MitchelCypes P.E.

FPF Post of August 9, 2026 – Introduction

My name is Mitchel Cypes, and I am running for VT State legislature for the Chittenden 8 (CH8) legislative district in the Republican primary on August 11th. I am concerned that the needs of the residents of CH8 are not being addressed. The residents of CH8 are hard-working people, who mostly live in modest single-family homes on their own properties. We want a safe community, reasonably priced good education and for our grown children to be able to OWN a home nearby. The residents of CH8 are the people most affected by Montpelier’s spending whims. The residents of CH8 who I have met want our State government to go in a different direction.

I believe that we can make our tax burdens fairer. We should be questioning more of what our State government spends. I believe more emphasis should be placed on affordable home ownership and a reduction in government overreach.

My family and I moved to Vermont 22 years ago, for my wife’s career opportunity. This gave me the opportunity to be involved in the schools from pancake breakfasts in RMCS to supporting my son’s track team and daughter’s dance team in SBHS. I have worked as a licensed civil engineer doing a lot of stormwater environmental designs in Vermont. I was able to get the first RDA permit in 2008/9 when the CLF focused on South Burlington. I have worked as a municipal regulator, which provided me with a front row seat seeing the effects on State impose rules on municipalities. The problem is not generally the municipalities in creating opportunities, but rather the State. I have been on an institutional board and my HOA.

I am thankful for all of the encouragement that I have received from so many people in our community to run for State legislature. I retired in late July and can now focus on making the lives of the residents of CH8 better. If you are voting in the Republican primary, I would like to ask for your vote to allow you to have a choice for State legislature in November.

Front Porch Forum Post of August 31, 2026 – Home Ownership

At a webinar hosted by the Vermont Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD), I asked what percentage of affordable housing money goes towards home ownership versus rentals. I was told that it used to be zero, but now it is up to 3%. In my opinion it should be closer to 50%. Why is the State legislature directing VDHCD to encourage rentals instead of home ownership? Possibly because homeowners want safe neighborhoods to protect their investment, support the police, care about property taxes & government spending, and are more likely to vote Republican?

Home ownership allows people to gain their own wealth by paying back their own mortgage. Renting pays back someone else’s mortgage and provides wealth to others. I have been told that 25% of single-family homes in Vermont are rented. Highest percentage in the nation. The property tax system often allows 2nd, 3rd and more homes to be taxed less than primary homes. In Florida, 2nd plus homes are taxed a third more. Shouldn’t non-homestead be separated into non-homestead residential and commercial so 2nd plus homes could be taxed more and primary homes and commercial properties be taxed less? It seems that our current tax system encourages concentration of wealth to a few.

It seems that many people are drawn to the ideologies of socialism, communism and fascism. These ideologies believe that there should be an elite group of people who control production and have the wealth. Everyone else, per these ideologies, are supposed to support the elites. Politicians, who support these ideologies, will tell you that a new version will be different, but will not. These ideologies encourage income inequality by discouraging home ownership.

I told my 23-year-old daughter that one of the main reasons I am running for State legislature is so that she and others her age can buy a home in Vermont. Is it time for a change of attitude in Montpelier?

Front Porch Forum Post of September 12, 2026 – Election Choice

One nice experience running for State office is the discussions with other candidates, even those running against you or your party, hearing different perspectives. Often in these discussions we can find a lot of common ground. I had the chance to meet Bridget Burkett on CCVT last week. She is a good person. Similarly, we had a good discussion. We found items listed by CCVT that we agree on & had a different perspective on others.

We both agree that taxes on second homes should be higher than primary residences, and that companies should get permission from people before selling personal data. Though we agree that cell phone usage in schools should be limited. Bridget believes there should be State legislation. I believe that the school districts should make these policies without State legislation. We both are disturbed by the increase in crime on Church Street, however only I stressed the problem with defunding the police & the need for better prosecution in the courts. Bridget supports building a facility to house people found incompetent to stand trial. I do not. I question how there could be so many criminals being found incompetent. I believe that criminals should be held responsible for their actions. She spoke of increasing programs. I spoke of taxes being increased 62% in the last 8 years & the lack of spending transparency of NGOs. She spoke of trying to represent all Vermonters, where I stressed that I would focus on representing the residents of CH8 & not voting for new spending that would increase taxes for CH8. Bridget favors State home-rule authority by default over municipalities. I believe the municipalities, being closer to the people, should have home-rule authority by default over the State.

Thankful for FPF even with the 2K character & 5 posts per month limit. More to come. Hope this is helpful. Thank you for your attention & support.

Mitchel Cypes, P.E.
Republican candidate for Chittenden 8 (CH8).

Front Porch Forum Post of September 14, 2026 – Vote NO for Prop 3 (Expanded)

The main component of Proposition 3 (P3) would “prohibit laws that ban agreements requiring union membership as a condition of employment”. Edit out the double negative legalese to simplify this to ‘union membership is required as a condition of employment.’ This means that a monopoly can be created for some service that will get more expensive for Vermonters & push job opportunities out of state.

From experience I know there is also a human cost. I was a schoolteacher in the South Bronx. (I taught 7th grade social studies. My first year was a learning experience and without complaint had the least of everything. My second year I had a more advanced classes that had a bad behavior reputation. I had some fun with the tough students and then made them feel like they were smart. This made the classes fun to teach.) With hard work, 6 weeks into my 2nd year of teaching, my disciplined learning classes were taken from me & given to a union favored teacher. I was moved to a program with truant & challenged students that was not desired. (I was then teaching 3 classes of 8th grade earth science and 1 class of 8th grade social studies.) I was one of 3 young teachers that elevated the program. At the end of my 3rd year, again my position was given to a union favorite. (The school added one new class and two veteran favorite teachers. I was the one moved out of the program. I was asked to teach life science which I did not know well and felt uncomfortable teaching it. The Principal told me that in 5 years I would be able to pick what I wanted. However, I spoke to other teachers who waited their 5 years and were still waiting for preferred teaching assignments.) I interviewed at nearby schools, but they schools were all connected. I realized that no matter what I did, the union, the UFT (United Federation of Teachers), had their favorites and controlled who taught what. I saw a lot of non-favorites just going through the motions. Not a way to live.

I (went back to college and) got an engineering degree (from The City College of New York) & I supported myself by substitute teaching. I got a job at the NYSDOT (New York State Department of Transportation Region 4 Rochester). (Nearly two years later) New governor (Pataki) did a mass layoff. The union, CSEA, helped their favorites keep employment by transferring to other regions. Not for me. (I was prohibited from applying for a job opening in Hauppauge, which was near family & had several of my CCNY classmates.) I was not a (union) favorite. I left & moved instead of being laid off. (Based on my limited seniority and for me a lack of union assistance, if I stayed, I would have been one of the last layoffs. The work experience at NYSDOT was great and gave me skills that propelled my engineering career. I got some nice recommendations. It would have been great to be able to stay working for NYSDOT, but the union decided who was and was not.)

Unionization is not for everybody or every business. With unions in control hard working less connected people may not get promotions or opportunities. If there is only one union statewide for a profession & you are not treated well, you may need to leave the State to stay in that profession. CH8 wants their children to have opportunities here. P3 can limit opportunities & make Vermont less affordable. Why do this & how will the non-favorites be protected?

Vote ‘NO’ for P3. Thank you for your attention & support.

Mitchel Cypes, P.E.
Republican candidate CH8

Front Porch Forum Post of September 24, 2026 – Cypes for Chittenden 8: Response to Bridget Burkett’s Post of September 23, 2026 (Expanded)

Thank you Bridget for your post. I am offering CH8 a choice. With 16 years of planning experience plus years as a civil engineer, I have seen many failures of State government & schools, & have spoken out against bad legislation & expenditures. Democrats’ posts have beautiful words, but little action. (See the about Mitch section above) Per Bridget’s listing:

Education – VT is ranked 2nd in per pupil spending but is ranked much lower in performance. The cost of living in Chittenden Co. is 16% greater than the VT average. Why is there no cost-of-living adjustment? We need to cut administrative costs & reduce the shared State portion of funding allowing communities to set spending & tax rates, which will increase affordability.

Healthcare – UVM Medical just laid off 199 people. How can we get more timely affordable healthcare when State overregulation is forcing the hospital to reduce staff? We need to create more healthcare opportunities, not disable them!

Housing – CH8 wants housing for their children to stay in VT. Excessive permitting & fees from ACT 250 & ANR (Agency of Natural Resources) reduces affordability. Democrats push rentals. Republicans believe in home ownership. The proportion of State affordable housing money for home ownership should be increased from 3% to 50%.

Environment – VT is by far carbon negative. The State should stop hurting people. See upcoming post. (CO2 & Math)

Economic Development – We need to stop the State from limiting economic opportunities that municipalities want. We need to reduce spending & taxes, & stop diverting money for infrastructure to the schools. (This really surprised me when I learned of it. Why is money for roads and bridges going to fund the schools? We need good roads for economic development!)

Civil Rights – In 2017 a proxy for the SB school board spoke of ‘them’, students who are not fully white, stating, “you have to understand them because they’re not as capable”. I stole the microphone & responded “how dare you say that my two children are not as capable because they are not fully white”. I have lived a multicultural life. We should not be labeling & separating people but rather bring people together. (The school board was not speaking. Instead, they had proxies speaking for them. After a proxy would speak the other proxies would stand and cheer. Similarly, the other proxies cheered after the “not as capable” comment was read. Note in all the years (K-12) our son and daughter were in the SB schools, we never had this problem from any student, teacher, parent nor administrator in the schools. This seems to have been only a district and school board point of view. One school board member did speak to me afterwards not agreeing with what was said.)

Mitchel Cypes, P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8

Front Porch Forum Post of September 29, 2026 – New Website Announced

This is my sixth FPF post for the campaign. It will be the only that will include Williston, for which there is a fee. Please check out my website, cypes4ch8.org, which provides more details as to why I am running, who I am, & what I would like to do if elected. It also has my five prior posts, some of which are expanded from the 2K character limit of FPF with more detail. Future posts & additional information will be added. Williston has 19% of the population of CH8. However, CH8 only comprises 8% of Williston’s population. Many on Williston’s FPF have called for a candidate that is more fiscally conservative like me.

I want to be a voice for the often forgotten Chittenden 8 (CH8), whose residents are hard-working people, who mostly live in modest single-family homes on their own properties. We are tired of Democrats overtaxing & questionable spending. We want our health care system to be affordable & available, which overregulation is destroying. We support the police & want laws enforced. We want our children to be able to get jobs & afford to live in Vermont. Democrats force member, including the incumbent, conformance to their policies. Please see my website, cypes4ch8.org, that has specific proposals & more.

We need to change attitudes in Montpelier. Democrats want our children to rent instead of owning a home. Homeowners gain wealth by paying off their mortgage. Renters pay off someone else’s mortgage. Homeowners support the police to protect their investment & shared infrastructure. Renters are more likely to support defunding the police. Homeowners want lower taxes & less handouts. Renters don’t care about property taxes. Homeowners often become Republicans, which is why Democrat elites want our children to rent instead of own a home. Only 3% of affordable housing money goes to homeownership with 97% going for rentals. This should be 50% each.

Thank you for your attention and support.

Mitchel Cypes P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8
Cypes4ch8.org

Front Porch Forum Post of September 30, 2026 – Sustainable Affordable Housing

Forgive the repetition, one of my main goals for running is so my daughter’s & son’s generation can buy a home in VT. I believe this should be THE priority. In addition to increasing the percentage of affordable housing money (3% to 50%) for ownership, reducing the exorbitant costs & fees from ACT 250 and ANR, & a property tax break for principal resident homeowners, we need to make affordable housing units more sustainable.

Currently, there is a maximum income one is allowed to have to qualify to buy an affordable housing unit & a maximum price that an affordable house, whether new or resale, could be sold. From this system, there is little incentive to maintain or improve the property since the owner would not be able to sell the property for a greater price. If there was a leak in the roof & the cost effective long term choice would be to replace the roof, the owner would most likely fix just the leak and leave the roof replacement to a future owner.

What if housing built with affordable assistance was allowed to be sold at a market rate, but the percentage of the purchase price equivalent to the assistance provided would go to a fund to create more affordable housing. This would create an incentive for maintenance & expansion.

What if we could incentify with housing assistance the building of smaller, but modern, residences on small say 50’x50’ or 60’x60’ lots. This combination would make affordable housing more able to be built by developers, provide more affordable home OWNERSHIP, & help keep our children in Vermont. This is the type of out of the box thinking that I would like to bring to Montpelier to create opportunities for us.

Mitchel Cypes, P.E.
Republican candidate for Chittenden 8
cypes4ch8.org

Front Porch Forum Post of October 26, 2026 – Public Safety and Healthcare

It was great to meet with hundreds of CH8 residents. In addition to wanting a voice that represents specifically us, getting tax relief, curbing State overspending, & providing a better future for our children so they can live, work & own a home here, the biggest concerns voiced to me were public safety & healthcare costs/availability.

Many in CH8 spoke of not wanting to go into Burlington due to crime. One spoke of having an open bathroom in their business that they had to close to the Public because of drug needles being left in the bathroom. I spoke to some CH8 resident police officers, who spoke of poor moral. I heard from others who volunteer to help the homeless, who checked IDs, told me that most of the homeless they were helping were not from VT. There were a lot of homeowners who spoke of wanting to leave VT due to costs/taxes/crime. Some had started the moving process.

Democrats are pushing for single payer healthcare, which generally results in less healthcare opportunities & higher costs. A relative of mine who needed a medical procedure was forced off their insurance during the Obama years & on to Obamacare resulting in her out of pocket expenses doubling, costing many thousands of dollars more. In the UK with nationalized healthcare about 7 million people are waiting for medical procedures, which is more than 10% of their population. Then there is the story of Charlie Gard, an infant with a fatal genetic disorder that UK’s healthcare system could not treat. His parents were denied by the UK courts the opportunity to bring their child to the U.S. for an experimental potentially lifesaving procedure. In VT we need to create new & maintain existing healthcare opportunities for lowering costs & increasing healthcare options. Reducing the commercial property tax rate & streamlining regulations for a faster review process could help create more options & cost savings.

Mitchel Cypes, P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8
Cypes4ch8.org

Front Porch Forum Post of October 27, 2026 – CO2 & Math

I recognize that math is a 4-letter word to many. The VT Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC) did a calculation on how much CO2 is produced in VT. This included factories, cars, etc., to cow farts. Not every car or cow were measured. Instead, the average car/cow was multiplied by the number of each. From this the DEC calculated that VT produces 9.45 million metric tons of CO2 per year. This seems like a large number.

Let’s do the same style of math for CO2 reduction. 75% of VT’s 9,250sm is forested. I have been told by a couple of foresters that assuming 50 trees per acre is reasonable. Online a typical tree produces 260lbs of O2 per year. To convert O2 weight to CO2 weight multiply 44/32. Multiply by 50 trees per acre. Multiply by 640 acres per square mile (sm). Multiply by 9,250sm. Multiply by 0.75 since 75% of VT’s land is forested. Divide by 2,200 to convert to metric tons.

260*(44/32)*50*640*9,250*0.75/2,200 = 36.08 million metric tons of CO2 removed. This would be nearly 4 times the removal of CO2 than what is produced. In the years I have spoken of this, a legislator & a planner told me the tree removal of CO2 should be 50kg. Why not say 110lbs. What is your reference? If we replace 260 with 110 & you get 15.26 million metric tons removal, which is still more than the 9.45 million metric tons. The reality is probably around 25 million. Add that more than half of the CO2 removal on the planet is from the oceans, reducing the amount that needs to be removed to say 5 million metric tons, then the CO2 forest removal is between 3 & 7 times what is produced.

With VT being this carbon negative, why is our congressional delegation NOT getting money for VT since VT is removing CO2 for other states? Why are Democrats pushing state mandates that limit energy options, increase energy costs & allow for costly litigation? Costs that CH8 disproportionately pay for.

Mitchel Cypes P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8
Cypes4ch8.org

Front Porch Forum Post of October 28, 2026 – More No on Prop 3, No of Prop 4 and More CO2

NO on Prop 3

Here is another experience to share as to why people should vote NO for Prop 3. In 2001 I was the construction inspector on a road project Town of Islip, Long Island. The contractor hired a non-union asphalt spreader operator. This operator, best I ever saw, was fast & accurate. He made the other workers work so fast, that the contractor paid for the operator & a union coverage person to just watch. There were 2 reasons why this operator could not join the union. One was he was so good that he made others work faster. The other was because that union 25 years ago did not take African Americans like the operator. Though this situation is less likely today, limiting opportunities for advancement for subjective reasons does occur. Do you want government or a union to decide your opportunities or do you want to decide your own future?

NO on Prop 4

Shubael Clark was a prominent landowner/farmer in Hinesburg in the late 1700s & early 1800s. He was head of the local Baptist Church, rare for an African American. His family was welcomed & integrated into the community. Decades ago, couples like my wife & I got stares & comments. Now we are in commercials. Except for 1 school board meeting, we never had a problem in VT. Prop 4 has confusing legalese & unclear intentions. It seems to want to arbitrarily punish people. So many groups can claim a ‘history of discrimination’. As written Prop 4 will result in lawsuits against the State that again, it is the people of CH8 that will disproportionately pay for. Please vote NO on Prop 4. Supporters should better explain their intentions.

More CO2

If we had healthy oceans, excess CO2 would be absorbed by the oceans. According to Smithsonian China produces 30x the amount of oceanic pollution, Indonesia 12x & India 10x. Is this ignored because we are not the worst to blame?

I appreciate the encouragement that so many have provided. Thank you for your consideration & hopefully your vote.

Mitchel Cypes P.E.
cypes4ch8.org

Front Porch Forum Post of October 29, 2026

Thank you for your interest & support. It has been a pleasure meeting so many people in CH8. This is my 11th post. The remaining prior posts should be on my website, cypes4ch8.org, by this weekend. I have been a part of this community for 22 years. I have volunteered for & defended this community. I will be a representative focused on the needs of the CH8 community, which is different from the rest of VT, who have their own representatives.

I stressed how our over taxation is making many want to leave VT. I spoke of several ideas of how we can cut spending & make our tax system fairer for CH8. I will vote against the crazy spending ideas from Montpelier & vote to remove such that was done in the past. I stressed the need for home ownership opportunities, especially for our children, & the need (& how to) to provide more work opportunities. 50% of affordable housing money should be for homeownership. People should have work options that are not limited by government (Prop 3).

The path to affordability should start with the State repealing overregulation & reducing fees for businesses, development & healthcare. Single payer style healthcare has been proven to provide less healthcare options & to increase costs. I believe local school boards, being closer to the voters, should have more authority/accountability in determining school spending & taxes.

Public safety should include enforcement of smaller crimes. Police departments should never be defunded. Illegal drug use should not be encouraged. All legislation should be clear for everyone to understand without confusing legalese & double negatives that hide unintended consequences.

The incumbent does not agree with most of these ideas.

Change does not happen unless you vote for it. I would like to be part of the change & am again asking for your vote on Tuesday. Thank you to those who already have.

Mitchel Cypes P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8
Cypes4ch8.org

Half Truths & Mobility

I must be doing something right. Several of my signs have been pulled, knocked over &/or had the bases broken, while next to signs that are fine. Also, there was a paid ad on FPF for Prop 3 that states “This is not about forcing anyone to join a union.” Let’s correct this half-truth. Prop 3 forces people who get jobs with a union to join the union “as a condition of employment”. Per prior FPF post, some unions are good & some have favorites. If you are not a favorite, then w/Prop 3 you may need to leave VT to advance in your career.

Half-truths can be deadly & destructive. In 2011 there were people holding signs for the “99%ers”. It was originally an effort w/media coverage to get more federal spending on capital projects. They occupied a park in Manhattan & became the occupy movement, which lead to a lot of property destruction & many people being killed around the country, including 1 in Burlington City Park. The half-truth was based on a study that found that the 1% in 2006 earned relatively more than the 1% in 1976. The slogan was that the rich were getting richer. The full truth, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Micheal Jordan, & a majority of the 1% in 2006, neither them nor their parents were in the 1% in 1976. It was a new group of people gaining wealth & economic mobility. People died from a half-truth lie.

On our scale, in the late 1950s, to get car insurance for a new car you had to drive the car off the lot, meet with an insurance agent, buy the insurance & wait for it to be processed by the company. My father figured out a way through the bureaucracy to sell car insurance that started when purchased, ending this gap of coverage. This jump started (pun) his career as an insurance agent. Later, insurance companies changed to allow everyone to do this. My father made the world a little better.

This is free innovative non-socialist America. Thank you again for your support.

Mitchel Cypes P.E.
Republican candidate for CH8
Cypes4ch8.org