Editor’s note: This commentary is by Darby Bradley, the former president of Vermont Land Trust.
There has been a lot of misinformation about S.119, a bill governing the amendment of conservation easements. Perhaps I can set the record straight and put people’s minds at ease about the purpose of this legislation:
This bill is not opening a new door to conservation easement amendments: land trusts in Vermont already have the authority to amend easements, and have used it on occasion to maintain and enhance conservation values. Rather, the bill establishes clear criteria for amendments, requires review and approval by the Natural Resources Board, and invites public participation. None of these elements exist in current law.
No land trust in Vermont has ever sold an easement, nor will they. It would be suicidal behavior even to propose the idea, especially if S.119 is enacted, because of the public outrage that would follow.
Vermont’s legislation will place limitations on all easement amendments. Before any significant amendment can go forward, the town, governmental agencies, neighboring landowners and the general public must receive notice of the proposal; any person can request a public hearing, and the proposal must be reviewed and approved under strict standards either by the Environmental Court or by a special administrative panel of the Vermont Natural Resources Board.
This legislation will strengthen the public’s role in future decisions and ensure that land trusts today and in the future will continue to uphold the values and benefits that come with conservation easements.
The legislation was developed by a 16-member working group, which included representatives from the Attorney General’s office, four state agencies and boards, land trusts of all sizes, the Vermont Bar Association, the Vermont Farm Bureau, and recreational and sporting groups. It passed the Senate last year on a voice vote, after being reviewed by four separate committees. Four committees of the House have heard testimony on the bill to date.
Maine adopted similar legislation governing amendments of easements in 2007. None of the horrible outcomes predicted by a few people for S.119 have occurred in Maine. No land trust has sold an easement. Landowners are still donating easements and receiving federal income tax deductions. Land trusts are still receiving federal grants for land conservation projects. In fact, Maine has protected over 500,000 acres of land since the amendment bill was adopted.
Here are some examples of easement amendments done by the Vermont Land Trust: 1) a house site was moved to a less intrusive location; 2) a farmstead was reconfigured to accommodate a new dairy barn; and 3) a farm had had its boundaries redrawn (without reducing conserved acreage) to incorporate more prime agricultural soils into the easement.
We have also made minor boundary adjustments to benefit several communities in cases where doing so didn’t adversely affect the conservation purposes. The benefits have included straightening a dangerous curve in the highway and enlarging a volunteer fire station. These decisions are made thoughtfully and judiciously. The Vermont Attorney General has never received a complaint about an amendment.
Two things are true: the characteristics and the use of conserved land in Vermont will evolve over time and easement amendments are a complicated subject. That is why we need to increase the scrutiny by which we evaluate change in the context of the original intent of the easement. This legislation will strengthen the public’s role in future decisions and ensure that land trusts today and in the future will continue to uphold the values and benefits that come with conservation easements.
More information about the bill and the thinking behind it can be found on the Vermont Land Trust’s website www.vlt.org/amendment.
