The Facts vs. Governor Douglas - Talking Points

January 28, 2009

Governor Douglas has outlined a radical vision for changing the programs that have protected Vermont’s communities and natural resources for several decades.  In presenting these changes to the state, the Governor has used powerful rhetoric to paint a picture of a regulatory structure that is strangling Vermont’s economy in bureaucratic gridlock.  This dark picture, however, is not accurate.

VNRC examined the Governor’s oft-repeated comments and compared them to the facts.

The Governor:
“We have a culture of "No" in permitting to a great extent.” [Vermont Public Radio, January 9, 2009]

The Facts:
According to the 2007 Annual Report of the Vermont Natural Resources Board, dated February 25, 2008, 424 of the 428 applications submitted were approved by the District Environmental Commissions, an approval rate of 99.1%.  There is a culture of “Yes,” to a much greater extent.

The Governor:
Governor Douglas asserts that it takes an average of 278 days for an applicant to receive an Act 250 land use permit. ‘Other states are doing better and we have to do better if we're going to be competitive," he said. [Rutland Herald, November 25, 2008]

The Facts:
According to the Vermont Natural Resources Board, in 2007 65% of applications were approved within 60 days; 81% were approved within 120 days.  The median processing time for an application was 35 days.  The 278 day figure appears to have been pulled from thin air.

The Governor:
“The current system remains a labyrinth, fraught with unpredictability, which threatens job creation for years ahead – unless we are prepared to make substantive changes that will modernize the system.” [Inaugural Address, January 8, 2009]

The Facts:
According to survey of hundreds of developers and consultants who had recently sought agency permits, conducted for the Agency of Natural Resources by the polling firm ORC Macro, over 75% of the respondents who had gone through an agency permit process themselves reported that the time it took to receive the permit did not cause them any problems, while 71% indicated that the regulations are reasonable (24% felt they are not reasonable).  Of the 22% of respondents who felt the permit process took too long, they mostly complained of added project costs and personal aggravation or frustration.

Few people welcome the added expense and time needed to obtain someone’s approval that their project is designed in a way that will not harm the environment.  Such a high percentage of satisfied – even supportive – permit recipients, however, is not indicative of a “labyrinth fraught with unpredictability.”

The Governor:
"The (Act 250) law allows special interest groups to intervene and bring lawsuits in a very generous way.” [Vermont Public Radio, January 9, 2009]

The Facts:
The “special interest” groups that the Governor refers to are our neighbors, Vermont citizens, and municipal officials, exercising their right to participate in development projects that effect their homes, livelihoods and communities.

In 2008, VNRC ¬– at the request of local neighbors – became involved in two Act 250 applications before District Commissions (less than 0.5% of all applications submitted).  VNRC became involved in these cases because they involved issues of statewide significance and were of critical importance to our members.  Anyone who has ever attempted to oppose a development project in the Act 250 process understands that it is neither easy nor inexpensive, and that frivolous opposition is not successful.

The Governor:
“We must expand the use of the self-certifications, general permits and permits by rule that are now used in stormwater, air pollution control and other programs. … Businesses will not be let off the hook from environmental protection. Non-compliance will bring costly penalties, motivating developers to complete legally and environmentally sound projects.” [Inaugural Address, January 8, 2009]

The Facts:
Since 1999, the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) has issued over 1,000 General Construction Permits for erosion and sedimentation control on construction sites around the state.  To date, ANR has taken two enforcement actions to correct violations.  In 2007, VNRC inspected 29 active construction sites chosen at random from ANR permit files and found nearly every site to be in violation of the law, with some of the violations being egregious. (Check out VNRC’s full reporting on this issue at www.vnrc.org/article/articleview/19744/). This is the model that the Governor wants to replicate with other environmental protection programs.

The Governor:
 “As we strive to protect that which is so special about Vermont, we must recognize that a "working landscape" requires Vermonters to be actually working - not simply admiring the view.” [Inaugural Address, January 8, 2009]

The Facts:
A 2005 study of the economic impact of the tourism industry in Vermont, conducted for the Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development, found that visitors to Vermont contributed 1.57 billion dollars to the state economy, and 196.4 million dollars in state revenues. That study also concluded: “The (tourism) industry is an integral part of a rural, working landscape, and whether looking at the jobs created or taxes collected, visitor spending provides a significant portion of local and regional economic activity in virtually every part of the state.

In addition to the economic value of visitors “looking at” Vermont’s working landscape, people are actually working on the working landscape.  Forest-based manufacturing industries in Vermont contributed $1.0 billion to the economy in 2005 (9.3% of Vermont’s total manufacturing sales) and employed 6,379 people with a payroll of over $207.4 million. In 2002 (the last available USDA Census of Agriculture), Vermont farms generated $556 million in total cash receipts. 

The Governor’s dismissing the economic value of the working landscape might explain his poor performance regarding economic development: He does not understand that Vermont’s economy relies on the state’s unique character and quality of life. 

The Governor:
 “Governor Jim Douglas says Vermont's environmental permit programs discourage business growth and development.” [Vermont Public Radio, January 9, 2009]

The Facts:
As Vermont was in the midst of the last painful economic downturns, in the early 1990s, many of the same arguments that you hear today regarding the economic benefits of deregulation were being raised in Montpelier.  In 1993 Stephan Meyer, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) who had recently authored a report entitled Environmentalism and Economic Prosperity, testified to New Hampshire State Senate that: “At this very moment, development interests are pushing to amend Act 250, arguing that it has greatly hindered the recovery of (Vermont’s) economy in general and the construction industry in particular.  New Hampshire, it seems, is the preferred model, with its relatively lax land use regulations.  However, a comparison of growth in construction employment, finance, insurance, and real estate employment, and similar indicators of economic activity related to land use show that in every case during the period of national economic growth (1982-1989) Vermont’s economic performance was either equal to or surpassed that of New Hampshire.”

Mr. Meyer went on to say: “there is certainly no reason to believe that Vermont’s economy – or its development sector – would have performed any better had Act 250 been eliminated or substantially weakened” and that “the more extensive planning required by Act 250 actually may have contributed to lessening the overall impact of the recession on Vermont’s construction, real estate and banking industry.” 

Act 250 appears to have the unintended consequence of buffering Vermont from the sharp peaks and valley’s of economic cycles by curbing in the excesses of poorly planned, under-capitalized projects during economic booms, and avoiding the subsequent sharp declines in business activity during recessions.  This affect has been identified by Vermont bankers as recently as 2008.

The Governor:
“By creating a more responsive regulatory process we will uphold our cherished environmental standards and at the same time allow our state to grow and thrive.” [Inaugural Address, January 8, 2009]

The Facts:
In April 2008 economist Tom Kavet, who advises the Legislative Joint Fiscal Office on the economic and fiscal implications of a range of state policy considerations, commented on the likely impacts of an economic stimulus package being considered at the time.  With regard to a program to exempt certain housing projects from Act 250 review, Mr. Kavet wrote: “There may also be net fiscal costs to skirting Act 250 safeguards to development. Act 250 has served to shape development in Vermont in a way that supports and contributes to critical tourism industry revenues and other unique and beneficial land use characteristics in the state. The overwhelming majority of Act 250 applications are approved.  Those that are not are often projects that have unacceptable characteristics that represent real costs to the state.”

Vermont’s brand is its landscape, its small, intact communities, and its legacy of environmental stewardship.  Together, these help to form the state’s green infrastructure.  Act 250 helps to protect all of these special characteristics.

The Governor:
“Further, we must expedite the chilling and costly effect of our lengthy appeals process by instituting “on the record review” – one formal hearing, where all evidence is submitted and examined. ”  [Inaugural Address, January 8, 2009]

The Facts:
According to a January 15, 2003 report from the Vermont Environmental Board to the Vermont Legislature regarding the status of the On the Record Review (OTR) Pilot Project, the Environmental Board reported:” The OTR Emergency Rules of Procedure were adopted in August of 2001 following the receipt of oral and written public comment.  The rules were widely distributed to interested persons including regional planning commissions, other state agencies, Act 250 attorneys and consultants, chambers of commerce and regional development corporations.  To date, no requests for “recorded hearings” have been received by the district commissions.  In spite of extensive outreach including the rulemaking effort, no inquiries have been received by the district commissions.  This is the second year of a three year pilot project and all of the preparations have been completed.

Despite the lack of past interest, the Governor is pursuing OTR.  This is intended to streamline the appeal process for the fewer than 2% of Act 250 decisions that are appealed.  It will, however, bring greater formality and complexity to district commission proceedings, further discouraging citizens and neighbors from participating in the review of projects that will affect their property, community and possibly their livelihood.


Vermont’s environmental resources, communities and unique character are too important to put through a political spin machine. The facts are clear: Act 250 and other environmental permitting in Vermont has not served as an obstacle to development. In fact, many argue that the state’s longstanding commitment to environmental stewardship has made the state more resilient in these turbulent economic times. Help put the facts — and Vermonters values — back into this important debate underway in the Legislature. Please contact Governor Douglas and your legislators and ask them not to use this global economic downturn as an excuse to roll back Vermont’s commitment to the environment — as our future prosperity depends upon healthy communities and a clean environment.