Dear Editor,
The permitting and appeals process for housing and other development in Vermont should be streamlined. Legal challenges can be lengthy, expensive and onerous, and delay is often the central — and winning — strategy. But projects can be challenged, successfully or not, only by parties with substantial funding and sustained commitment. That reality leaves much of the public on the sidelines, even though public policy should serve the public interest first.
From that perspective, expediting disputes makes sense. What does not make sense is leveraging a “housing crisis” to discard environmental protections or other community values. For every worthy project ultimately derailed by appeals under the current system, there may be a deeply flawed project that proceeds unchallenged. Developers with the resources to raise millions and the sophistication to tap tax dollars or credits are rarely stymied by the permit process. More often, they benefit from a judicial and political environment that is more accommodating than it should be.
The Burlington Square Mall redevelopment illustrates the risk. When the project first surfaced, City Hall effectively transformed its planning department into an advocate and accessory for the developer, abandoning its role as a guide and regulator in the public interest. The result was a prolonged pit, lasting social and economic harm, and a development delayed far longer than necessary.
Reforming the regulatory system to facilitate housing development is a worthy goal. But sidelining the public — and the public interest — in the name of a housing crisis is not.
Michael Long
Burlington
