Arlington Planning Commission
Minutes – 4/23/2026
Planning Commission members in attendance:
Jon Murray
Mary Anne Holmes
Jenna Tait
Michael Murno
Garret Siegel
Joan Nash (Zoom, APC alternate)
Also in attendance: Cynthia Browning, Interim Town Administrator
A motion was made by Michael Murno to approve the minutes from the last APC meeting (February 26, 2026), seconded by Joan Nash. Approved unanimously.
No Public Comments
New Business:
Cynthia noted that a new Town Administrator, named Katie Dixon, has been hired and will begin work for the town on May 18, 2026. The town administrator was formerly a … for the town of …
Old Business:
Act 181 Update: Garret noted that due to the expected repeal of the Road Rule and Tier 3 designation, he had decided to postpone the appearance of Nick Zaiac of the BCRC at the current meeting until the implications of these repeals were clear. He noted that the Planning Commission will reschedule Nick’s appearance in the next few months.
Garret noted that he had joined a Facebook group aimed at a Repeal of Act 181 early on to follow developments and that there was a well-attended protest in Montpelier organized by this group on March 24th. There had also been a recent presentation in Winhall about Act 181 and some commentary about it on the Happenings in Arlington FB group.
In face of significant opposition to the Act, the Chair of the House Committee on Environment and Energy, Amy Sheldon (D-Middlebury), changed her position on the Act; moreover, the Vermont Natural Resources Council, which had a big part in the drafting the Act, also changed their position, setting up an expected repeal of the most controversial parts of Act 181. It is unclear what will happen to Tier 2. Garret noted that the Tier 1 part of the bill, which exempts housing development in town centers from Act 250 review makes a lot of sense though it would be better if Tier 1A and Tier 1B implementation was prioritized on an Opt Out basis as opposed to Opt In which requires towns to apply for status. Tier 1 status also allows for the expansion of town centers which is particularly pertinent for the town of Arlington. Garret stressed again that the most wide-ranging effects of Tier 1 Act 250 exclusion remains hampered by the lack of expanded town water and wastewater; this is true for a majority of jurisdictions across the state.
Act 59 Listening Session: Mary Anne Holmes, Joan Nash & Garret Siegel attended a well-attended listening session at the Arlington Commons on March 19th. There were approximately 25 townspeople including Arlington farmers, foresters as well as members of the Arlington Energy Committee.
Act 59, entitled The Community Resilience and Biodiversity Protect Act aims “to maintain an ecologically functional landscape that sustains biodiversity, supports working farms and forests, strengthens community resilience, and upholds Vermont’s historic pattern of compact villages surrounded by rural lands and natural areas.” Its goal is to conserve 30% of Vermont’s land by 2030 and 50% by 2050. Governor Scott allowed this act to become law without signing it in June of 2023. The project is led by the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (VHCB) with the assistance of the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR). The VHCB asked the Bennington County Conservation District (BCCD) district manager (and Arlington resident) Michael Fernandez to organize and lead the session. It should be noted that the Bennington Country Conservation District does not have any direct involvement in the organization and implementation of the legislation. The purpose of the listening session was to introduce the Vermont Conservation Plan as well as to allow for public comment.
The three main objectives of the Conservation Plan are 1) to center Vermont Conservation design on science-based ecological priorities, namely connectivity, representation, forest structure, and aquatic systems; 2) to support Conservation for communities by assuring equitable access, working lands viability, climate resiliency, recreation, and education; and 3) to strengthen conservation capacity to sustainably steward conserved lands through adequate funding & workforce, innovation and infrastructure. (A link to the presentation can be found here.) There are three categories of conserved lands : “ecological reserve areas,” meaning areas having permanent protection from conversion and that are managed to maintain a natural state within natural ecological processes and where disturbance events are allowed to proceed with minimal interference; “biodiversity areas,” meaning areas having a permanent protection from conversion for the majority of the area and that are managed for the primary goal of sustaining species or habitats; and “natural resource management areas,” meaning areas having permanent protection from conversion for the majority of the area but that is subject to long-term, sustainable land management.
Here in 2026, 27% of lands are currently conserved. An additional 200,000 acres are needed to achieve the 30% goal by 2030 as well as an additional 1.4 million acres to reach the 2050 target. Many attendees were surprised to learn that land that is currently preserved under Current Use is not included in this figure even though those lands are effectively conserved as natural resource management areas for farming and/or forestry. If that land was counted in this total of conserved lands, the state would already be near the 2050 goal. (An inventory of currently conserved land in Vermont can be found here.)
For those who would like to comment on the Act 59 conservation plan, comments will be accepted through the end of June 2020 using a form available here.
Recreation/Hiking:
Discussion continued about how it is extremely difficult to figure out what lands one might hike on in Arlington. Asking for permission from a homeowner can feel like an imposition to the homeowner and somewhat chancy. It is hoped that we as a committee and town might be able to supply info on where one might go hiking without needing to ask. Public trails and access points should be a readily available resource and ideally marked for the public. The Planning Commission agreed that it would be great if we could compile such a list that might be available on the soon to be reworked town website.
April School Board Meeting:
Jenna attended the April School Board meeting. The school superintendent was present to present academic data, but it turned out that the data was incomplete and will necessitate another visit from the superintendent at a later date. What is clear from his presentation is that the school’s ambitions in terms of literacy, math and mental health have not been met. There is a Continuous Improvement Plan for the student body in place with a goal, for example, of 65% proficiency in English Language Arts. This goal has not been met. It should be noted that Arlington students do not differ from national trends in education. Covid is considered a big factor for this fact. Vermont had the second worst scholastic recovery post-pandemic. There are programs in place aiming to bridge this gap, notably homework assistance and free tutoring.
Integration and Communication:
Garret expanded on comments he has made at recent meetings of the Planning Commission that there are continued issues with how different government and school groups integrate and communicate. He noted that we are at a particularly critical juncture as the town faces issues such as school consolidation (Act 73), state sponsored acts on conservation and development (Acts 181 & 59) as well as the upcoming revision of the town plan. He said that he felt that it would make sense for a discussion to be opened in person with the Select Board about how to better coordinate these issues. Cynthia suggested that it would be good if Garret could present a brief to the Select Board in advance of meeting with them. Garret agreed to prepare a brief over the course of the next month.
Land Use Administrator’s Report:
The Planning Commission reviewed the last LUA report prepared by Joan Nash in her old role as Arlington Land Use Administrator, covering 12/20/25 through 3/12/26. The PC ran out of time to review the report at its last meeting. There was a question posed about the ongoing Barnes violation, and Cynthia noted that there were funds available for the town lawyer to address this issue. She also noted that the town will perform a ground survey to solve the right of way issue for a potential subdivision by the Red Mountain LLC on Glebe Road at a projected cost of $9,000. While the right of way and subdivision has been discussed previously by the PC, most of the work and discussion of this issue has been coordinated by the Land Use Administrator and the Select Board. Cynthia further noted that she wanted to have these issues organized for resolution before the new Town Administrator comes on board.
Next meeting:
The next meeting of the APC will take place on May 28th at 7pm at Town Hall. The agenda and Zoom link to the meeting will be posted to the town website as usual for those who cannot attend in person.
A motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 9:09 pm by Jon Murray and was seconded by Michael Murno.