvTB75h-3WUPCGpFc01SJFuZkIWhB9uq5nDu55r4kkEnjMUAUJgg0qxOqbedb7rXiUATCQGTcWWXqgpMOthULQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the conference committee working on S.127 and H.479 told each other Thursday they had resolved many textual differences but remain at odds over how to design and administer the proposed Community Housing Infrastructure Program, or CHIP, and how to limit its fiscal exposure to the statewide education fund.

The committee advanced language that would create CHIP as a housing‑focused tax‑increment tool but debated three central implementation questions: (1) whether to cap annual retained increment and, if so, at what level; (2) how to structure a determinate, auditable “but‑for” test to show projects require tax‑increment support; and (3) how fast the state review board must act after municipalities submit completed applications.

Why it matters: CHIP would use retained education property tax increment to finance infrastructure for housing developments. Committee members said the program could unlock housing and help grow municipal grand lists, but several lawmakers warned that retained increment means forgone education revenue and wanted firm safeguards.

Most contentious was a cap the House side proposed to make the new program administrable and to limit annual exposure of the education fund. Advocates for the cap described it as a pragmatic way for the agency that reviews applications (referred to in the discussion as “Pepsi”/VEPSI) to measure lifetime increment commitments and stop approvals when the annual retained‑increment budget is reached. Opponents said a fixed dollar cap is blunt, risks becoming quickly obsolete, and could limit projects in high‑need areas.

The committee discussed an approach the House negotiators offered that equates a near‑term benchmark — roughly the value of a penny on the property tax in the current year (discussed in committee as about $14 million) — with a $40 million annual administrative ceiling for lifetime retained increments aggregated across approvals. That arithmetic came from Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) spreadsheets and illustrative scenarios laid out during the meeting, but the committee heard that JFO’s working estimates were prepared for a separate exercise and should not be read as a definitive unit projection. “The figures that are being attributed to Jeff Carr were for a completely separate exercise,” said Alex Merrill, commissioner of the Department of Housing, referring to an earlier JFO estimate and urging caution about using it as a firm unit calculation.

Members also debated the program’s “but‑for” requirement — the showing that a proposed housing development would not proceed without tax‑increment assistance. Some members urged keeping the test high‑level and defer detailed, auditable criteria to agency rulemaking so smaller municipalities would not be deterred. Others pushed for clearer, more prescriptive measures in statute (vacancy rates, housing targets, AMI thresholds or other objective metrics) to reduce subjectivity and auditing disputes.

On timing, negotiators discussed a statutory review deadline for the state reviewer after an application is deemed complete. The House negotiators suggested a 45‑day window for an agency decision, but agency representatives said monthly meeting schedules and the need for site visits could make 45 days unrealistic; several members signaled they would accept a longer period tied to a timely site visit (for example, 60 days) with authority for the reviewer to extend for good cause.

The committee also considered how to treat contiguous parcels, phased projects and the question of whether deed restrictions should require housing built with CHIP support to remain primary residences or affordable “in perpetuity.” Several members warned that perpetual deed restrictions on market‑rate units are legally and administratively fraught and likely unworkable unless an affordable‑housing nonprofit sponsors and manages units.

Where it goes from here: Committee leaders said they will draft a new working proposal reflecting the meeting discussion and circulate it to agency and stakeholder partners for technical feedback before reconvening. They asked JFO, the reviewer (Pepsi/VEPSI) and housing agencies to be available for the next session to discuss the cap arithmetic and the auditability of any “but‑for” test.

Ending: The conference committee did not vote on final language. Members agreed to continue negotiations and to circulate follow‑up materials, including JFO spreadsheets and suggested rulemaking language for the reviewer.","Lawmakers on the S.127/H.479 conference committee agreed on many technical edits but left open major decisions about a new Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP), a proposed $40 million annual cap on tax-increment retention, the administration of a \"but‑for\" test and timelines for agency review.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

VHFA off‑site modular housing study to proceed without full budget allocation, committee told

Committee backs narrow task force on visitability language, seeks fire safety input

Conference committee moves to bar Social Security number requirement on rental intake forms

Conference committee narrows but disputes key details of CHIP, TIF cap and oversight