Sterling Students Explore Environmental Law: From the Classroom to the Vermont Statehouse
By Environmental Law and Policy class and Faculty, Farley Anne Brown
Sterling students in the Environmental Law course have been diving deep into the world of environmental policies, exploring the complex laws that shape Vermont. Their studies go beyond the classroom by attending legislative committees at the Vermont Statehouse, immersing themselves in real-time policy action and engaging with key stakeholders who influence crucial environmental issues.
The bill updates below were written on March 20, 2026. You can find the most recent status of these bills on the Vermont General Assembly website.
The Vermont State Legislature started the second session of the biennium in January 2026. Over a thousand bills are introduced throughout a regular session, which ends tentatively in April or May. Students from the law course each chose a bill they found meaningful to track over these past few weeks. Topics ranged from pollution and conservation to land and farm workers rights. This week marked the second of two crossover deadlines, which is the point in the legislative session where a bill needs to make it to the other chamber to have a chance of passing this session. Some of the bills made it, and others did not. Read more about the bills and their status below.
H.778, An Act Relating to Dam Safety
Submitted by Emma Weldon
The main purpose of bill H 778 is for areas with a high risk of flooding if a dam fails to have an emergency evacuation plan in place (100 people or more) and to do drills of that plan (1,000 people or more). It started in the House of Environment and is currently in the House of Appropriations. When a dam could fail, opening dam flood gates can cause more harm than good since it could potentially cause a larger area to flood. This bill focuses more on failure preparedness but some witnesses wanted more context to what being in a high risk area meant. So far, bill H 778 has a third reading ordered but the meeting has yet to take place. It has a good chance of passing and getting the third reading. The bill is important because first responders and others involved if the dam fails will know what to do and it will prevent significant damage to the dam, surrounding area, and nearby residents.
H.739, An Act Relating to Prohibiting the Use and Sale of the Herbicide Paraquat
Submitted by Vivian B. Holmberg
Proposed house bill H.739 would implement a ban on the sale and use of the herbicide Paraquat in the state of Vermont. Paraquat dichloride is a contact herbicide that is acutely toxic to human health and exposure to which has been linked to a significantly increased risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. The herbicide is currently only for use by specifically trained applicators in accordance with federal EPA guidelines.
An exemption for Vermont's orchardists and apple growers would be made, but only with possession of a specialized permit approved by the Vermont secretary of Agriculture, Food, and Markets. The House committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry heard testimony from neurologist James Boyd on the neurological risks associated with paraquat exposure, the sponsor of the bill herself representative Esme Cole, and from apple growers in Vermont who advocated for an exemption on their behalf citing that apples are the second largest specialty crop produced by the state. H. 739 has successfully made it through crossover date and into the Senate for consideration.
H.727, An Act Relating to Sustainable Data Center Infrastructure
Submitted by Michael J. Apicella
With the growth and development of data centers and technologies such as A.I. over the last few years, the power and water demand of data centers has caused growing concern nationwide. Vermont bill H.727 aims to protect water resources, energy grid demands, and protections for Vermont’s ratepayers. While Vermont is not necessarily a major hub and source for data center development, this bill helps to address the issue before it becomes a problem.
Currently, the bill is in its second reading in the House committee on Ways and Means after being in the House committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure. This bill has received a lot of unanimous support from legislators in committees and the House, which was surprising to learn. There were a lot of proposed changes in wording and language within the bill, throughout the testimonies given, but it seems to have maintained a consistent message and language up to this point.
As someone who has been doing more recent research on data centers, I find this bill important and interesting. I grew up just an hour outside of Ashburn, Virginia, which is the Internet capital of the world, with 70% of the world’s daily internet traffic.
H.304, An Act Relating to Fair Labor Standards and Housing Standards for Agricultural Workers
Submitted by Izzy W. Johnson & Lew Z. Collet
In Vermont, agricultural workers are completely exempt from minimum wage law. There is also a lack of housing regulations for farmworker housing, which is commonly found defunct and unmaintained. H.403 would have included farmworkers under minimum wage, including overtime pay after 60 hours. It would have introduced housing inspections for farmworker housing and surveys for those residing there to determine where and what needs to be inspected. Testimony in the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry was 90% positive towards the bill. Criticisms included the potential of some farms being unable to pay minimum wage to their workers, and the fact that the housing inspection surveys may be ineffective in addressing the problem.
Will Lambeck, an organizer for Migrant Justice and a notable supporter of the bill, stated, “We are concerned that the proposed mechanism (...) would not achieve the desired results.” He went on to say, “We do not believe that the Agency would be capable of securing worker participation without fear of reprisal or retaliation.” As an alternative, he suggested that the state contract the Milk with Dignity Standards Council, a Migrant Justice group, to perform the farm housing inspections.
In his testimony, Kevin Kouri, a chairperson of the Vermont Dairy Producer’s Alliance and notable opponent of the bill, stressed that Vermont farms are, “already at a breaking point,” stating, “Vermont risks accelerating the decline of its agricultural sector—reducing local food production, weakening rural communities, and shrinking the workforce opportunities the bill aims to protect.” He added that the bill would introduce “...new administrative demands and new avenues for liability during a time when most farms lack the staffing or technical capacity to manage complex regulatory oversight. Even well-intentioned farmers could inadvertently violate procedural requirements, resulting in financial penalties that compound existing pressures.”
When voting, they removed the overtime pay and housing inspections, so they were only voting on the minimum wage portion. Sadly, the bill was voted down in committee on March 13th. This bill would’ve fixed a lot of problems in Vermont agriculture, the most pressing of which being farm employers committing wage theft against their employees. Hopefully, there will be a bill addressing agricultural wage and housing reform in light of this bill being voted down.
H.868 and S.26, Ultra-processed Foods in Schools
Submitted by Al “Biggest Dog” Burgess
House Bill 868 was a bill introduced to the Vermont House of Representatives on February 11th, 2026. It was an act relating to banning ultra-processed foods in public school meals. This bill was aimed at creating a taskforce to come up with creative ideas to phase out ultra-processed foods in school lunches.
Testimony was largely unanimous in the sentiment that the bill was not as useful as it could be, and that a taskforce was a misuse of time and funding. The testimony said that the problems with school lunches were all due to lack of funding, and that there was no need to create a taskforce to generate the answer that they already have.
This bill did not make it through the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry. This bill is important to Vermonters because many children have high rates of cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The poor quality of some of the foods served in school meals could be a contributing factor. Ultra-processed foods lack a clear definition, and the legislature would need to define that. The bill was built off of a California Law that passed, but rather than banning the foods it was set to make a taskforce.
The Senate passed a bill, S.26 in the same session. S.26 is an act relating to banning artificial food dyes in school lunches, and it bans 7 very specific chemicals. S.26 is now in crossover, and the bill is expected to pass through the House. It is the first step in addressing ultra-processed foods in Vermont school systems. If a bill is to be passed banning ultra-processed foods it must come with some kind of appropriations component to replace these cheaper chemicals with local Vermont products.
H.536, Heavy Metal Babies
Submitted by Jack Ryder Beatson
House Bill 536 was introduced to the Vermont House Committee on Agriculture, Forestry, and Food Resiliency early this year, by Representative Mary-Katherine Stone of Burlington. The purpose of H. 536 is to prohibit the sale of baby foods containing concentrated levels of toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and cambium, as well as to enforce more rigorous testing guidelines and honest labelling relating to these contaminants. The presence of heavy metals in manufactured baby food is surprisingly common, and the FDA limits the acceptable concentration to 10-20 parts per billion of lead in baby food and formula. While there is an amount of contamination that won’t have any adverse health effects, problems arise from uncertainty and the potential for dangerous concentrations. All testimonies heard were in favor of this bill’s passing, with some deliberation among the Representatives on whether or not to include baby formula in the new regulations, and debating specifics of labeling techniques, such as QR codes. The bill is headed to the House floor, and it looks likely to pass. This bill is protecting the health of young children in the state of Vermont and could hopefully set a nationwide precedent for progressing legislation that improves the health of our children.
H.537, An Act Relating to the Right to Grow Vegetable Gardens
Submitted by Otto Gisleson Benischek
H.537 was introduced in January, 2026 to the Vermont House of Representatives by Representative LaLonde of South Burlington. This bill seeks to establish a legal right for renters and people living in Common-Interest Communities (CICs) to be able to grow vegetable gardens. The bylaws of many CICs and HOAs are very strict as far as growing edible plants with some outright banning them. These bylaws can be incredibly hard to change from within the community and if enacted this bill would provide legal protections for those who want to grow gardens in common-interest communities. The bill does allow the boards of CICs to reasonably regulate gardens (banning pesticides, removing dead plant material, etc). Tenants of rented spaces are also given protections in the bill, requiring that landlords must allow tenants to be able to grow vegetables in portable containers. The H.537 has only faced light opposition from groups representing landlords and CICs who mostly wanted clarification on certain parts of the bill’s language related to what counts as “reasonable” for an HOA to regulate, and a landlord’s ability to approve the containers tenants are growing crops in.
If passed, the H.537 may be a good first step in enshrining a general right to grow food similar to Maine’s 2022 amendment to its constitution protecting the right to food.
Submitted by Otto Gisleson Benischek
26-0787, An Act Relating to the Regulation of Forestry under Act 250
Submitted by Brianna Rose Ruud
The Land Use Review Board (LURB) and Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation created a “Wood Manufacturers Report” in January, 2026 to analyze the recent activity in logging and forestry. Ellen Czajkowski from the Office of Legislative Council has drafted this bill to clean up some unintended consequences of Act 250, improving its permitting process to support Vermont’s working industry. Members of the LURB and ANR have come in to review and revise the draft with the House Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry along with testimony given by Sam Lincoln from Lincoln farm. The bill’s current draft form exempts log and pulp yards and areas “not for development” from Act 250 permitting. It also clarifies that the exemption of forestry and logging below 2500 ft is only if it doesn’t violate any other Act 250 regulations. This bill is important to add amendments to Act 250, creating a smoother process for landowners to get a permit for their forestry and logging businesses in Vermont, since forest product is one of the State’s largest industries. The draft’s language has been approved by two committees in the house and seems to be on its way to getting passed in the near future.
H.230, An Act Relating to the Management of Fish and Wildlife
Submitted by Santana L. Calderon
House Bill 230 focuses on several aspects of conservation and protection. The bill grants free fishing weekends during Labor Day weekend if fishing with a licensed angler.
This bill uniquely includes species that are not normally considered in regulation such as reptiles and amphibians. In section 6, the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife may create rules regarding the commercial harvest for use, export, or sale. Also under specific criteria for taking, collection or possession for scientific, educational, or noncommercial culture or ceremonial purposes. Rules adopted by the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife under this section of the bill shall be designed to maintain the best health, population, and utilization levels of the regulated reptile or amphibian. H.230 also cracks down on increased fines for illegal hunting and poaching. In the bill, it is believed that actively enforcing these laws will deter future hunting and poaching.
Testimony given by Vermont Fish and Wildlife comparing current fines versus fines planning to be implemented most fines are close to double and some even triple. The interim commissioner at the time Andrea Shortsleeve sent correspondence stating the Department of Fish and Wildlife “strongly support the bill” and feel it is good for the people of Vermont.
Individual testimony given shared information on invasive species and where they are currently located within the state of Vermont. Vermont Herp Atlas also emailed correspondence regarding the bill stating herpetologists in the state are “very much in favor of the language that protects reptiles and amphibians.”
This bill passed the House quickly and was transferred to the Senate. Since it has been received by the senate it has not had any movement. This bill was introduced early 2025, so there is still a chance it gets “off of the wall” and moves forward.
This bill is quite important because it shows that Vermont is actively conserving the species within the state. This bill will allow the rules to change depending on conditions of the environment. With the rise of climate change, and expansion of housing which leads to the destruction of habitat, acting proactively rather than retroactively Vermont wildlife can prosper.
H.723, An Act Relating to the Posting of Land
Submitted by Magnus Hayden
Vermont House bill H.723 would amend the state laws on the expiration of signage enclosing property, as well as adding language that would allow signs without dates written on them or signage with unintentional errors like improper spacing to still be a legal means of enclosing property.
As the laws currently stand, signage expires and must be replaced after the end of the calendar year, meaning landowners, a largely aging demographic in Vermont, must re-sign the entire perimeter of their property in early January should they want to keep their property enclosed. The bill would change this to the signs having a 365-day lifespan after they are registered with the town, allowing the replacement of signage to happen in whatever season the landowner would like.
Further, under the current laws, an error in spacing, such as a gap larger than 400 feet between two signs, or a missing sign, means the entire perimeter is null. The bill would introduce language that would have infractions on enclosed property be assessed based on whether a “reasonable person” would be able to tell that the land was posted.
The bill was originally created after a landowner reached out to their legislator, complaining about the state's current laws and how they place an undue burden on the landowners should they want to enclose their own property. The legislator then spoke with his peers and discovered many of their constituents had brought up the same issue.
This bill is important because not only does it affect all landowners who may consider posting their land in Vermont, but it also affects anyone who uses Vermont lands. Because of how many people this bill would affect, the pressure is on to find a solution for legislators who are moving into an election cycle and trying to maintain their seats.
