February 25, 2026

ATTN: Sen. Randy Brock, Sen. Bob Norris, Rep. James Gregiore, Vermont Land Use Review Board, Vermont Woodland Association, Vermont Sugar Makers Association, VLCT, NRPC, State of Vermont

REGARDING: Vermont Act 181

To Whom it May Concern, It is the opinion of the Town of Fairfield Selectboard that Act 181’s regulations do not effectively respect the rights of rural property owners and, furthermore, the Act’s imposed restrictions are not equitable to rural towns such as Fairfield. An aspirational vision of conserving the natural beauty of Vermont should not be translated into state-imposed, Future-Land-Use projections that undermine property owner rights, and municipal control.

We support all bills and ideas being considered that will reduce the impact of Act 181. The state’s Future-Land-Use projections have not been informed by our families, our efforts, our stories or our history.

Although the formation of our country includes the government claiming control of rural lands from rightful owners, the tragic consequences to native peoples and rural farm families have, since, been made clear. In our opinion, imposing state-level, Future-Land-Use restrictions and organizing all land into “connectivity blocks”, to impose limitations and state-level reviews on municipal level road development, only continues this tragic legacy of claiming control of rural lands from rightful owners.

It also does not take into consideration the fact that families, as stewards of their lands for sometimes more than 10 generations in Fairfield, also are custodians of historic rock walls, ancient roads, and ruins of old schoolhouses, civil war activity and industry. These structures and ruins may not show on our current E911 registration or on state maps but they are often utilized and woven into the activities of our community for multiple purposes including education, maple sugaring, farming and recreation.

Act 181 restrictions will be felt more severely by large, rural, towns such as Fairfield, which insults the integrity of the hard-working custodians of these lands and this municipality. The Town of Fairfield is the third largest town in VT, by square miles, but has held about the same population, 2,044 as of the most recent census, for over a hundred and fifty years. At 68.5 square miles, Fairfield is only 4.2 square miles smaller than the next largest town in Vermont, Stowe, according to Vermont’s Open Data Portal, but with significantly fewer financial resources. For comparison, Stowe’s population is estimated to be 4,339 and their total Government Expenses in 2025, according to their most recent audit, was $19.5 million dollars. Fairfield has only 1046 taxable properties, no opportunities for local option taxes, and has no enterprise funding. Our grand list is just over $1.5 million dollars and our total expenses on governmental activities were $2.3 million dollars.

Although Fairfield is expansive, it is not affluent. The extra fees and restrictions that will result from Act 181 could realistically result in the end of many family farm and maple sugaring enterprises; the majority of these already have careful land management practices in place to meet their obligations for Current Use land management, NOFA standards for land care, Fairfield Zoning Regulations, Agency of Natural Resources permitting, and more.  Furthermore, any new restrictions on development in Fairfield could undermine the Town’s ability to grow it’s grand list to pay for its own governmental activities, including road maintenance, town clerk operations, zoning and town administration and more.

Navigating and enforcing Act 181’s requirements locally will result in undue hardship to our municipality and our families. Maintaining our rural landscape, with careful, steady growth strategies over time, is already embedded into our Town Plan and our Zoning Bylaws. We are concerned that, if unchanged, Act 181’s land use restrictions will impose an unfair economic burden on, not only our landowners, but also The Town of Fairfield’s overall economic stability into the future.



As such, we strongly encourage you to do all in your power to pull the brakes on as many Act 181’s restrictions as possible, including but not limited to:

• H.70 - Use existing “current use” laws to meet conservation goals and prevent skyrocketing land H.602 - Repeal the “Road Rule” permit requirement and extend Act 250 relief
• H.730 - Require notification & property tax reduction for Act 250/181 designation impacts o H.805 - Streamline Act 250 permitting & provide property tax relief for restrictive land use designations
• H.749 - Remove requirements to permanently preserve 30% and ultimately 50% of Vermont land from Act 59

Thank you for the important role you play in advocating for what is best for our state. We encourage you to be wise, moving forward, and hope you will share our concerns as you tackle this legislation.

Respectfully Yours,

The Town of Fairfield Selectboard, Tom Howrigan, Chair Gavin Ryan David Persons Ron Bocash Brian Dubie