Advisory Group Stalls on Building and Energy Codes
A working group on improvements to the state's energy and building codes adjourned with little forward progress.
An advisory committee tasked with increasing compliance with Vermont’s energy codes has adjourned, largely mired in gridlock. The committee voted on its final recommendations last week, including some that, if enacted by the legislature, could lead to modest improvements in code compliance. The committee largely could not reach agreement, however, on more detailed or significant recommendations that went beyond its prior efforts and those of its predecessors. Its final meetings took place in the shadow of Governor Phil Scott’s decision to essentially roll back Vermont’s latest energy codes.
The legislature charged this committee, made up of stakeholders from across state government and the building trades, with developing proposed solutions to two major issues facing buildings and energy in Vermont.
First, although Vermont has some of the most stringent energy codes for new buildings in the country, compliance—even self-reported compliance—is abysmally low (see below). Such noncompliance can defeat the efficiency, cost-saving, and climate goals embodied in the energy codes.
Second, energy codes are typically only one aspect of regulating construction, alongside standards for other features, including building materials, sanitation, and fire safety. Vermont is unique in that for owner-occupied single family homes (SFHs) and duplexes—the very buildings currently receiving the most attention in Vermont due to our critical housing shortage—the state has only passed an energy code, without embedding it in a larger building code. This creates risks for builders and homebuyers alike.
A prior iteration of this committee proposed that the state move towards a unified system of oversight over the energy codes.[1] Presently, the law splits authority between the Department of Public Service, which updates the energy codes; the Division of Fire Safety (DFS), which receives certifications of energy code compliance for larger buildings (but does not actually verify compliance) and licenses certain building trades; individual municipalities, which receive compliance certifications for smaller residential buildings; and the Office of Professional Regulation, which maintains a registry of general contractors. Efficiency Vermont conducts voluntary trainings on meeting the energy standards, and DFS also currently adopts and enforces building codes for buildings other than SFHs. The prior committee recommended replacing this fragmented system with a single “Authority Having Jurisdiction” over almost every aspect of the energy codes and recommended appointing DFS. Notably, DFS objected at the time.
In 2024, the Legislature commissioned the present working group to keep moving the ball forward. It charged the group with recommending ways to fund the new work DFS would take on if it became responsible for all aspects of energy codes. It also directed the group to decide whether to recommend adoption of a statewide building code.
The group met the first charge, but only in skeletal form. It voted to recommend that “The AHJ for [energy codes] should transition to DFS in stages by 2030. Transition funding could come from [Thermal Energy and Process Fuels[2]]; ultimately funding would be fees, as with all other DFS programs.” DFS director Michael Desrochers again opposed taking on this role, writing in comments, “The DFS does not have the capacity or experience to inherit such a program… This proposal would be extremely costly, contains no reliable funding source and will create layers of bureaucracy with numerous unintended consequences.”
As for a statewide residential building code, the committee ultimately voted against recommending that DFS initiate rulemaking for such a code by next June.
These are only advisory opinions—the legislature can choose whether to follow them—but the sense of frustration among some committee members at not producing more detailed or ambitious recommendations was palpable. “A lot of effort—a lot of really good effort—was invested, and we just didn’t get there,” Jim Bradley, who represented the Vermont Builders and Remodelers Association on the committee, told me. Pressed on why, he theorized that key actors represented on the committee were thinking in terms of their current resources and “they already feel stretched with all their normal responsibilities.”
But wouldn’t the legislature appropriate new funding to support DFS’s expanded mandate? Well, not necessarily. Representative Scott Campbell, who co-chaired the committee, said when I asked this question, “Yeah, but there is no money here,” and predicted that even if the legislature passed a bill that both made DFS the sole energy code authority and increased the agency’s funding, “the Governor would surely veto it.”
Ultimately, maybe the committee’s most significant recommendation was that Vermont should hew more closely to the model code underlying Vermont and other states’ energy standards. The committee recommended that, in the future, Vermont adopt updates to this model code either wholesale (or close to it) or not at all. This “almost-all”-or-nothing approach to code updates is a departure from the present system, where Vermont significantly customizes model code updates when turning them into state law.
Committee members speaking in favor of this simplified approach noted that Vermont would not have to print its own energy code books or create its own training materials, instead relying on those created by the group behind the model code. Members skeptical of the change noted that it could mean that the code no longer keeps pace with Vermont’s climate goals or responds to other Vermont-specific needs.
Representative Campbell told me he was in the process of teeing up a bill, based on the group’s recommendations, for the legislature to consider in 2026. If you want to stay updated on that and other developments in Vermont climate and energy policy…
*Note: An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the Office of Professional Regulation.
[1] There are two energy codes—one for “commercial” buildings, which includes multifamily residences over three stories, and one for smaller residential buildings.
[2] These are funds raised by Vermont’s energy efficiency utilities via participation in regional carbon and electricity markets and they are already being used to support efficiency measures in building heating.