Find Your Vermont Dream Home

Advanced Search

 

New England Landmark Realty covers the Vermont real estate market 

from the inside — market data, buyer strategy, seller timing, land 

use regulation, and the policy decisions shaping what homes cost and 

who can afford them.

 

Tony Walton has been working Vermont real estate since 1978. 

The analysis here reflects that depth.

 

Browse by topic below, or use the search to find what you need.

Feb. 13, 2026

Stowe STR Ban: What Buyers & Sellers Need to Know Now

Jump to Key Takeaways

Classic Rock & Fresh Powder | Week of February 6, 2026

THE OPENING RIFF

"This land is your land, this land is my land" — Woody Guthrie, "This Land Is Your Land" (1944)

Except in Stowe, where the town's trying to figure out whose land it actually is. Last month, Stowe proposed regulations that would eliminate all short-term rentals unless the owner lives there full-time. Not restrict them. Not cap them. Eliminate them. If you own a second home in Stowe and rent it on Airbnb, your business model just became a town meeting agenda item. Meanwhile, Spruce Peak—Vail's crown jewel in Vermont—is lobbying for carveouts. Workers can't find housing. Buyers are doing math. And everyone's pretending this is about parking.

Key Takeaways

If You Only Remember 3 Things

  • Stowe's owner-occupancy requirement would eliminate STR income for non-primary-residence owners, creating immediate valuation questions for $875K+ condos
  • Killington's stable STR environment (registration-only) is driving faster inventory movement than Stowe's uncertainty-taxed market
  • Every Vermont ski town with 25%+ STR penetration is on the same regulatory curve—Stowe's just further along

Quick Facts

  • 1,200+ active STRs in Stowe represent ~35% of housing stock
  • Worker affordability ceiling ($250K) sits $625K below median Stowe condo prices
  • Jay Peak's 257" season total vs. Stowe's 218" as of early February 2026

THE WIDE SHOT: WHAT'S HAPPENING EVERYWHERE ELSE

Stowe isn't inventing this fight. Aspen, Tahoe, Park City, Jackson—every ski town in North America is wrestling with the same question: Do we want workers or do we want Airbnbs? You can't have both when a two-bedroom condo pencils out better as a vacation rental than as workforce housing.

Here's the Stowe version: The town's considering a short-term rental ordinance that would require owner-occupancy as a primary residence. Translation: If you don't live in Stowe full-time, you can't rent short-term. Period. No grandfather clause for existing STRs. No phase-in. Just done.

Spruce Peak—where Vail owns The Lodge and manages hundreds of condos within the resort complex—is quietly lobbying for exemptions. VTDigger reported in January that fewer than 20% of Spruce Peak's condos outside The Lodge are registered as STRs. But if the ordinance passes as written, that number goes to zero unless owners relocate to Stowe full-time.

The Vermont translation: Stowe's housing crisis is acute. Restaurant and retail workers are commuting 45 minutes because there's nowhere to live. The town sees 1,200+ STRs and connects the dots. Whether they're right is a different question than whether they have the political will. Right now, they have the will.

The real estate play: If you bought a Stowe condo assuming STR income would cover 40–60% of your annual costs, that assumption just became a policy debate. Buyers making offers this winter need to model two scenarios: one with rental income, one without. Sellers holding STR-dependent properties might want to close before this vote happens.

BY THE NUMBERS: STOWE'S HOUSING MATH

Stowe's Housing Math: By The Numbers - Infographic showing 1,200+ STRs, $875K median condo prices, and $250K worker affordability ceiling

The numbers don't lie. They just make everyone uncomfortable.

1,200+ short-term rentals in a town where the median condo costs $875K and restaurant managers make $50K. The math problem isn't complicated: Workers can afford housing around $250K. Housing costs $875K. Someone's got to bend, and it's not going to be the laws of arithmetic.

Remove STR income from the equation, and that $875K condo becomes worth… less. How much less depends on who you ask. Sellers will say 10%. Buyers will say 30%. The town will say "not our problem." All three are probably wrong.

POWDER REPORT: VERMONT GROUND TRUTH

The Snow

Stowe: 218" season total as of February 2. 21" in the past seven days. Conditions firm but fast midweek, packed on weekends. The snow's here. The parking fee's still $50. Make of that what you will.

Jay Peak: 257" season total as of mid-January—still the snowfall king of the East. Resort's own report called early February "spectacular." No exaggeration. No drama. No parking fees. Jay's having the kind of season that makes people remember why they bought up there in the first place.

Killington: Holding steady around 240" for the season. Coverage is excellent across all peaks. Crowds manageable except Saturday mornings. Still the Beast of the East, still delivering.

Sugarbush: Season's tracking above average. South-facing terrain skiing better than it has any right to in early February. Lincoln Peak coverage edge-to-edge. Mad River Valley quietly having a very good winter.

Mad River Glen: Because someone has to ask—yes, the single chair's running. No, they still don't allow snowboards. Yes, that's still the whole point. If you have to ask why, you'll never understand.

The Buzz

Jay Peak's having a stealth great season. No drama. No controversies. No town meetings about who gets to live where. Just 257 inches of snow and blue skies in early February. While Stowe's fighting about STRs and parking fees, Jay's… skiing.

It's a quiet reminder that sometimes the best marketing is just being a place people want to go. No press releases. No lobbying. Just snow.

The Controversy Nobody's Naming Out Loud

Let's talk about Spruce Peak's lobbying for STR carveouts while the town tries to figure out where to house the people who make the beds at Spruce Peak.

Vail's position is that resort-managed properties should be exempt from owner-occupancy requirements because they're "integral to the resort experience." Which is one way to describe a $1.2M condo that gets rented 60 nights a year while a lift operator sleeps in a van. The resort experience, apparently, requires short-term rentals. The lift that takes you to the resort experience? That person can figure it out.

Here's what's actually happening: Those Spruce Peak condos were sold with a very specific pitch. Buy here, ski here, rent it out when you're not here, rental income covers 40–60% of your costs, everybody wins. It was a beautiful story. Buyers believed it. Banks financed it. And now the town's saying, "Cool story. We're shutting it down."

Vail's argument—that banning STRs at Spruce Peak would tank condo values—is completely correct. Those buyers paid a premium for ski-in/ski-out and rental income. Take away the income, and suddenly that $900K condo is worth… less. Probably a lot less. Turns out people don't love paying a million dollars for something they use 15 days a year if it doesn't also pay for itself.

But the town's argument is also correct: 1,200+ STRs in Stowe, and restaurant workers are commuting from the next county. Something's gotta give.

So Vail's lobbying for carveouts. Because if resort-managed STRs get exempted but owner-managed STRs don't, well, that's just the free market rewarding operational excellence. Definitely not a two-tiered system where Vail wins and individual condo owners eat the loss.

The outcome? Probably a compromise where everyone's equally unhappy. The town passes something. Spruce Peak gets some carveout that's smaller than they wanted. Condo owners outside the resort complex lose rental income or sell at a loss. Workers still commute from Morrisville, but now there are fewer Airbnbs and more empty second homes.

Progress.

SIDEBAR: THE DEVELOPER'S PLAYBOOK

How to Sell a $900K Condo in a Town With a Housing Crisis

Step 1: The Pitch
"This isn't just real estate—it's an investment. Rent it out when you're not here. The property practically pays for itself."

Step 2: The Fine Print
Don't mention that 'paying for itself' depends on zoning laws, town ordinances, and the political mood of a town meeting you'll never attend.

Step 3: The Amenities Tour
Ski-in/ski-out. Heated pools. Private lockers. Concierge. Rental management. The whole package. Very important: Do the amenities tour before driving past the employee housing trailers.

Step 4: The Comp Analysis
Show them what similar units rent for. $500/night in February. $400/night in January. "Do the math—that's $40K+ in gross rental income." Do not show them the math on what a restaurant manager makes annually. Different math.

Step 5: The Closing
Sign here. Welcome to Stowe. You're going to love it here. All sixteen days a year.

Step 6: The Town Meeting (Two Years Later)
Owner-occupancy requirement? Nobody said anything about owner-occupancy requirements. That's new. How could anyone have predicted that a town with a housing crisis might regulate short-term rentals? This is Vermont, not Aspen.

Step 7: The Lobbying
"Resort-managed properties are integral to the resort experience and should be exempt from these regulations. Also, we'd like to talk about workforce housing solutions. Maybe the town could rezone that land over there."

Step 8: The Pivot
Launch a workforce housing initiative. Partner with the town. Build 50 units. Get good press. Do not mention that you sold 400 condos with rental income projections that depended on nobody building workforce housing.

Step 9: Repeat
Find the next town. Start at Step 1.

THE B-SIDE: WHAT NOBODY'S SAYING OUT LOUD

Here's the part nobody wants to talk about: Stowe's STR fight isn't really about housing. It's about who gets to live in Stowe.

The math is simple. A two-bedroom condo at Spruce Peak rents for $400–600/night during ski season. That's $2,800–4,200/week. Over a 16-week season, that's $45K–67K in gross rental income. Even at 50% occupancy, you're clearing $22K–33K before expenses.

Now do the workforce housing math. A local restaurant manager making $50K/year can't afford a $2,500/month mortgage. But a second-home owner from Boston can, because the condo pays for itself.

The question isn't whether Stowe needs workforce housing. It does. The question is whether eliminating STRs creates workforce housing or just eliminates STRs. Because if those condos don't convert to long-term rentals—if they just sit empty or sell to full-time retirees—then Stowe gets fewer STRs but no more workers.

Vermont Ski Town Housing Crisis Comparison - Stowe vs Killington vs Sugarbush vs Okemo STR percentages, median prices, and workforce gaps

And Stowe's not alone. The chart above tells the story: Every major Vermont ski town is dealing with this. Stowe just has the highest STR percentage (35% of housing stock), the highest prices ($875K median condo), and the longest worker commutes (45+ minutes). Sugarbush is a few years behind. Killington and Okemo are watching nervously.

The uncomfortable truth: Ski towns need workers. Workers need housing. But housing that pencils as an STR doesn't pencil as workforce housing. The numbers are too far apart. So either buyers eat the loss, or sellers do, or the town subsidizes the gap. Somebody's paying for this. The only question is who.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Mount Snow (Dover): Fractional ownership condos at Grand Summit Way—these are quarter-shares, not full ownership—are sitting. One unit listed at $11,000 has been on the market 91 days. Another at $23,500 for 76 days. These are weeks, not properties. Buyers doing the math: $23,500 buys you 13 weeks of access… or a season of weekend trips to an Airbnb with no HOA fees. The fractional model made sense when it was the only way to own ski access. Now it's competing with Airbnb flexibility and losing.

Stowe: A Villa Drive condo—these are hotel-condos near Spruce Peak—listed at $22,000 has been sitting for 639 days. Not a typo. Twenty-two thousand dollars, nearly two years on market, no takers. Why? Because the buyer's not buying real estate. They're buying a week in a resort-managed unit with HOA fees, rental pool splits, and now the looming threat of an STR ban. That's a lot of friction for a week in Stowe. Every day that ordinance sits on the town clerk's desk, that DOM number climbs.

Killington: Movement here. Jackson Gore Inn condos—resort-managed, ski-in/ski-out—are moving in the $46K–71K range with 36–118 days on market. Not fast, but not stalled. The difference? Killington's STR environment is more stable. Buyers can still model rental income with some confidence. That matters. Boring stability is starting to look like a competitive advantage.

The pattern: Buyers are gun-shy on anything where the income model depends on short-term rental regulations that might not exist in six months. Stowe's uncertainty is a tax on every listing in town. Mount Snow's fractional model is losing to Airbnb flexibility. Killington's boring stability is starting to look like a feature, not a bug.

BONUS: TOWN MEETING BINGO

Stowe STR Town Meeting Bingo Card - Satirical bingo card with predictable phrases from STR debates

Print this. Bring it to the next town meeting. Report back on how fast you filled the card. My bet? 47 minutes.

THIS WEEK'S TRACKS

Listen on Spotify: Classic Rock & Fresh Powder - Week of February 6, 2026

Bruce Springsteen – "My Hometown" (1984)
For the Stowe locals watching their town get rezoned one ordinance at a time. It's not the town they remember, and they're not sure what it's becoming.

The Rolling Stones – "You Can't Always Get What You Want" (1969)
Buyers wanted ski-in/ski-out and rental income and no regulations. Stowe's deciding which one they keep.

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers – "The Waiting" (1981)
For the 639 days that Villa Drive condo has been sitting. And the buyers waiting to see what the town meeting decides before they make an offer.

Fleetwood Mac – "The Chain" (1977)
Workers, owners, developers, the town—everyone's connected whether they like it or not. And right now, nobody's loving it. But the chain won't break, even when it wants to.

Dire Straits – "Sultans of Swing" (1978)
A reminder that sometimes the best move is to just play your game and let everyone else figure out theirs. Jay Peak got 257 inches while Stowe fought about parking. That's the whole story.

Got a track suggestion for next week? Hit me: tony@nelandmark.com

Ready to Talk Ski-Home Strategy?

Whether you're watching Stowe's STR fight from the sidelines or trying to figure out what it means for your property, let's talk. I've been working Central Vermont ski real estate for 20 years. I've seen markets shift. I've seen regulations change. And I've helped buyers and sellers navigate both.

If you're thinking about buying, we need to model two scenarios: one with STR income, one without. If you're thinking about selling, timing matters more this year than it has in a decade.

Tony Walton | Principal Broker
New England Landmark Realty
(802) 253-4711 (Office) | (866) 324-2427 (Toll-Free) | (802) 233-4107 (Cell)
tony@nelandmark.com

Vermont Ski Home Guide: https://www.nelandmark.com/vermont-home-buying-guide/
Seller's Guide: https://www.nelandmark.com/selling-your-vermont-home/

Where to Go Next

Classic Rock & Fresh Powder is a bi-weekly newsletter covering Vermont ski conditions, real estate trends, and the intersection of powder and property. Published every other Thursday during ski season.

Posted in Community Insights
no comments yet
Feb. 10, 2026

Apparently, I've Been Trendy for Thirty Years. Nobody Told Me.

Harris Vexley

Waterbury, Vermont | Thermos owner since 1991

I walked into Martha's general store last Tuesday morning with my thermos and a shopping list written on the back of an envelope—same as I've done every Tuesday since the first Bush administration—and found myself surrounded by what I can only describe as a vintage clothing convention.

Seven people. All under thirty. All wearing clothes that looked simultaneously brand new and forty years old. One young woman was photographing a thermos on the counter. Not photographing with a thermos. Photographing the thermos itself. Like it was a museum piece.

I recognized the model immediately. Stanley 1.1 quart classic. Same one I've had since 1991. Except hers didn't have any dents, and mine looks like it survived three tours of duty and a domestic dispute.

The price tag was still attached to hers: $87.

I paid $9 for mine. At Sears. When Sears still existed.

"Excuse me," I said, trying to reach the coffee pot without disrupting what appeared to be a photo shoot for Thermoses Quarterly.

A young man with an extremely deliberate mustache—the kind that takes more maintenance than my entire grooming routine—turned to me with the expression you'd expect if I'd just materialized from a time portal.

"Oh my god," he said. "Are you living the analog lifestyle?"

I blinked at him through my slightly smudged wire-rims. "I'm trying to get coffee."

"No, but look at you." He gestured at my general existence like I was an art installation. "The vintage thermos. The handwritten list. The—wait, is that a pocket watch?"

"It's a chain for my reading glasses."

"Brilliant."

The Trend I Didn't Know I Was

Turns out, I'm fashionable. At 58. For the first time in my life.

According to the assembled youth of Waterbury, 2026 is "the year of analog living." It's a movement. There are hashtags. CNN reports that sales of craft kits jumped 86% last year, with another 30-40% increase expected this year. Film photography is back. Vinyl records are having a renaissance. People are buying fountain pens on purpose.

I've been using a fountain pen since 1994 because I bought a box of twelve at a yard sale for three dollars and I'm not wasteful. Still have seven left.

Apparently, this makes me a pioneer.

The young woman with the pristine thermos looked at my actual thermos—scarred, dented, held together by stubbornness and what I suspect is sheer molecular confusion—and asked if it was "vintage or vintage-inspired."

"It's from 1991," I said.

"From the actual year 1991?"

"I was there when I bought it."

She gasped. Actually gasped. Like I'd just announced I'd discovered fire.

"It's authentic," she whispered to her friends.

I wanted to point out that "authentic" just means "old and still working" but they seemed so excited that I didn't have the heart.

The Great Irony

I got my coffee—terrible, as always; Martha's been making the same weak pot since Carter—and settled into my usual spot by the window. The analog lifestyle crew continued their discussion, and I couldn't help but overhear.

They were planning their "unplugging." Screen-free Sundays. Digital detoxes. One woman had a twelve-month roadmap for reducing her social media use, complete with milestones and accountability checkpoints.

Another was learning to knit. Using YouTube tutorials.

Let me repeat that: She was learning an analog hobby by watching digital videos about it.

Martha caught my eye from behind the counter. She's been running this store for thirty-seven years. She's seen trends come and go—the low-fat craze of the '90s, the Atkins thing in the 2000s, that year everyone suddenly needed coconut oil for everything including their cars. She was smiling the way you smile when you're watching someone try to teach a cat to swim.

The irony wasn't lost on these kids, to their credit. One of them actually said, "I know it's weird that we're organizing our analog lifestyle on Instagram, but how else do you build community?"

I thought about the thirty years I'd been coming to this store. Same time, same day, same terrible coffee. The way Jerry saves me the local paper before it sells out. How Martha asks about my boys without me having to bring them up. The community that built itself slowly, like ice forming on a lake—you don't watch it happen, but one day it's solid enough to walk on.

"You just show up," I said. "Regularly. In person."

She wrote that down in her leather journal. Which probably cost more than my first car.

Distressed Aesthetic

By the time I'd gathered my groceries—real milk, bread from the bakery down the street, cheese that comes in blocks like God intended—the group had moved on to discussing their favorite "offline hobbies."

Jigsaw puzzles were mentioned. Knitting. Bread baking. One fellow had just bought a typewriter for $240 to "reconnect with tactile writing."

I have a typewriter. It's in my basement, next to my old skis and several boxes I've been meaning to sort through since Clinton's second term. I paid $15 for it at a yard sale in 1996. It seemed expensive.

As I approached the counter, Martha rang up my purchases with barely contained amusement.

"You're trendy now, Harris," she muttered.

"I don't feel trendy."

"That's what makes it authentic." She bagged my groceries in paper—the store's been using paper since Eisenhower, long before it was environmentally conscious. "Your thermos is probably worth a fortune now. I saw one online marked 'distressed aesthetic.'"

I looked at my thermos. Each dent has a name. The big one is from the Ice Fishing Disaster of 2003. The scrape along the bottom is from being dragged behind my truck for three miles. The crater near the cap is from when my youngest son—he was seven—dropped it off the porch trying to bring me coffee.

It's not distressed. It's experienced.

"Mine's too distressed," I said.

"That's not how this works," Martha replied. "More authentic damage means higher price. They want the story without the time."

And there it was. The thing that had been bothering me since I walked in.

Skipping to the End

Look, I don't blame these kids. They're exhausted. They grew up with smartphones surgically attached to their palms. They've been optimized and content-ified and engagement-maxed since before they could vote. The digital detox trend is real because the fatigue is real.

But they want to skip to the end. They want the patina without the years. The wisdom without the winters. The dented thermos without the three decades of Tuesday mornings.

I didn't choose to live "analog." I just lived. The analog part is what other people called it later, after they'd tried everything else.

I don't have a smartphone because I never needed one, not because I made a brave stand against technology. I use a paper map because I bought it in 1989 and it still shows where the roads are. I write shopping lists on envelopes because envelopes are free if you're already getting mail.

It's not a philosophy. It's just... life. Unoptimized. Unbranded. Undocumented.

Apparently, this is now revolutionary.

The Photo Shoot

As I headed for the door, the photographer stopped me.

"Could we get a picture? For our analog lifestyle documentation project?"

I paused. "You want to document analog living by taking pictures?"

"With film," he said, like this solved the paradox.

I thought about saying no. But he was earnest, and you can't be cruel to earnest. Earnest is how we got the Hoover Dam and the polio vaccine. You have to respect earnest, even when it's confused.

So I stood by the window while they posed me. Someone adjusted my collar. Someone else told me to "look contemplative."

I looked like I always look: mildly confused, slightly rumpled, patiently waiting for whatever's happening to be over.

The photographer clicked the shutter. Then did it three more times.

"Perfect," he said. "That's going to be so authentic."

I nodded, picked up my groceries, and walked home. Half a mile. No podcast, no phone call, no GPS telling me to turn left onto the road I've lived on for forty-three years.

Just boots on snow. Breath in cold air. Coffee at the right temperature.

Behind me, through the window, they were probably already planning their next authentic experience. Choosing which vintage item to acquire. Which handicraft to learn via tutorial. Which piece of slow living to schedule into their optimized calendars.

I'm not judging. Not really.

They'll get there eventually. You can't buy your way to the end of becoming. You just start, keep going, and let the dents accumulate.

Thirty years from now, their thermoses might look like mine.

And by then, I figure, I'll probably be hopelessly outdated again.

Which suits me fine.

Epilogue: Influencer, Apparently

Two weeks later, Martha sent me a text. My grandson had to help me open it—took fifteen minutes because my flip phone isn't really designed for links and he kept getting distracted.

It was a photo. Me in the general store. Soft light. Thoughtful expression. Battle-scarred thermos.

The caption: "Met this incredible human who's been living the analog lifestyle for DECADES. No social media. No smartphone. Just pure, intentional existence. He didn't even know it was a trend. That's the goal. 💚 #analoglife #authenticity #2026yearofanalog"

47,000 likes.

I stared at it, then handed the phone back.

"You're famous, Grandpa," he said.

"I'm the same as I was yesterday."

"Yeah, but now people know about it."

Which is, I suppose, the entire problem in miniature. The idea that a thing only matters once it's been seen. That living only counts if it's documented. That authenticity requires an audience.

I still don't know what an influencer is. My grandson tried to explain. I nodded at appropriate intervals and understood nothing.

Then, because it was Tuesday, I made dinner the same way I've made it every Tuesday for thirty years: from scratch, without a recipe, using ingredients that don't have their own apps.

The analog lifestyle.

Also known as: living.

The kids will figure it out eventually. Or they won't. Either way, my thermos will still hold coffee, and hot coffee will stay hot.

That remains the entire point.

Harris Vexley writes from Waterbury, Vermont, where he has been accidentally trendy since 1994. His thermos has no social media presence and prefers it that way.
Posted in Harris Vexley Humor
no comments yet
Jan. 31, 2026

The Staging Mistake That Cost You $15K (And You'll Never Hear About It)

Kore's Design Eye | New England Landmark Realty | January 22, 2026

Two-Sentence Summary

Most Vermont sellers stage their living room and primary bedroom beautifully, then leave secondary bedrooms, dining rooms, and entries looking bare or neglected—and buyers mentally dock the price by thousands without ever telling you why. Cohesive whole-home staging in 2026 isn't optional; it's the difference between your asking price and a low offer you can't explain.

If You Only Do 3 Things

  • Stage every room a buyer will open a door to—not just the "hero" spaces; secondary bedrooms, dining rooms, home offices, and entries must look intentional, not abandoned.
  • Add warm, layered textiles and lighting throughout—a single throw pillow on a gray couch in the living room doesn't create warmth if the rest of the house feels cold and sparse.
  • Create "lifestyle moments" in every space—a coffee setup on the kitchen counter, books on the nightstand, a coat hook with a scarf in the entry; buyers need to see themselves living there, room by room.
Beautifully staged Vermont living room with warm neutral furniture, layered textiles, and inviting lighting

The Moment Buyers Decide

Buyers make their real decision in the first eight minutes of a showing—not in the living room you spent $2,000 staging, but in the moments after, when they open the guest bedroom door and see a bare mattress, a folding chair, and your 1987 exercise bike. The living room told them you care. The guest bedroom just told them you ran out of budget—or interest. In a 2026 Vermont market where inventory is up and buyers have choices, that disconnect costs you thousands in perceived value.

You won't hear about it in the feedback. The buyer's agent will say something polite like "they're still considering options" or "they want to see a few more homes." What they won't say: your incomplete staging made the house feel half-committed, and buyers don't pay full price for half-effort.

Here's the quiet problem. You think staging is about making the living room look good for photos. It's not. Staging is about maintaining buyer confidence as they move through every single space. The second they open a door and feel doubt—whether it's a cluttered office, a sad dining room with no table, or an entry that screams "we gave up here"—they start negotiating in their head.

The Quiet Problem (What's Actually Turning People Off)

Buyers in 2026 expect cohesive, whole-home staging—not just two showcase rooms and a bunch of "we'll let the buyer imagine it" spaces. When the living room is styled like a Pottery Barn catalog but the second bedroom looks like a storage unit, buyers read it as deception or neglect. Their mental script shifts from "I can see us here" to "what else are they hiding?" And in Vermont's current balanced market, where buyers can afford to be selective, that script kills deals.
Unstaged secondary bedroom with bare mattress and minimal furniture showing incomplete staging

This isn't about taste. It's about perception. Buyers don't consciously think "this unstaged bedroom is worth $15,000 less." They just feel uneasy. The house starts to feel like a project instead of a home. And projects get discounted.

The math is cruel but simple. If a buyer walks through five homes in a weekend and four of them have cohesive staging throughout, yours is the one that feels incomplete. Even if your bones are better. Even if your kitchen is newer. The emotional gap is what they remember.

Buyers don't say it. They just leave.

The Fix (Three Budget Options)

Whole-home staging doesn't mean spending $10,000. It means creating intentionality in every space a buyer will see—secondary bedrooms, dining rooms, entries, home offices—so there's no "confidence drop" as they move through the house. You can do this affordably by borrowing furniture, adding minimal textiles and lighting, and staging "lifestyle moments" that help buyers visualize living there. Even a $500 investment in completing neglected spaces typically protects $10,000–$20,000 in perceived value.

Budget Fix: Under $500, One Week

What to do: Borrow furniture from family or move existing pieces to fill gaps in secondary bedrooms and dining rooms. Add inexpensive neutral bedding ($80–$120 per bed at Target or HomeGoods), a pair of matching nightstands with lamps ($150–$200), and area rugs ($60–$100 each) to secondary bedrooms. Stage the dining table with simple white place settings and a centerpiece (greenery or candles, $40–$60). Add a coat hook, basket, and small bench or chair to the entry ($80–$120).

Time investment: One weekend of shopping and arranging.

Payoff: Photos now show complete, lived-in spaces instead of empty or neglected rooms. Buyers stay emotionally engaged through the full walkthrough. You protect your asking price by eliminating the "project feel."

Mid Fix: $1,500–$3,000, 1–2 Weeks

What to do: Rent furniture for unfurnished rooms (approximately $300–$600/month for bedroom sets and dining furniture). Hire a professional stager for a full-home consultation (typically $400–$800 in Central Vermont; they'll audit every space and provide a room-by-room plan). Invest in warm textiles throughout—throws, pillows in rust/ochre/warm grays, curtains that frame windows without blocking light ($500–$800). Do cohesive paint touch-ups in rooms that feel dated or cold (greige, warm whites; $300–$600 in materials and labor for 2–3 rooms).

Time investment: 1–2 weeks to coordinate rentals, staging consult, and minor updates.

Payoff: The house now reads as cohesive and complete in every photo and every showing. Buyers don't mentally dock the price. You're competing at the same level as other well-staged homes in your price range. This typically protects $15,000–$25,000 in negotiating position.

Do It Right: $4,000–$6,000, 2–3 Weeks

What to do: Hire a professional stager for whole-home staging—not just a consultation. They'll bring furniture, art, layered textiles, greenery, and accessories to create "lifestyle moments" in every room (coffee setup on the counter, books and reading glasses on the nightstand, throws draped just right, Vermont-appropriate touches like a vintage snowshoe or ski decor that feels intentional, not cluttered). Include cohesive styling in entries, home offices, flex spaces, and even laundry rooms if they're visible. Budget for 4–8 weeks of rental if needed.

Time investment: 2–3 weeks for full staging coordination, installation, and photography.

Payoff: Your listing becomes the one buyers remember. Photos are scroll-stopping. Showings convert to offers at a higher rate. You're not just protecting your asking price—you're often creating competitive tension that pushes final sale price above list. In Vermont's 2026 balanced market, this is the difference between "nice house" and "the one we want."

Professionally staged secondary bedroom with neutral bedding, nightstands, lamps, and cohesive warm styling

Vermont Context (Why This Matters Even More Here)

Vermont's housing stock skews older, with quirky layouts, small secondary bedrooms, and awkward spaces that buyers already worry about—so leaving those rooms unstaged amplifies doubt instead of resolving it. In Central Vermont's January 2026 market, where inventory is up 8.9% and buyers are selective, cohesive whole-home staging is what separates homes that sell at asking price from homes that sit and get discounted. Winter light is unforgiving in photos; if a room isn't staged, it photographs as a dark, cold void—and buyers scroll past.

Vermont homes weren't built with open-concept staging in mind. You've got small dining rooms, secondary bedrooms that are actually 10x10, mudrooms that double as laundry rooms, and offices carved out of former sewing rooms. Buyers know this. They're fine with it. What they're not fine with is feeling like you didn't try.

When a buyer tours a 1920s Waterbury farmhouse, they're already managing mental questions: "Is that second bedroom big enough for a queen bed and dressers?" "Can we actually use the dining room or is it just a pass-through?" If those rooms are bare or styled like an afterthought, the answer becomes "probably not"—even if the room is perfectly functional.

And in winter, this problem gets worse. Vermont's January light is flat and gray. An unstaged room doesn't just look empty—it looks cold, dark, uninviting. The buyer's brain registers it as a space they'll never want to spend time in. Staging with warm textiles, layered lighting, and intentional furniture placement overrides that reptile-brain response.

Whole-home staging checklist showing every room buyers will judge including living room, bedrooms, dining room, entry, and office

Here's what buyers aren't telling you: when they walk through a Vermont home in winter and every room feels considered—even the small ones, even the weird ones—they relax. They stop problem-solving and start imagining. That shift is worth $15,000 in your pocket.

Bottom Line

Incomplete staging tells buyers you ran out of effort, budget, or care—and they price that doubt into their offer or walk away entirely. In 2026, when Vermont buyers have more inventory to choose from and expect cohesive, whole-home presentation, staging every space a buyer will see isn't extra credit. It's the baseline for protecting your asking price. The fix is cheaper than the discount you'll take if you don't do it.

You spent years living in this house. You know the guest bedroom is charming once there's a bed and a lamp. You know the dining room works beautifully when there's a table in it. But buyers don't know that. And in the 90 seconds they spend deciding whether to make an offer, they're not giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Let's make it easy for them to say yes.

Let's Talk Before You List

If you're thinking about selling this winter or spring, send me your current listing photos (or a walk-through video). I'll tell you exactly which rooms need attention and give you a realistic one-weekend plan to close the staging gaps—before you spend money on the wrong things or take a discount you didn't need to take.

Tony Walton, Principal Broker
New England Landmark Realty (NELR)
Office: (802) 253-4711 or (866) 324-2427
Cell: (802) 233-4107
nelandmark.com

Where to Go Next

Posted in Vermont Real Estate Trends
no comments yet
Jan. 29, 2026

Rates Hit 6.09%, The Lowest in Three Years. So Why Aren't Buyers Flooding In?

 

The Numbers Guy | New England Landmark Realty |

Two-Sentence Summary

Mortgage rates hit 6.09% on January 22, 2026—the lowest level in three years—yet Vermont buyers aren't flooding the market despite inventory rising 11.7%. The disconnect reveals that affordability isn't just about rates: it's about wages, home prices, and property taxes, and understanding that gap changes your strategy whether you're buying or selling.

If You Only Do 3 Things

  • Run your actual payment math at 6.09%—compare it to what you'd pay at 7% (last year) and 5.5% (the rate you're waiting for); the difference might be smaller than you think, and waiting could cost you more in price appreciation than you save in interest.
  • Factor in Vermont's full monthly cost—mortgage + property taxes (which just jumped 12%) + insurance + maintenance; the rate is only one piece of the affordability puzzle.
  • If you're a buyer, act on quality inventory now—Vermont's inventory is up, but well-priced homes in good condition are still moving fast; if you're a seller, understand that buyers are rate-aware but payment-constrained, so pricing and staging matter more than ever.
Vermont home for sale in winter with warm lighting and opportunity for buyers

What Changed (And the One Number That Matters)

On January 22, 2026, Freddie Mac reported that 30-year fixed mortgage rates averaged 6.09%—the lowest level since late 2022. For Vermont buyers who have been sitting on the sidelines waiting for rates to drop, this is the moment they've been asking for. Yet showings haven't surged, and Vermont's inventory—which rose 11.7% in November 2025—continues to climb. Translation: lower rates aren't unlocking buyer demand the way everyone expected.

Here's what the data tells us. Rates peaked above 7.5% in late 2023. They've been trending down for months. Fannie Mae forecasts rates will hover around 6% through most of 2026, potentially sliding to 5.8%–5.9% by year-end.

That's meaningful. A buyer financing $400,000 at 6.09% pays roughly $2,420 per month in principal and interest. At 7%, that same loan costs $2,661—a difference of $241 per month, or nearly $87,000 over the life of the loan.

So why aren't buyers flooding open houses?

The Data (What the Numbers Actually Say)

Three data points explain the disconnect: (1) rates are at 6.09% (Freddie Mac, January 22, 2026), the lowest in three years; (2) Vermont's median home price rose 5.8% in 2025 to $385,000 (Catalyst Realty Collaborative); and (3) affordability is improving but remains tight, with the typical monthly payment representing 29.3% of median household income nationwide (Realtor.com forecast for 2026). In Vermont, property taxes—up an estimated 12% for FY2026—add another $400–$500 per month to the housing cost equation, meaning buyers are payment-constrained even with lower rates.
Data Point 1: Mortgage rates at 6.09%
Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey, January 22, 2026
This is the lowest 30-year fixed rate since late 2022. Fannie Mae projects rates will average around 6% through 2026, potentially ending the year near 5.9%.
Mortgage rate chart showing 30-year fixed rates from 2023 to 2026 with current rate at 6.09%
Data Point 2: Vermont median home price rose 5.8% to $385,000
Source: Catalyst Realty Collaborative / Vermont market reports, 2025 data
While rates dropped, home prices kept climbing. That means buyers gained ground on interest costs but lost ground on purchase price. Net effect: affordability improved modestly, but not dramatically.
Data Point 3: Vermont property taxes up an estimated 12% for FY2026
Source: Vermont Department of Taxes / Valley News, December 2025
Average Vermont property tax: approximately $4,859 per year (SmartAsset). A 12% increase adds roughly $583 annually, or about $48 per month. On a $400,000 home, that's equivalent to losing $8,000–$10,000 in buying power at current rates.

Let's run the numbers. A buyer purchasing a $385,000 Vermont home (the current median) with 10% down finances $346,500. At 6.09%, the monthly principal and interest payment is approximately $2,095. Add property taxes ($405/month average), insurance ($150/month estimated), and a 1% annual maintenance reserve ($320/month), and the total monthly housing cost is roughly $2,970.

At 7% rates, that same buyer's P&I payment would be $2,304—about $209 more per month. The rate drop helps. But if that buyer was stretching at 7%, they're still stretching at 6.09%. The rate improvement didn't create a flood of new qualified buyers. It gave existing qualified buyers a better deal.

So What Does That Mean for Vermont?

Vermont's inventory rose 11.7% in November 2025—the biggest gain since 2022—yet prices continued rising 5.8% through year-end. That suggests demand is still strong enough to absorb new supply, but buyers are selective. Well-priced, well-staged homes in desirable Central Vermont towns are still moving quickly, while overpriced or neglected listings sit. For buyers, this means lower rates create opportunity but not urgency; for sellers, it means you're competing on quality and price, not just riding a rate-driven wave.
Vermont home buyers reviewing mortgage calculations and affordability analysis at kitchen table

Math doesn't care. Vermont buyers have been waiting for rates to drop. Rates dropped. But affordability is a function of four variables: income, home price, interest rate, and monthly obligations (taxes, insurance, debt). Rates improved. Prices didn't fall. Taxes rose. Wages grew modestly.

Translation: if you were priced out at 7% rates, you might still be priced out at 6.09%—unless your income rose or you adjusted your price range. And if you were barely qualified at 7%, you're now comfortably qualified at 6.09%, which means you can compete more effectively.

Here's the Vermont-specific wrinkle. Central Vermont's housing stock is older, quirky, and often requires updates. Buyers at 7% rates were skipping homes that needed work because their payment didn't leave room for renovations. At 6.09%, some of those buyers now have breathing room—but only if the home is priced to reflect its condition.

For sellers, this means staging and pricing matter more than ever. Buyers have more inventory to choose from. They're not desperate. They're deliberate. If your home photographs poorly, feels incomplete, or is priced like it's still 2023, they'll move on to the next listing.

Bottom Line

Lower rates help, but they don't solve affordability on their own. If you're a Vermont buyer waiting for 5% rates, you might wait years—and prices could rise enough in the meantime to wipe out any interest savings. If you're a seller expecting a rate-driven buying frenzy, adjust expectations: buyers are active but selective, and your listing needs to compete on quality and price, not just hope.

Here's the play if you're buying. Run your payment math at 6.09%. Compare it to what you'd pay at 5.5% (the rate you're hoping for). If the difference is $100–$150 per month, ask yourself: is it worth waiting 12–18 months for that savings if home prices rise another 3%–5%? On a $385,000 home, a 4% price increase ($15,400) costs you more than two years of interest savings.

Here's the play if you're selling. Price your home based on current market conditions, not where rates were six months ago. Invest in staging and photography that show your home at its best. Understand that buyers at 6.09% can afford more than buyers at 7%—but they're also comparing your listing to a growing number of alternatives.

Real affordability checklist showing mortgage payment, property taxes, insurance, and total monthly housing costs

The opportunity is real. Rates are lower. Inventory is higher. Affordability is improving. But the market isn't frenzied—it's balanced. That means disciplined buyers and prepared sellers win.

Let's Run Your Numbers

If you're trying to decide whether to buy now or wait, or if you're selling and want to understand what buyers can actually afford in today's Vermont market, let's talk. I'll walk you through the payment math, show you what's moving (and what's sitting), and help you make a decision based on data, not hope.

Tony Walton, Principal Broker
New England Landmark Realty (NELR)
Office: (802) 253-4711 or (866) 324-2427
Cell: (802) 233-4107
nelandmark.com

What to Do Next

Posted in Vermont Real Estate Trends
no comments yet
Jan. 27, 2026

South-Facing Isn't Enough: Why Your Vermont Building Site Needs a Winter Shadow Map Before You Break Ground

 

Blueprint: Vermont Design & Build | New England Landmark Realty | January 22, 2026

Two-Sentence Summary

A south-facing Vermont building site means nothing if your winter sun is blocked by tree lines or ridges during the only hours that matter for solar gain—10am to 2pm from November through February, when the sun sits 23° lower in the sky than summer. You can't fix bad solar access after you build, but you can map winter shadow patterns in 30 minutes with free tools before you buy, potentially saving $15,000–$45,000 in heating costs over the life of your home.

If You Only Do 3 Things

  • Map winter shadows before making an offer—use Sun Surveyor (app) or SunCalc (web tool) to simulate December 21 sun angles at 10am, noon, and 2pm on your potential building site; look for 4+ hours of unobstructed southern sun during these critical months.
  • Walk the site in person during winter—digital tools show you the math, but boots on the ground in January/February reveal microclimates, cold pockets, and shadow patterns you can't see in summer; bring a compass and note where shadows fall between 10am–2pm.
  • Identify your building envelope before you negotiate—don't assume "anywhere on the lot works"; locate the 40'x60' zone with best winter sun exposure, acceptable slope (5%–15%), and year-round access, then make sure setbacks, septic, and well placement don't force you into the dark zone.
Vermont winter building site evaluation showing solar access assessment and tree line shadow patterns
Reading the land in winter reveals what summer hides: where the sun actually reaches during the months you'll need it most.

Why This Matters

Vermont's winter sun sits 23° lower in the sky than summer sun at solar noon (approximately 23.5° altitude vs. 69° in June at 44°N latitude). This low angle means tree lines, ridges, and buildings that don't block summer sun can steal 4–8 hours of winter solar gain daily—the difference between a $1,200 heating bill and a $2,400 heating bill every winter for the next 30 years. Most land buyers evaluate "south-facing" as a checkbox without understanding that orientation means nothing if shadows dominate your building envelope from November through March.

Here's the brutal math. Vermont winters demand heat from late October through April—roughly 200 days per year. Passive solar gain through south-facing windows can offset 20%–40% of your heating load if your building site gets clean southern exposure during the critical 10am–2pm window when the low-angle sun actually penetrates glass and warms thermal mass.

Block that sun and you're fighting uphill for three decades. At $0.18/kWh (approximate Vermont electric rates) or $3.50/gallon heating oil, losing 30% of your potential solar gain costs you roughly $400–$700 annually. Over 30 years at 3% inflation, that's $15,000–$45,000 in present value. And you can't retrofit solar access. Trees grow. Ridges don't move.

Translation: the "cheaper" land with mature trees blocking your southern exposure isn't cheaper. It's expensive land pretending to be a deal.

The Principle: Winter Sun Angles Change Everything

At Vermont's latitude (roughly 44°N), the sun's path across the sky shifts dramatically between seasons. Summer sun rises northeast, climbs to 69° altitude at solar noon, and sets northwest—giving you 15+ hours of daylight and high-angle sun that clears most obstacles. Winter sun rises southeast, struggles to 23° altitude at solar noon (roughly the angle of a 5/12 roof pitch), and sets southwest—giving you 9 hours of weak daylight and low-angle sun that any obstacle can block. The hours that matter for heating—10am to 2pm—represent your only meaningful solar gain window from November through February.

Here's what changes when the sun drops 46° in altitude. A 40-foot white pine that casts a 40-foot shadow at summer solstice (when the sun is nearly overhead) casts a 95-foot shadow at winter solstice. A ridgeline 200 feet south of your building site that's invisible in summer photographs throws your entire building envelope into shade from 7am until 11am in December.

Most buyers tour land in summer. The site feels bright, open, warm. They check "south-facing slope" off their list and move forward. Then they build, spend their first winter in the house, and realize the living room is dark until noon and cold all day. By then they've spent $400,000 and the mistake is permanent.

The fix is simple. Map winter shadows before you commit.

Vermont Reality Check: Your Site Has Microclimates You Can't See in July

Vermont's landscape creates microclimates invisible during summer site visits: north-facing slopes stay frozen and dark through March, valleys collect cold air and lose 10–15°F overnight, ridges catch wind and lose heat faster, and tree lines create shadow zones that shift dramatically from December to February as the sun's rising and setting positions migrate 50° along the horizon. A site that feels warm and sunny in July can be a frozen dark pit from November through February if you don't understand how Vermont's topography, tree cover, and sun angles interact during heating season.
Vermont building site with blocked solar access showing winter tree shadows covering potential building area
South-facing orientation is meaningless if your tree line blocks the sun during the only hours that matter for heating season.

Here's what actually happens on the ground. Central Vermont's mixed forests are dominated by white pine, hemlock, and northern hardwoods. Mature pines hold their needles year-round and stand 60–80 feet tall. A 70-foot pine 100 feet south of your building site blocks winter sun until mid-morning. A ridgeline 300 feet south blocks it until noon. A neighbor's barn 150 feet southwest blocks afternoon sun after 2pm.

Add Vermont's topography. If you're building in a valley (and most buildable land in Washington, Lamoille, and Chittenden Counties is either in valleys or on hillsides), cold air drains downhill at night and pools in low spots. These frost pockets can run 10–15°F colder than ridgetop sites just 200 feet higher in elevation. Pair cold air drainage with blocked sun and you've created a microclimate that fights you all winter.

Mud season makes it worse. March and April are heating months in Vermont, but they're also when the sun finally climbs high enough to clear winter obstacles. If your site doesn't get sun until late March, you're burning fuel through the entire shoulder season when passive solar could be carrying the load.

Bottom line: if you haven't walked the site in January or February, you don't know what you're buying.

What Works: Three Moves to Map Solar Access Before You Commit

Before making an offer on Vermont land, you need to identify the building envelope (the 40'x60' zone where your house will actually sit) that gets 4+ hours of unobstructed southern sun between 10am–2pm on December 21, the winter solstice. Use free digital tools (Sun Surveyor app or SunCalc web tool) to simulate shadow patterns, then walk the site in person during winter months to verify what the math predicts. This 30–60 minute process can save you from committing $150,000–$300,000 to land that will cost you $400–$700 annually in lost solar gain for decades.

Move 1: Digital Shadow Mapping (15–30 minutes, free)

Tool: Sun Surveyor app (iOS/Android, $9.99) or SunCalc.org (free web tool)

What to do: Input the property address or GPS coordinates. Set the date to December 21 (winter solstice—the worst-case sun angle). View the sun path overlay at 10am, 12pm, and 2pm. The tool will show you exactly where the sun sits in the sky and what obstacles (tree lines, ridges, structures) block it. Look for a building envelope that maintains southern exposure during all three time windows.

What you learn: Whether the site has a viable building location with winter solar access, or if every potential building spot is compromised by shadows. This takes 15 minutes and can kill a deal before you waste time on engineering or permitting.

Cost: Free (SunCalc) or $9.99 (Sun Surveyor app)

Sun path diagram showing winter versus summer solar angles at Vermont latitude with critical 10am-2pm window highlighted
Winter sun in Vermont sits 46° lower than summer sun—what clears obstacles in July blocks your heating-season solar gain from November through March.

Move 2: Winter Site Walk (1–2 hours, requires January/February visit)

Tool: Compass app, boots, and a notepad

What to do: Visit the site on a clear day between late December and mid-February. Arrive at 10am. Stand in the potential building envelope and observe where shadows fall. Use your compass to confirm true south (Vermont's magnetic declination is roughly 14°W, so magnetic south-southwest is true south). Note when the sun clears obstacles and when shadows return. Walk the perimeter of the potential building zone and identify cold spots (areas that stay shaded all day or where snow lingers longer).

What you learn: Microclimates, wind patterns, and real-world shadow behavior that digital tools approximate but don't fully capture. You'll see which trees actually block the sun (often not the ones you'd guess from summer visits), where cold air pools, and whether the site feels warm and protected or exposed and harsh. This visceral understanding changes decisions.

Cost: Time + gas money for a winter site visit. Non-negotiable if you're serious about the land.

Move 3: Building Envelope Verification (Before P&S or Contingent on It)

Tool: Land surveyor or site engineer + your digital shadow map + winter site notes

What to do: Once you've identified the optimal building envelope for solar access, verify that it's also viable for septic (primary and reserve areas), well setback (100+ feet from septic), driveway access, and local setback requirements (typically 25–50 feet from property lines in Vermont). If your "sunny spot" conflicts with septic or setbacks, you need to know before you sign a purchase and sales agreement. Make the offer contingent on site engineering verification if you're not certain.

What you learn: Whether the site actually works or if competing constraints (septic, well, access, wetlands, setbacks) force you into a compromised building location with poor solar access. Better to walk away or renegotiate price than to build in the wrong spot.

Cost: $1,500–$3,500 for preliminary site engineering (septic design, survey, well consultation). This pays for itself if it prevents a $40,000 foundation mistake or a lifetime of high heating bills.

Vermont home with optimal winter solar access showing clear southern exposure and strategic tree placement
Good site selection: southern exposure is protected and unobstructed, trees are positioned east/west/north to provide summer shade and wind protection without blocking winter sun.

Vermont Context: How This Plays Out in Central Vermont's Real Estate Market

In Central Vermont's current land market (January 2026), buildable parcels near towns (Waterbury, Stowe, Montpelier) are selling for $80,000–$150,000 per acre, with many lots featuring mature tree cover and complex topography. Buyers are paying premium prices for "view lots" on ridges or hillsides without understanding that steep south-facing slopes with heavy tree cover often have worse solar access than modest flat lots with strategic clearing. The parcels that look dramatic in summer listings often perform poorly in winter, while the "boring" cleared lots with gentle south-facing slopes and minimal tree obstruction deliver superior passive solar performance and lower lifetime heating costs.

Here's the pattern I see. A buyer falls in love with a 10-acre parcel on a hillside in Stowe with mountain views and mature forest. The listing photos are gorgeous—summer green, dappled light, classic Vermont. They make an offer at $120,000/acre ($1.2M total) without mapping winter sun. Then they hire an architect who realizes the only buildable envelope (given septic, well, and access constraints) is shaded by their own tree line from 7am until 11am in December. To get solar access they'd need to clear 15–20 mature trees, which kills the forest aesthetic they paid for and creates erosion concerns.

Meanwhile, a less sexy 5-acre parcel in Calais with a south-facing clearing and modest tree cover sells for $70,000/acre ($350,000 total). It photographs fine but doesn't have the "wow" factor. Yet it has 6 hours of unobstructed southern sun from November through March, which means the house they build will be warm, bright, and cheap to heat. Over 30 years, the Calais parcel saves them $20,000–$45,000 in heating costs compared to the Stowe parcel—effectively making it the better financial deal even though it "cost more" per acre on paper.

Translation: price per acre is the wrong metric. Cost to own over 30 years is the right one.

Bottom Line: Read the Land Before You Buy It

Vermont's real estate market in 2026 offers buyers more land inventory than we've seen since 2022, but increased inventory doesn't mean better parcels—it means more choice and more responsibility to evaluate correctly. Solar access is invisible in summer and permanent after you build. Spend 30 minutes with free digital tools and 2 hours on a winter site visit now, or spend 30 years paying for a mistake you can't fix. The land doesn't care about your dreams. It only cares about physics.

Here's your play. Before you make an offer on Vermont land, open SunCalc.org or download Sun Surveyor. Plug in the property location. Set the date to December 21. Look at the sun path from 10am to 2pm. If your potential building envelope is in shadow for more than an hour during that window, you have a problem worth $15,000–$45,000 over the life of the home.

Then visit the site in January or February. Walk the land with a compass. Stand where you'd build and feel what winter feels like on that spot. If it's cold, dark, or windswept at 11am on a sunny winter day, imagine living there for 30 winters. If that doesn't sound good, don't buy the land.

And if you find a parcel with clean southern exposure, acceptable slope, and good bones? Move fast. Those are the lots that age well.

Free Tools for Winter Shadow Mapping:
- SunCalc.org — Free web-based sun position calculator with shadow visualization
- Sun Surveyor — $9.99 iOS/Android app with AR overlay showing sun path over live camera view
- USGS Topo Maps — Free topographic data showing slope, ridges, and elevation (usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/tnm-delivery)
- Google Earth — Free terrain view showing tree cover and topography; use historical imagery to see winter tree shadows

Let's Walk the Land Together

If you're evaluating Vermont land and want to understand what you're actually buying—not just what the listing says—let's schedule a site visit before you make an offer. I'll bring the compass, the shadow maps, and 20+ years of watching people build (and sometimes regret) their choices. We'll identify the building envelope that works, the one that doesn't, and the questions you need to ask before you commit.

Tony Walton, Principal Broker
New England Landmark Realty (NELR)
Office: (802) 253-4711 or (866) 324-2427
Cell: (802) 233-4107
nelandmark.com

Where to Go Next

Posted in Development and Investment
no comments yet
Jan. 24, 2026

I've Lived in Vermont Since 1978. Here's What We're Getting Wrong About the Housing Crisis.

By Tony Walton, Principal Broker, New England Landmark Realty

I was 12 years old when my family moved to Vermont in 1978. I've lived in Arizona, Texas, North Carolina, and Idaho since then—but I've called Vermont home for 46 years. I came back full-time in 1998 with a belief that this was still a place where you could build a life if you were willing to work hard and show up for your community. I've raised two sons here. I've served on nonprofit boards and sold real estate for over 20 years through the Great Recession, the COVID crash, and two housing bubbles. I love this place.

But I'm watching Vermont hollow out, and the conversation we're having about why is mostly bullshit.

Let me be clear: I'm a real estate broker. I've made a living selling homes to out-of-state buyers, second-home purchasers, and retirees with big-city equity. I'm not anti-wealth. I'm not anti-growth. I'm not some Bernie-bro socialist who thinks private property is theft.

But I'm also a Vermonter who chose to come back and stay, who watches essential workers leave because they can't find housing, and who's tired of pretending the market will magically fix a problem we've spent 20 years creating through policy choices that prioritize aesthetics over people.

So let's stop lying to ourselves. Here's what's actually happening.

The Museum Economy: When Vermont Becomes a Postcard, Not a Place

Vermont has become a museum for rich people to visit. We've built an economy that extracts value from elsewhere while making it impossible for the people who actually make Vermont function to afford to stay.

The math is brutal. Vermont's median home price is now $385,000—up 5.8% in 2025 alone. The median household income? About $79,800. Which means over 91% of Vermonters cannot afford the median-priced home without being severely housing-cost-burdened.

In 2019, a Vermonter earning the median income could afford roughly half the homes on the market. By 2024, that dropped to one-third. And if you're a renter hoping to buy? Only 6% of Vermont renters have the income needed to purchase a median-priced home today, down from 32% in 2021.

Translation: We've priced out the teachers, the nurses, the carpenters, the restaurant workers, the nonprofit staff—everyone who makes Vermont more than a scenic backdrop for weekend Instagram posts.

Meanwhile, property taxes have risen 40% in the last five years, with another 12% increase projected for 2026. Homeowners are furious. They're blaming school budgets. They're showing up at town meetings demanding cuts. And I get it—when your tax bill jumps $1,200 in a year, you want someone to blame.

But here's what nobody wants to say out loud: Your property taxes aren't high because schools are greedy. They're high because we stopped growing the tax base.

Student enrollment is down. We're educating fewer kids than we were 10 years ago. But we're trying to maintain 1970s-era school infrastructure across 200+ towns with half the population density to support it. And because we've blocked housing development, blocked commercial growth, and made it nearly impossible to build anything anywhere affordably, the taxable grand list hasn't grown fast enough to spread those costs across more properties.

So we squeeze existing homeowners harder. And harder. Until they break.

That's not a school spending problem. That's a we-refuse-to-grow problem.

The Second Home Conversation Nobody Wants to Have

Here's the part where I lose some friends.

Vermont has a second-home problem. Not because second-home owners are bad people—many of them love Vermont as much as I do, contribute to local nonprofits, and spend money in our communities. But because when your vacation home sits empty 35–40 weeks a year while the teacher coaching your kid's soccer team is commuting 45 minutes from another county because she can't afford rent in town, we have a resource allocation problem.

Out-of-state owners dominate Stowe's short-term rental market. Entire neighborhoods in Waitsfield, Manchester, and Woodstock have become ghost towns most of the year. And yes, those properties pay property taxes (often at lower nonhomestead rates than they should). But they don't house Vermonters. They don't stabilize communities. They don't keep the elementary school open or the volunteer fire department staffed.

The legislature is now debating Act 73 and S.244—proposals to reclassify second homes and short-term rentals into a higher property tax category, potentially as high as $2.00 per $100 of assessed value. The goal: discourage housing from sitting vacant or operating as Airbnbs instead of long-term rentals, and generate revenue to fund schools.

The pushback has been immediate and loud. "This punishes people who've invested in Vermont!" "You're killing tourism!" "This is class warfare!"

Maybe. Or maybe it's a community finally saying: If you're going to own property in a place with a housing crisis, you're going to help pay for the schools and services that make this a place worth owning property in. And if that makes Vermont less attractive as a second-home investment? Good. We need homes for Vermonters more than we need more investment properties.

I've sold second homes. I'll probably sell more. But let's not pretend there's no tension here. When a wealthy out-of-state buyer outbids a young Vermont family by $50,000 because they can pay cash and plan to use the house six weeks a year, that's not "the market working." That's wealth inequality playing out in real time, and pretending otherwise is cowardice.

The Building Problem We Won't Name

Vermont needs 40,000+ new housing units by 2030 to meet demand. Right now, we're on pace to build about 12,000. We're going to miss the target by 28,000 units—and that's with the state begging municipalities to approve housing developments.

Why? Because we've spent 50 years making it nearly impossible to build anything.

Act 250 was passed in 1970 to protect Vermont from becoming New Jersey. Noble goal. But it's now a permitting gauntlet that adds 12–24 months and $40,000–$80,000+ to every project that triggers jurisdiction. The recent reforms (Tier 1A, 1B, 2, 3) are a step forward—they exempt some housing in designated growth areas. But they also increase scrutiny in rural areas, which is where most buildable land still exists.

And even without Act 250, you've got local zoning boards, design review committees, NIMBYs showing up to every public hearing to complain about "character" and "density" and "traffic," and a culture that treats every new housing development like an existential threat to Vermont's soul.

Here's the thing: Vermont's soul isn't its zoning code. It's the people who live here. And right now, we're choosing aesthetics over people. We're choosing "viewsheds" over teachers having a place to live. We're choosing "I don't want apartments near my house" over young families staying in the state.

The legislature just introduced a bill to ban corporate entities from buying single-family homes in Vermont. It sounds tough. It feels good. And it will accomplish almost nothing, because Vermont's housing problem isn't Blackstone buying up subdivisions—it's individuals outbidding locals, landowners sitting on buildable parcels waiting for appreciation, and towns blocking every development that comes before them.

Banning corporate buyers is political theater. It lets us feel like we're doing something without confronting the hard truth: We are the problem. Our refusal to build. Our refusal to say yes to housing. Our refusal to accept that Vermont in 2026 can't look exactly like Vermont in 1978.

The Coming Reckoning

Here's what happens if we don't fix this.

In 10 years, Vermont will be a state of retirees, remote workers with out-of-state incomes, and vacation homes. The median age will push past 50. The schools will consolidate further because there won't be enough kids to justify keeping them open. The volunteer fire departments will collapse because there won't be enough working-age adults to staff them. The restaurants and ski resorts will close early or reduce hours because they can't find workers—because workers can't find housing.

And the Vermonters who do stay will be the ones who inherited property or who are willing to be housing-cost-burdened at 50%+ of their income just to avoid leaving.

That's not a functioning society. That's a theme park with a property tax problem.

Some of you reading this will say: "Tony, you're exaggerating. The market will correct. Supply and demand always balance out."

No. They don't. Not when policy strangles supply for decades. Not when wealth concentration allows a small number of buyers to outbid everyone else indefinitely. Not when "the market" is designed to allocate housing to the highest bidder, regardless of whether that person actually lives here.

The market is working exactly as designed. It's just not designed to prioritize Vermonters.

What It Takes to Fix This (And Whether We Have the Guts)

I'm not naive. I don't have a magic policy that solves this overnight. But I know what doesn't work: pretending this is a temporary blip, blaming schools for tax increases, and blocking every housing development because it might change the view.

Here's what actually moves the needle:

1. Say yes to housing. Not just "affordable housing" in someone else's town. All housing. Market-rate, workforce, senior, rental, ownership—everywhere, all the time. Because vacancy rates matter, and if you're not building housing, you're rationing it by price. And right now, locals are losing that auction.

2. Tax second homes and short-term rentals differently. If your property sits empty 40 weeks a year or operates as an Airbnb instead of housing Vermonters, you should pay more to support the community infrastructure you're using. Period. That's not class warfare. That's recognizing that housing has a social function beyond ROI.

3. Reform permitting. Act 250 reform is a start, but it's not enough. Local zoning needs to allow as-of-right development in growth areas—no design review, no conditional use hearings, no six-month appeals process. If it meets code, it gets built. Otherwise, we're just pretending to care about housing while ensuring nothing actually happens.

4. Use public land to build housing. The state just announced it's inventorying state-owned land to sell or lease to housing developers. Good. If private landowners won't develop, the public sector should. And if that makes you uncomfortable, ask yourself: Why should your speculation matter more than a nurse's ability to live near the hospital?

5. Stop blaming schools and start growing the tax base. Education spending isn't the problem—it's that we've refused to build the housing and commercial tax base that funds education. You want lower property taxes? Build 5,000 housing units in the next three years. Watch what happens to your rate.

But here's the real question: Do we actually want to fix this, or do we just want to complain about it?

Because fixing it means accepting that Vermont will look different. It means saying yes to housing developments that don't look like restored 1850s farmhouses. It means higher density in town centers. It means your property value might not appreciate at 6% annually forever. It means second-home owners might pay more in taxes. It means some of the postcard aesthetics you moved here for might change.

And I'm not sure we're willing to make that trade.

The Sliver of Hope (Because I'm Still Here)

Here's what gives me hope: Vermonters have always been pragmatic problem-solvers when we stop posturing and start working.

I've watched this state rebuild after floods. I've watched small towns come together when someone loses a barn or a house. I've watched neighbors show up for each other in ways that would shock people from places where "community" is a marketing slogan.

That capacity is still here. The question is whether we'll deploy it before it's too late.

The new "Let's Build Homes" nonprofit is a signal. Burlington's mayor pushing a three-pronged housing strategy is a signal. The state inventorying public land is a signal. These are people refusing to accept that Vermont's best days are behind it.

But signals don't build houses. Political will does. Money does. Saying yes does.

And if we can't muster that—if we keep choosing aesthetics over people, tax relief over growth, and nostalgia over survival—then we're not solving a housing crisis. We're managing a decline.

I didn't come back to Vermont in 1998 to watch it become a museum. I came back because it was still a place you could build a life, raise a family, and be part of something bigger than yourself.

That's still possible. But the window is closing.

So here's my question for all of us—the longtime Vermonters, the new arrivals, the second-home owners, the developers, the selectboard members, the legislators, and everyone in between:

What kind of Vermont do you want your kids to inherit? A living, breathing community where working people can afford to stay? Or a scenic postcard where only the wealthy can play?

Because right now, we're choosing the postcard. And we're running out of time to change our minds.

Tony Walton
Principal Broker, New England Landmark Realty
Waterbury, Vermont
(802) 233-4107
tony@nelandmark.com
nelandmark.com

If you want to talk about what's actually happening in Vermont real estate—not the polished version, the real version—call me. If you want to yell at me for writing this, call me anyway. But if you want to pretend everything's fine, save us both the time.

New England Landmark Realty

Office: (802) 253-4711 or (866) 324-2427
Tony's Cell: (802) 233-4107
Website: nelandmark.com

Vermont Home Buying Guide | Vermont Seller's Guide

Posted in Vermont Housing Crisis
no comments yet
Jan. 23, 2026

Why Vermont’s Housing Market Plays by Different Rules in 2026

Authored by Trish Sawyer | New England Landmark Realty

Why Vermont’s Housing Market Plays by Different Rules in 2026
If you’ve been following national real estate headlines lately, you may have seen talk of 2026 shaping up as a “rare opportunity” for home buyers. In many parts of the country, large-scale new construction, builder incentives, softening prices, and even a rise of foreclosures are changing the balance of power.

But here in Vermont — especially in Central Vermont — we’ve always played by different rules.

Key Takeaways (optional, 30 seconds)

Two-Sentence Summary: Vermont doesn’t behave like the national housing market because the state is structurally underbuilt and demand is anchored in lifestyle, not just interest rates. If you’re buying or selling in Central Vermont in 2026, this is a guide to where the market has genuinely normalized and where it hasn’t.

If You Only Remember 3 Things:

  • Vermont’s supply limits are structural (zoning, Act 250, wastewater, terrain), so “oversupply” headlines don’t translate cleanly here.
  • Buyer behavior has cooled into something healthier: more due diligence, more selectivity, and more reward for preparation.
  • In Central Vermont, the advantage isn’t “finding a deal,” it’s understanding value and pricing reality early.

Quick Facts:

  • Vermont is underbuilt relative to demand; large-scale subdivision overbuilding is rare.
  • Negotiation is back, but prime locations don’t turn into clearance aisles.
  • Homes that are priced right and well-presented still move; mispriced listings often sit and get harder to relaunch.

General Vermont Trends (Statewide Context)
In December 2025, Vermont’s median home sale price was up about 11.1% year-over-year statewide, with a median sale price around $428,300.

Other sources suggest more moderate statewide appreciation in recent years — with median home prices up roughly 5%–9% in 2025 compared with prior years.

State property transfer records also point to a roughly 9% jump in the statewide median sale price from 2023 to 2024.

Federal House Price Index data for all Vermont properties continues to climb, reflecting long-term value growth.

Prices have generally increased over the past few years, though the pace of growth fluctuates by region and market segment.

Vermont Isn’t Overbuilt. It’s Underbuilt.
Unlike fast-growing states where entire neighborhoods can appear almost overnight, Vermont has long faced limited housing supply. Between zoning regulations, Act 250, wastewater constraints, and our rugged terrain, new housing simply isn’t built at scale.

That structural reality means Vermont doesn’t experience the dramatic boom-and-bust cycles seen elsewhere. We don’t have an oversupply problem — we have the opposite. And that matters in 2026 just as much as it did five or ten years ago.

Lifestyle Demand Drives Our Market
People buy homes in Vermont for lifestyle: proximity to the mountains, access to outdoor recreation, a sense of community, privacy, charm, and quality of life. Whether it’s a primary residence or a second home, buyers here are rarely making purely financial decisions.

That kind of demand tends to be more resilient. While interest rates influence timing and strategy, they don’t eliminate the desire to live — or invest — in Vermont.

What Has Changed in 2026
The market has normalized — and that’s not a bad thing.

Buyers are more thoughtful and selective. Sellers need to be realistic. Homes that are priced correctly, well presented, and thoughtfully marketed are still selling — often quite well. Homes that miss the mark may sit longer, sending signals that can be difficult to undo.

Negotiation has returned, but within reason. This isn’t a market of fire sales or dramatic discounts in prime locations. Instead, it’s a market that rewards preparation, strategy, and local expertise.

What This Means for Sellers
If you’re considering selling in 2026, this is a market where how you sell matters as much as when you sell. Pricing accurately from the start, understanding buyer psychology, and presenting your home at its best can make a meaningful difference in both outcome and experience.

Well-prepared homes continue to attract strong interest — while overpriced or poorly positioned listings often struggle.

What This Means for Buyers
For buyers, 2026 offers something incredibly valuable: clarity. There’s less frenzy, more opportunity to perform due diligence, and room for smart negotiation — particularly around inspections, timing, and terms. The key is knowing where flexibility exists and where it doesn’t.

In a market like Central Vermont, success isn’t about chasing deals — it’s about understanding value.

The Bottom Line
Vermont hasn’t suddenly become a bargain market — and it likely won’t. But for buyers and sellers who understand how our market truly works, 2026 offers something just as powerful: confidence.

If you’re considering buying or selling in 2026, I’d be happy to connect. I’m always glad to share my proven strategies for selling or acquiring a home in this ever-evolving Central Vermont market — and to help you navigate it with clarity and confidence.

I'm here for you whenever you're ready to make a move!

Call/text or email me anytime!

Ready to talk strategy?

If you’re buying or selling in Central Vermont, we can pressure-test pricing, timing, and negotiation based on what’s actually happening locally, not what the national headlines are shouting.

New England Landmark Realty
Office: (802) 253-4711 or (866) 324-2427
Trish Cell: (802) 233-0554

Vermont Home Buying Guide
Selling Your Vermont Home
NELR Home

Posted in Vermont Real Estate Trends
no comments yet
Jan. 16, 2026

Trump’s Ban on Institutional Homebuyers: What It Means for Vermont Real Estate

By Tony Walton

Summary:

Donald Trump wants to kick big investors out of the housing market. On Wednesday, he proposed banning institutional investors from buying single-family homes — a move aimed at cooling prices and reclaiming homeownership for average Americans. Wall Street didn’t take it well. Vermont? We’re paying attention.

What Just Happened

Trump posted on Truth Social:

“People live in homes, not corporations.”

That one sentence triggered a nosedive in single-family rental (SFR) REIT stocks like Invitation Homes and American Homes 4 Rent, which dropped up to 9%. These firms — along with private equity powerhouses like Blackstone — have been aggressively gobbling up single-family homes nationwide. In some markets, they've distorted pricing and squeezed inventory dry.

But here’s the catch: Vermont isn’t Atlanta.

According to Redfin and Cotality data, large institutional buyers (those with 1,000+ properties) account for just 2.5% of purchases nationally, and even less in Vermont. The dominant players in Vermont’s housing market? Locals. Small-scale landlords. Second-home buyers. Wealthy out-of-staters looking for that “Vermont vibe.” Not BlackRock.

So will Trump’s policy shift hit Vermont the same way it hit Wall Street? Not likely. But it could signal a broader federal crackdown on investor activity — and that could ripple into Vermont’s second-home and short-term rental markets.

Vermont’s Reality Check

Here’s what matters for buyers, sellers, and investors in the Green Mountain State:

  • Institutional buyers are not dominating Vermont towns. Burlington, Montpelier, and Brattleboro have yet to see the kind of buy-to-rent surges seen in Sun Belt cities.
  • But speculation is growing. In ski towns like Stowe and Killington, deep-pocketed buyers have driven up home prices, sidelining local workers.
  • This proposal could shift sentiment. Even if Trump’s plan stalls in Congress, the message is loud: housing is political now. That may cool investor interest in secondary markets — and Vermont fits that bill.
  • Builders could get cautious. If developers think SFR buyers are leaving the market, they may pause on new projects. That’s bad news for inventory.
  • Rentals might tighten. Ironically, banning institutional buyers could push rents up — fewer landlords mean less rental supply, especially in ski towns and university hubs.

Final Word: A Vermont Perspective

Trish Sawyer, a seasoned Vermont real estate professional, frames it this way:

“Vermont’s not a hedge fund playground. But anytime federal policy targets the investor class, it can change buyer psychology — and that trickles down. For locals looking to buy, this could be the first domino.”

The politics are noisy. But the undercurrent is clear: ownership is back in style, and policy may be swinging to support it. Whether you’re a first-time buyer or a local landlord in Montpelier or Middlebury, the writing’s on the wall — the market is shifting again.

How Will Vermont Respond?

While institutional buyers are rare in Vermont, changes in federal policy often influence investor psychology far beyond their target markets. Towns like Stowe, Middlebury, and Barre may not see Wall Street ownership, but they could still feel the impact of buyer hesitation, builder caution, and shifting rental trends. Monitoring housing dynamics in Vermont will be key over the coming months.

Ready to Make Your Move?

If you're wondering how this national policy discussion could impact your Vermont homeownership plans, now is the time to act. Whether buying, selling, or investing, staying informed means staying ahead.

Contact Tony Walton

Tony Walton
Phone: 802-253-4711
Email: tonywalton@nelandmark.com
Office: 26 N Main Street Suite 2, Waterbury, VT 05676
View Profile

Posted in National Real Estate Trends
no comments yet
Jan. 14, 2026

3 Things Buyers Notice First in a Winter Showing (Hint: It’s Not the Paint Color)

 

By Trish Sawyer

Winter showings in Vermont have a reputation for being “tough.” Snowbanks, boots by the door, bare-limbed trees. But here’s the inside scoop: serious buyers love winter showings—because winter reveals how a home actually lives.

After years of walking buyers through homes across Vermont amidst January snowstorms and February deep freezes, I can tell you this with confidence: buyers notice the same three things every single time.

1. Warmth (It’s Immediate—and Emotional)

Before buyers notice the countertops, flooring, or paint colors, they notice how the home feels.

At my latest listing located at 53 Freedom Drive, in Montpelier, https://s.paragonrels.com/goto/79BPmTyarw I keep the thermostat set at 66 degrees. Not tropical—but intentionally comfortable. When buyers step inside from the cold, they literally get a warm welcome. Coats come off. People relax.

Add in the ambiance from the lovely gas stove—flickering away, warming both the heart and the home—and you can feel the mood shift almost instantly. Buyers linger longer. They talk more. They start imagining winter evenings, not winter hassles.

As a Realtor, I can tell you this:

If a home feels cozy within the first minute, buyers feel more confident that the rest of the house works just as well.

The moment buyers step inside, they’re asking themselves one question: “Does this house feel warm and cozy… or drafty and cold?”

They notice:

  • How quickly they feel the embrace of a warm home once they enter;
  • Whether heat feels even from room to room;
  • Whether there are cold floors, chilly corners, or that one room everyone avoids.

You don’t need perfection—but a home that feels cozy in winter creates an immediate emotional win.

Seller tip: If you’re showing in winter, set the thermostat comfortably (not frugal). Buyers don’t want to imagine turning the heat up—they want to imagine curling up inside and getting hygge with a hot cup of cocoa and a faux fur blanket.

2. Snow Management & Access

Buyers are quietly assessing something very practical: “How hard is this house to live in during a Vermont winter?”

They're asking themselves:

  • Is the driveway plowed wide enough to pass another car?
  • Where does snow slide or pile up?
  • Is the path to the front door clear and safe?
  • Is there a place to put boots, coats, and snow gear?

This isn’t about perfection—it’s about function. A home that looks manageable in winter feels livable year-round.

3. Light (Even on a Gray Day)

Winter light matters more than people realize. Buyers pay attention to:

  • Natural light in main living spaces;
  • Window placement and exposure;
  • How rooms feel on an overcast afternoon.

Even on the cloudiest Vermont day, a bright, well-oriented home stands out.

Seller tip: Open all shades and blinds before a showing—even if the view is snowy. Light sells.

The Takeaway

If your home feels cozy, manageable, and light-filled in winter, buyers notice—and they remember.

And if you’re curious how your own home would show during a Vermont winter (with no pressure or commitment), I’m always happy to share insight. Sometimes it’s just about seeing your home through a buyer’s snow-covered lens.

Winter doesn’t hide a home’s strengths—it reveals them. When a house feels warm, accessible, and welcoming in January, buyers trust it will feel even better in July. Instead of seeing winter as something to endure, they see spaces they can actually enjoy.

That’s a powerful shift and confidence is what sells homes—no matter the season.

If you'd like expert advice on selling your home in any season or if you'd like to book a private showing at 53 Freedom Drive, Montpelier, give me a call!

I'll bring the cocoa! ☕😉

Why Winter Showings Work in Montpelier

Montpelier’s charm doesn’t disappear under snow—it transforms. Winter home showings give buyers a realistic sense of how a property functions in real-world Vermont conditions. From efficient heating to well-managed driveways, showcasing these features builds trust. If you're preparing to sell this season, focus on comfort, accessibility, and light. These are the silent selling points that set your home apart.

For expert advice on selling your home during Vermont’s winter season, our guides offer actionable tips and personalized support.

Ready to Make Your Move?

Winter buyers are serious—and if your home makes the right impression, it can stand out no matter the season. Whether you’re selling or just curious, our local expertise can help you plan with confidence.

Work With Trish Sawyer

If you're thinking about selling this winter—or just curious how your home might show—Trish brings warmth, expertise, and Vermont know-how to every conversation. From snowbanks to showings, she knows what makes buyers fall in love with a home.

Ready for insight that makes a difference? Reach out to Trish for thoughtful advice and a personalized approach that works in every season.

View Trish’s Profile
Email: trish@nelandmark.com
Phone: 802-253-4711

Posted in Home Selling Tips, Vermont Real Estate Trends
no comments yet
Jan. 13, 2026

REALTOR® Safety in Vermont: What Buyers & Sellers Can Do

The Math of Vulnerability

By New England Landmark Realty LTD

Here's a number that should stop you mid-scroll: 322,000. That's how many REALTORS® felt fear for their safety while on the job in the past year, according to the National Association of REALTORS®. Not mild discomfort. Fear. The primal kind that makes your hand hover over your phone, wondering if you should text someone where you are.

Another number: 56,000 REALTORS® were victims of actual crimes while performing their duties. Not in dark alleys. In living rooms. In vacant properties on tree-lined streets that look like they belong on a postcard. In Vermont.

And here's the statistic that should make every homebuyer and seller pause: Only 53% of real estate brokerages have standard safety procedures in place. Which means roughly half of us are winging it, hoping our instincts and a charged phone will be enough.

They weren't enough for Beverly Carter.

The Beverly Carter Story: When Protocol Isn't Protection

September 25, 2014. Little Rock, Arkansas. Beverly Carter, 49—a respected REALTOR®, a mother, someone who followed the rules—scheduled a showing at a vacant property in a rural area. She did what many agents do: she showed up alone to meet potential buyers. Except they weren't buyers. They were predators.

Beverly was kidnapped from that property. Her body was found days later in a shallow grave. Her murderer later told investigators he targeted her specifically because she was a real estate agent—alone, vulnerable, accessible through public advertising. "She was a rich broker," he said, as if that justified the unspeakable.

Beverly's murder changed the industry. Her son, Carl Carter, founded the Beverly Carter Foundation to advocate for agent safety nationwide. September became REALTOR® Safety Month. Training programs proliferated. Apps were developed. But the fundamental vulnerability remains: we meet strangers in empty houses, often alone, because that's the job.

In Vermont, we pride ourselves on community, on knowing our neighbors, on the safety of rural living. But isolation isn't just a feature—it's sometimes a risk. Poor cell coverage in the Kingdom. Vacant properties on dirt roads in the Mad River Valley. That gorgeous converted barn in Waitsfield with no neighbors for a quarter mile. These aren't just listing features. They're also security concerns.

The Uncomfortable Truth: Independence Demands Interdependence

Real estate agents are the original gig-economy workers—independent contractors who spend most of their time in the field, meeting people we don't know, in places we can't control. We can't vet every potential client who calls us from an online listing. We can't demand background checks before a showing. And we're trained—culturally, professionally, economically—to say yes. To accommodate. To make it work.

This is where you come in. Because the safest transaction isn't one where the agent takes all the precautions—it's one where everyone in the ecosystem understands the stakes and acts accordingly.

How Home Buyers Can Help Keep Your REALTOR® Safe

    1. Understand That Pre-Qualification Isn't Personal—It's Protective

When your agent asks you to meet at their office first, to provide identification, to get pre-approved by a lender before scheduling showings—they're not doubting your intentions. They're protecting their life...

    1. Offer to Meet Publicly First

Suggest meeting your agent at their office or a coffee shop before the first showing. This isn't just courteous—it's a gift...

    1. Be Transparent About Your Contact Information

Use your real name. Provide a working phone number. Don't insist on communicating only through burner emails or anonymous texts...

    1. Respect Showing Protocols

If an agent brings a colleague to a showing, don't be offended...

    1. Accept That Some Showings Require Company

For vacant properties, especially in rural areas or those with poor cell coverage, agents may require that someone accompany them...

How Home Sellers Can Help Protect Agents Showing Their Property

    1. Secure Your Property and Your Information

Remove valuables, prescription medications, and personal documents before showings...

    1. Improve Property Accessibility and Safety

Ensure all areas of your home are well-lit...

    1. Never Show Your Home Yourself

I've had sellers tell me they'll "just handle this one showing"...

    1. Support Open House Safety Measures

If your agent brings a colleague to an open house...

    1. Communicate About Risk Factors

If your property has unusual risk factors—remote location, foreclosure history, squatters in the area—tell your agent upfront...

The Vermont Context: Isolation Is a Double-Edged Sword

Vermont sells itself on what it isn't: not crowded, not rushed, not dangerous...

The New Social Contract

Here's what the Beverly Carter story teaches us: protocols without partnership are insufficient...

The Bottom Line: Empty Houses, Full Accountability

Beverly Carter followed industry-standard safety protocols. She was careful. She was experienced...

For Vermont REALTORS®: The National Association of REALTORS® offers comprehensive safety resources at nar.realtor/safety, including training courses, safety apps, protocols, and the REALTOR® Safety Pledge. September is REALTOR® Safety Month—but the work is year-round.

For Buyers and Sellers: Ask your agent what safety protocols they follow. Offer to help them implement those protocols. And if they seem overly cautious, good. That's the person you want negotiating the biggest transaction of your life.

Why REALTOR® Safety Should Matter to You

Real estate safety isn't just about the agent—it's about building trust throughout the transaction. Whether you're touring a vacant colonial in Montpelier or listing a ski chalet in Stowe, understanding safety protocols for Vermont real estate agents creates transparency and fosters confidence between all parties.

Ready to Make Your Move?

Whether you're buying your first Vermont home or preparing to list a rural retreat, working with a REALTOR® who prioritizes safety is essential. Let’s ensure your next transaction is secure, respectful, and successful—for everyone involved.

Contact Tony Walton

Tony Walton
Phone: 802-253-4711
Email: tonywalton@nelandmark.com
Office: 26 N Main Street Suite 2, Waterbury, VT 05676
View Profile

Posted in Agent Resources, Home Buying Tips
no comments yet

Vermont Home Valuation

Find Out What Your Home is Worth

Thinking about selling? Get an instant market analysis of your Vermont home today.

🔥 Get the Latest Vermont Market Trends! 🔥

Vermont Market Report

Explore Topics