Transcript Highlights:

• So by now, I think we're all familiar with the impressive affordable.
• So what is affordable housing? What a loaded question, right?
• We hear about affordable housing in different ways.
• So you see the definition of affordable housing.
• strategies in other states and affordable housing policies in Florida.

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs held its first meeting and heard presentations focused on affordable housing implementation under the Live Local Act. Florida Housing Finance Corporation described its role in administering rental and homeownership programs, including SAIL, SHIP, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, disaster recovery efforts, supportive housing, and the Live Local funding and tax incentives. Officials said the first year’s $150 million Live Local rental allocation was fully committed to 23 developments producing 3,171 units with mixed-income set-asides, and they outlined how projects were selected through competitive solicitations tied to statutory priorities such as mixed-use development, publicly owned land, foster youth, rural areas of opportunity, redevelopment, and housing near military installations. They also discussed the tax credit contribution program, the missing-middle property tax exemption, sales tax rebates, and the year-one ad valorem exemption for qualifying affordable projects. Members asked detailed questions about the data and program design, including the use of area median income figures, per-unit subsidy levels, county targeting, tenant relocation during redevelopment, and whether the programs were helping lower-income households. Florida Housing said it uses competitive scoring and data from the Schimberg Center and that redevelopment projects are supposed to include tenant relocation plans. The homeownership portion of the presentation covered the Hometown Heroes program, which provides down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, with exceptions for active-duty military and veterans. Staff said the program has assisted more than 21,000 families and leveraged over $6.5 billion in first mortgages, and members asked about repayment rates, credit scores, and whether participants were staying in homes long enough to show the program was serving intended buyers. The committee then heard from OPAGA on two required Live Local evaluations: affordable housing strategies in other states and affordable housing policies in Florida. OPAGA reported that Florida has a high share of cost-burdened households, with 1.5 million households cost burdened and 1.4 million severely cost burdened, and that Florida’s counties and municipalities reported more than $1.4 billion in affordable housing expenditures in fiscal year 2023-24. The report identified 13 innovative out-of-state programs, with three considered high-potential for Florida implementation, and summarized Florida local government practices such as SHIP-funded homeownership and rental assistance, expedited permitting, mixed-income zoning, rehabilitation programs, and interlocal cooperation. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:48.560> to information on what they can afford to information on what they can afford
• <00:31:05.399> multif Minnesota and we do affordable multif Minnesota and we do affordable
• <01:19:30.760> home pipeline for creating affordable home pipeline for creating affordable
• pipeline of Workforce and affordable pipeline of Workforce and affordable home<01:19:45.360>
• <01:20:20.840> home of the home Coalition affordable home of the home Coalition affordable

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• housing that is not just affordable but deeply affordable, and looking at the area's median income so
• <00:15:19.040> and terms terms of the affordability now and terms terms of the affordability
• affordable<00:15:40.680> but<00:15:40.920> deeply not just affordable but deeply
• affordable units incredible affordable affordable units incredible affordable<00:26:41.360> units
• Thank you very much. deliver a th000 affordable housing units deliver a th000 affordable housing units

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• is to create affordable housing or feed into the creation of affordable housing? Yes sir.
• And when I say deeply affordable, I'm talking about housing that's affordable to folks, households at
• Affordable for people in Westlake Hills is different than what is affordable in Kyle.
• I'm an affordable housing developer, a real affordable housing developer.
• To create affordable housing like the last two gentlemen said, this is not creating affordable housing

Bills: HB21, HB211, HB223

Keywords: HB 21, Texas Tax Code, ad valorem tax, property tax, delinquent taxes, tax delinquency, penalty reduction, interest rate, split payment, installment payment, tax relief, county tax collector, taxing unit, property owner, tax collection, voter-approval tax rate, no-new-revenue tax rate, tax increase election, supermajority, 60 percent threshold

Transcript Highlights:

• As a CLT, just a little bit about us: we create permanently affordable housing.
• In America, there is a stigma around living in affordable housing.
• We're a nonprofit affordable housing developer based here in Sacramento.
• We're a non-profit affordable housing developer based here in Sacramento.
• It does not go toward deepening the affordability targets.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing-finance and permitting reforms aimed at making affordable and middle-income housing projects “pencil.” The first panel focused on the welfare property tax exemption, with witnesses arguing that annual recertifications are outdated, burdensome, and costly for both residents and operators. They urged streamlining by aligning eligibility rules with TCAC or HCD monitoring, allowing one-time qualification at occupancy, and preserving exemptions for projects that remain in compliance, especially as insurance costs and operating deficits are rising sharply. A major portion of the meeting centered on social housing and community land trusts under SB 555. HCD described the state’s ongoing study, due by December 31, 2026 and to be included in the 2027 annual report, and outlined public engagement already completed with residents and practitioners. Community land trust and policy witnesses argued that social housing will require legislative action beyond the study, including expanded tax abatements, public land use, soft loans, and simpler capital stacks. They emphasized that the model should include mixed-income and “missing middle” households, and several members discussed the stigma around the term “social housing,” suggesting a rebrand toward generational or multi-generational housing to broaden public support. The committee also discussed a proposed certified professional program modeled on Vancouver, Canada, to speed plan checks and inspections by allowing state-certified private professionals to perform certain code-compliance functions under local oversight. The witness said this would reduce delays, repeated reviews, and cost overruns while preserving local authority over zoning and enforcement. Members raised concerns about local control, infrastructure costs, and political resistance, but expressed interest in exploring a pilot and further recommendations. In the final panel, housing advocates supported allowing HCD loan funds to be disbursed during construction rather than only after completion. They said this would reduce interest costs, improve project feasibility, and could produce additional affordable homes without new appropriations. Members agreed the current system is fragmented and outdated, and several speakers and legislators repeatedly called for streamlined, more flexible financing and permitting tools to support housing production.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is the state's affordable housing finance agency.
• It is the state's affordable housing finance agency.
• The affordable housing challenges, such as you all are well aware, The affordable housing challenges,
• It's the largest affordable and workforce—I'll say affordable, attainable workforce—housing community
• Based on the most recent rental housing and affordable housing studies by the Schenberg Center for Affordable

Summary: The committee met to hear a panel on workforce and attainable housing, with presentations from Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Pensacola Habitat for Humanity, Wendover Housing Partners, the City of Tallahassee, and Escambia County. Speakers described how state and local tools such as SHIP, the Live Local Act, land trusts, accessory dwelling units, infill development, and public-private partnerships are being used to expand housing supply and preserve long-term affordability. Several panelists emphasized that housing demand is rising across income levels, that workforce households often need subsidy to buy or rent, and that housing location, transportation access, and proximity to jobs and services are critical. They also highlighted challenges including rising construction costs, limited land, insurance, NIMBY opposition, and the need for more flexible financing tools and employer participation. Members asked about area median income thresholds, whether current programs are reaching the households most in need, and what additional tools might help. Florida Housing said its traditional rental programs generally serve households at or below 60% AMI, while need is increasingly reaching up to 80% AMI statewide and higher in some regions; staff also provided examples of AMI levels by county. Other discussion focused on the impact of local government opt-outs, tax abatements, corporate ownership of single-family homes, insurance costs, Fortified construction standards, and whether bonuses or other income calculations can unintentionally disqualify applicants. Panelists urged more political will, more local flexibility, and additional incentives for employers and landowners to support housing near jobs. The committee also used an anonymous interactive polling exercise, and members identified partnerships, SHIP funding, local government action, cost, and insurance as key issues. In closing, the chair said the committee would continue a member-driven process and likely hold a workshop on housing-related topics. No formal votes or bills were taken up in the meeting, and the session adjourned after the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• to have access to clean and affordable transportation.
• I think we're making, they are becoming more affordable.
• But those affordable homes won't build themselves.
• affordable housing projects.
• So affordable housing taking... ...for affordable, 100% deed-restricted affordable housing projects.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• affordable housing for our community. affordable housing for our community.
• And so, when we look at affordability for affordable rentals, that vacancy rate is at 6%.
• faster, and build more affordably. faster, and build more affordably.
• say I really can't afford it either. say I really can't afford it either.
• Help me afford to stay in the district. Help me afford to stay in the district.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• every community, Minnesotans can afford every community, Minnesotans can afford a<00:02:44.760><
• > more affordable homeownership more affordable homeownership opportunities.<00:05:08.880> So,
• opportunity to afford a home. opportunity to afford a home.
• . affordability. affordability.
• And so, by investing public resources in the creation of affordable homes to rent, affordable homes to

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 3279, the “Our Future Starts at Home” constitutional amendment, which would ask voters to approve a 3/8 of 1% statewide sales tax increase to create a dedicated housing revenue stream. Chair Howard said the proposal is intended to address Minnesota’s housing shortage through predictable, long-term funding, estimated at about $400 million annually for 25 years, and would be administered through a council that would fund housing vouchers, rental and supportive housing, and affordable homeownership. Supportive testimony came from coalition and nonprofit advocates, including Nelima Sitati Munene, Ben Helvick Anderson, Dakota Morgan, and Chris Berggren. They argued that Minnesota’s housing crisis requires permanent, sustained investment rather than one-time grants, and said the amendment could produce thousands of vouchers, supportive housing units, rental units, and starter homes over time. Testifiers also emphasized the need for community voice and lived-experience representation in how funds are distributed, and described the bill as a way to prevent homelessness and stabilize families statewide. Several members raised concerns that the proposal would add another regressive tax burden on residents already struggling with affordability. Representatives Johnson, Nash, Dotseth, and Myers argued that sales taxes hit lower-income Minnesotans hardest and said the state should focus more on zoning, regulatory reform, and other cost reductions instead of new taxes. Chair Howard responded that housing costs themselves are already highly regressive and that both policy reform and public investment are needed. The bill was laid over and no vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• WHAT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING? WHAT A LOADED QUESTION.
• OF THOSE AFFORDABLE EXCUSE ME, THOSE COMPLEXES THAT PROBABLY ARE NOT UP TO CODE.
• THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT OUR REPORTS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
• THE GOVERNMENTS ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES.
• WE ALSO ASKED LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ABOUT THE MOST EFFECTIVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm on the board of La Casa, the LA County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency, where we finance affordable
• By adding the affordability requirements from AB 1893, we ensure affordable units for lower-income Californians
• By adding the affordability requirements from 1893, we ensure affordable units for lower income Californians
• It only applies to affordable SROs. It requires new affordability covenants.
• Preservation notice law applies to subsidized affordable housing.

Summary: The committee heard several housing bills, with the longest discussion focused on SB 79, which would allow more housing near high-capacity transit stops and on transit agency-owned land. The author and supporters argued it would address California’s housing shortage, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and strengthen transit systems by putting more residents near rail and rapid transit. Supporters included housing advocates, local officials, environmental groups, and transit-oriented development organizations. Opponents, including many cities, the League of California Cities, and some tenant and legal advocacy groups, raised concerns about affordability requirements, displacement, demolition protections, local control, and the bill’s interaction with existing local planning efforts. The committee discussed amendments to strengthen anti-displacement protections, minimum density, affordability standards, and a local flexibility alternative, and SB 79 was moved out on a due-pass-as-amended vote of 8-1, with one member not voting. The committee then took up SB 21, which would amend the Housing Crisis Act to allow limited unit reductions when converting deed-restricted SRO buildings into larger, more livable affordable units with private bathrooms, kitchens, and supportive services. The author and nonprofit housing providers said many SRO buildings are financially unsustainable and that the bill would preserve deeply affordable housing while improving conditions for residents. There was no organized opposition testimony at the hearing, though one business property group registered opposition. Members expressed support for the preservation-focused approach, and SB 21 was approved on an 8-0 vote and sent to the Assembly Committee on Local Government. Next, SB 92 was heard, a measure to close a density bonus loophole by limiting how much additional commercial floor area a project can receive and preventing the law from being used to justify very large nonresidential projects with only minimal affordable housing. The author cited a San Diego project as an example of the problem, and the City of San Diego supported the bill as a reasonable fix. Several labor and housing groups also supported it, while no formal opposition witnesses testified. The committee accepted amendments, members praised the effort to curb abuse while preserving feasibility, and SB 92 passed on a 7-0 vote. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 522, which would extend just-cause eviction protections to units rebuilt after disaster if they had previously been covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The author and the Los Angeles City Attorney said the bill would help preserve rental housing in disaster-affected communities, especially after the Pacific Palisades fires, and would not create new rent control. Opponents, including apartment, realtor, and property owner groups, argued it would add burdens to rebuilding and could discourage reconstruction. Members raised questions about whether existing law already protects returning tenants and whether the bill was necessary, and the hearing continued into committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our affordable houses are not affordable.
• Our affordable houses are not affordable.
• Our affordable houses are not affordable.
• Our affordable houses are not affordable.
• Our affordable houses are not affordable.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Housing held a public hearing on a series of housing bills. HB 1432 and HB 1428 drew support from HHFDC, and HB 1428 also received testimony from Hawaiian Community Assets, which said housing counseling funding is needed to meet demand for financial education tied to affordable housing, and that such counseling can help reduce evictions, prevent foreclosure, and stabilize households. HB 833 on community land trusts received broad support from HHFDC, county housing officials, community land trust representatives, and a local developer; testimony emphasized keeping housing affordable in perpetuity, but also asked for clearer access to financing, longer repayment terms, and inclusion of additional land trusts in the bill. Peter Savio argued that community land trusts are the best way to control demand and keep housing tied to local incomes. The committee also heard HB 19 on the Dwelling Unit Revolving Fund, which HHFDC said should be made permanent because the pilot has been successful, with 81 units in the program and $7.4 million of the $10 million allocation already committed. HHFDC said the fund helps stalled for-sale projects by providing state equity that revolved back when homes are sold. HB 529 and HB 432 were also heard; HB 432 would create a subaccount in the rental housing revolving fund for projects above 60% AMI, and HHFDC said this would help finance housing for households at 65% and 80% AMI. The bill drew support from several housing, business, and industry groups. Several other housing measures were discussed with mixed testimony. HB 419 had HHFDC support, Limby Hawaiʻi opposition, and support from the Grassroot Institute and others; members asked about whether councils approve these projects in one or multiple readings. HB 527 and HB 416 also drew a mix of support and opposition, with questions focused on county approval timelines and whether state-financed projects would still go through normal local review. HB 417 on the rental housing revolving fund prompted questions about how it differs from the Dwelling Unit Revolving Fund and whether it should be more flexible for mixed rental and for-sale projects. HB 418’s proposed working group was noted as potentially unnecessary because HHFDC said a public working group was already being formed. HB 1411 on housing preference raised questions about what happens if a recipient changes jobs, and HB 374 drew an Attorney General’s Office recommendation to remove a duration requirement to avoid possible constitutional travel issues. HB 373 and HB 1492 were also heard, with strong testimony from Peter Savio in favor of a broader trust-based model for affordable housing. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• What an affordable housing PILOT does is it grants tax abatement in exchange for providing a mix of affordable
• This helps subsidize affordable housing.
• Our affordable rent is coming from the same place; affordable rents always do from HUD.
• then it remains affordable.
• So that affordability is forever.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard presentations on a range of housing finance, permitting, and affordability tools. Chattanooga described its affordable housing PILOT program, which uses a per-unit property tax abatement tied to the rent loss from providing affordable units, with a 15-year term and annual compliance monitoring. Committee members asked about the program’s structure, whether it had been used elsewhere, and who was participating; the presenter said the first mixed-income project would bring 278 units with 42 affordable units and that the model was attracting private market-rate developers. Shoreline then described its MFTE and inclusionary zoning approach, emphasizing that longer tax exemption periods and station-area zoning changes had helped spur development, with most current pipeline projects concentrated near light rail stations. The committee also heard from the Municipal Research Services Center and the Department of Commerce on tax increment financing, proportional impact fees, and permit timelines. Commerce explained that TIF can fund public improvements such as roads, utilities, broadband, and some affordable housing or child care facilities, while proportional impact fee guidance is intended to help jurisdictions charge fees more closely aligned with actual project impacts. On permit timelines, Commerce presented its first annual report under recent law changes, using 2024 as a baseline year and noting that reported timelines were generally longer than statutory goals; members asked about outliers, paper versus electronic processing, and whether back-and-forth between applicants and staff was driving delays. Commerce said it would follow up with more data, including on CHIP funding and permit reform practices. Several local governments then shared permitting process improvements. Auburn reported relatively short review cycles and described its move to fully electronic permitting, internal performance standards, and a stock plan program that speeds review for repeated home designs. Bellevue described an AI permitting pilot with a local startup to help with pre-application questions, document triage, and plan review, aiming to reduce incomplete applications and revision cycles. Seattle presented a pilot for accessory dwelling unit co-development in which a mission-driven partner would help homeowners split lots, finance, build, and manage ADUs, with the homeowner eventually buying out the partner and retaining ownership; committee members asked about rent setting, management fees, and default risk, and staff said they would follow up. The committee also heard brief overviews of community land trusts and limited equity cooperatives as permanent affordability models, with presenters urging continued state and local funding support and policy recognition for these approaches.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:41.200> it from me because we couldn't afford it from me because we couldn't afford
• <00:07:01.160> and maintaining affordability and maintaining affordability and reliability
• <00:08:52.080> especially that maintains affordability especially that maintains affordability
• So is part of your keeping energy affordable, uh, heating energy in this particular case, affordable,
• We're now going to... decision was that keeping affordability decision was that keeping affordability

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to the affordable housing affordability crisis.
• this affordability issue. this affordability issue.
• solve affordable housing. solve affordable housing.
• affordability in our area. affordability in our area.
• . affordable. affordable.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We are relying on to build affordable housing, and building managers and workforce we are counting on
• As we look forward, I think that we can make significant progress in making our state more affordable
• As we look forward, I think that we can make significant progress in making our state more affordable
• As we look forward, I think that we can make significant progress in making our state more affordable
• As we look forward, I think that we can make significant progress in making our state more affordable

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Joint Conference Committee on Environment, Agriculture and Housing opened budget negotiations for the 2026-2027 enacted budget, with Senate and Assembly leaders outlining their one-house proposals and committee members giving brief remarks. The discussion covered environment, agriculture, housing, parks, and energy, with repeated emphasis on affordability, climate resilience, and support for rural and urban communities. Senate and Assembly chairs described the process and noted the agencies present, while minority members criticized the overall size of the budgets and urged more attention to housing affordability, building stakeholders, and energy costs. On the environment and energy side, the Senate highlighted proposals for $138 million in additional clean water infrastructure funding, a $75 million increase to the Environmental Protection Fund, $95 million in restored parks capital, $200 million for the Energy Affordability Program, and $1 billion for Sustainable Futures 2.0, including a proposed revival of the NY STUN program. The Assembly said it increased the EPF to $500 million, raised clean water infrastructure funding to $800 million, and included targeted amounts for cities, rural housing-related water projects, Cornell Ag Tech, and the Center for Sustainable Materials Management. Democrats argued that high utility bills are driven by natural gas costs rather than clean energy, while Senate and Assembly Republicans said the CLCPA and other energy mandates are increasing costs and should be reconsidered. Agriculture remarks focused on research, farm support, and resilience. Senator Hinchey described funding for Cornell’s COWS program, Farm to School amendments, $7 million for farm worker housing, and a new $20 million Farm Weather Resiliency Grant Program. Chair Lupardo said the Assembly added $16 million over the Governor’s proposal for educational research and outreach, restored support for beginning and disadvantaged farmers, and backed dairy, livestock, hemp fiber, and natural fibers initiatives, while also accepting $30 million in farmer tariff relief if guidelines are set. Minority Assembly Member Tague supported dairy infrastructure funding but criticized the farm labor overtime phase-down and the CLCPA’s impacts on farms. Housing discussion centered on major capital and assistance programs. The Assembly proposed $200 million more for the Housing Access Voucher Program, $100 million for Mitchell-Lama and NYCHA, $50 million for down payment assistance, $4 million for fair housing testing, land banks, and $40 million for the Homeowner Protection Program. The Senate outlined similar priorities, including $500 million for NYCHA, $100 million for Mitchell-Lama preservation, $250 million total for HAVP, and additional funding for mixed-income rental development, vacant rentals, senior housing, and block-by-block infill. Chair Rosenthal said rent stabilization was not being changed in the budget, while Republican members argued that affordability requires lower taxes, lower utility costs, and fewer regulatory burdens. No votes were taken; the meeting was an opening round of budget negotiations and ended with closing remarks from both sides.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:09:41.840> state-and-county-owned affordability, state-and-county-owned affordability, state-and-county-owned
• um properties for affordable housing. um properties for affordable housing.
• the greatest fear was managing a perpetually affordable project, which we did.
• the greatest fear was managing a perpetually affordable project, which we did.
• Affordable housing development project through interim loans to expedite the delivery of affordable housing

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing heard and acted on three measures related to the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation (HHFDC) and affordable housing policy. First, it considered GM 681, the nomination of Garth Yamanaka to the HHFDC Board of Directors. Yamanaka testified that he supports using all available tools to increase housing production, including open space and park dedication where feasible, more revenue-neutral and workforce housing, and a broad mix of housing types. Senators questioned him on priorities such as perpetual affordability, state- and county-owned projects, and whether HHFDC should focus more on revenue-neutral housing; he generally supported greater flexibility and more options, while emphasizing the need to consider feasibility and local market needs. The committee recommended GM 681 for advise and consent and adopted that recommendation unanimously, with Senator Fevella excused. The committee then heard GM 764, the nomination of Susan Coons to the HHFDC Board. Coons said she supports prioritizing state and government lands for affordable housing but stressed that the government cannot solve the housing shortage alone and should continue to engage private and nonprofit partners. In response to questions, she said HHFDC should give greater priority to perpetual affordability and could potentially devote more resources to revenue-neutral, income-blind housing, but she cautioned against blanket policies and said decisions should be guided by data, community needs, and project readiness. She also supported the idea of a 100,000-unit housing plan and said HHFDC should focus on more specific policies and projects. The committee recommended GM 764 for advise and consent and adopted the recommendation. Finally, the committee considered HCR 83, which supports using the dwelling unit revolving fund for pre-development costs through interim loans for government affordable housing projects. HHFDC testified in support and explained that it already has authority to make pre-development loans, but the resolution would provide policy support and comfort to the board. Members asked about loan security and default; HHFDC said such loans would typically be secured by land collateral and that it would not expect to forgive the loans. The committee agreed to pass the resolution with amendments, including adding committee report language about default and collateral and noting HHFDC’s existing authority. In a joint portion with the Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs, the committees also took up HCR 98 HD1 and recommended it pass with amendments to clarify that the countywide housing pattern book applies only to the City and County of Honolulu and involves collaboration between Honolulu housing and planning agencies. All recommendations were adopted, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So significant affordability challenges during that period.
• We have recently made higher education more affordable.
• We have recently had higher education more affordable.
• We were able to win permanent affordability for all 347 units.
• Half of them are being affordable. Go to other cities.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-21, House Bill 508, an act to protect tenants by limiting rent increases. Committee leaders explained the Article 48 initiative process and said the hearing was intended to gather testimony for a report to the legislature. The measure would replace current state law that prohibits rent control, cap annual rent increases at the lower of CPI or 5%, exempt certain properties including owner-occupied buildings of four or fewer units, subsidized, university, nonprofit, and short-term rental housing, and exempt new construction for 10 years. It would also eliminate vacancy decontrol, so limits would continue when units turn over, and enforcement would rely largely on tenants and the Attorney General through the courts. The hearing began with expert testimony from Whitney Airgood-Obrien of Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, who described Massachusetts’ severe rental affordability problems and reviewed research on rent regulation, noting mixed evidence on supply and quality effects but clearer evidence that rent regulation can slow rent growth and improve tenant stability. Supporters of the petition, led by Carolyn Chow of Homes for All Massachusetts, argued that rent stabilization is needed now to curb displacement and runaway rent increases, especially for low- and moderate-income renters. Laura Frost described her Arlington building being bought by a large firm that sought steep rent hikes, and said rent control would help prevent “tenant flipping” and community displacement. Dave Foley of SEIU Local 509 said the issue affects workers’ ability to live near their jobs, while Dr. Mark Paul and Tram Huang argued that the evidence supports well-designed rent stabilization, that vacancy decontrol encourages displacement, and that the policy should be seen as a complement to new housing production rather than a substitute. Committee members questioned supporters about the 10-year new construction exemption, the lack of vacancy decontrol, and whether rent stabilization could discourage development; supporters responded that the measure targets corporate rent gouging, that small landlords are protected by exemptions, and that production and rent stabilization can coexist. Opponents, including representatives of small property owners, chambers of commerce, and labor/building trades, argued the proposal would hurt small landlords, reduce investment, and slow housing production. They said operating costs such as taxes, insurance, and maintenance are rising faster than the proposed cap, and warned that the measure would reduce property values and tax revenue and could push investment to other states. Several opponents emphasized that many Massachusetts housing providers are mom-and-pop owners rather than large corporations, and said the policy would make it harder to maintain and improve housing. Committee members pressed both sides on the need for a middle ground between affordability and preserving development incentives, but no vote was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think that, you know, with the Affordable Homes Act, that...
• home but an affordable life.
• And new affordable homes and businesses, new opportunities for an affordable life, pop up in locations
• affordable units are developed or deeper affordability is provided.
• It encourages density and affordability.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• On his observations around housing affordability and stabilization. So affordable housing, Natasha.
• But if it is exiting affordability, that is where the resources But if it is exiting affordability, that
• Oregon still has a significant affordable housing shortage.
• Now Bill and Dinah are telling. afford to do major things like that.
• include affordable access to heating and cooling.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee met for a series of information sessions focused on housing stabilization, rental assistance, senior housing, and heat resilience. In the first panel, OHCS and NOAA described the state’s affordable housing preservation work, including the $35 million in 2025 stabilization funding used to reduce debt and keep distressed affordable rental projects operating, plus manufactured home park preservation efforts. OHCS said the portfolio remains under strain, with about a third of projects at debt coverage ratios of 1.0 or less and rising insurance and operating costs. NOAA urged faster closings on the stabilization awards, more funding in 2027, and broader rent assistance and process reforms. Committee members asked about the gap between current appropriations and need, and OHCS explained that the new Article 11-Q bond preservation program is structured differently and requires full refinancing rather than simple cash infusions. The committee then heard a detailed discussion of the state’s eviction prevention and rental assistance program, ORDAP. OHCS said the program is administered through community action agencies, prioritizes households at imminent risk of eviction, and is now funded at a much lower level than in the prior biennium, reducing expected service to about 8,200 households this biennium. The Oregon Law Center, a county community action agency, and Multifamily Northwest all agreed the program prevents homelessness and is effective, but they differed on whether assistance should be tied so closely to eviction court. Legal aid and community action witnesses said the current system is underfunded and that eviction filings are the clearest indicator of need, while Multifamily Northwest argued the process can push people into court unnecessarily and should be moved earlier when possible. Legislators raised questions about whether a pre-eviction model could be developed and about the costs of court involvement; one member shared a personal story about how rental assistance helped keep their family housed. Next, the governor’s office, OHCS, and OHA presented on the new senior housing initiative and healthy homes work. The governor’s housing director said Oregon is making progress on homelessness and housing production, with reductions in homelessness outside Multnomah County and an estimated 50,000 future units added to the pipeline through recent state actions. OHCS outlined the senior housing programs launched in May: a debt-financing program using elderly and disabled bond authority, an older adult housing development program funded through the senior property tax deferral revolving account, and a rehousing program for older adults that will use bridge funding and services to move at least 400 unsheltered older Oregonians into housing. OHA also described its Healthy Homes Grant Program, including $24.6 million already awarded, a new $5 million grant round for seniors and people with disabilities, and examples of home repairs and weatherization that help people remain safely housed. The final information session focused on home cooling and heat resilience. OHA presented data showing rising extreme heat days, more heat-related emergency visits, and likely undercounted heat deaths, especially among older adults, people with disabilities, low-income communities, and people without access to healthy homes. ODOE reviewed implementation of Senate Bill 1536, including a cooling needs study that found 58% of surveyed households in the studied housing types needed permanent cooling, with estimated statewide costs of $582 million to $1 billion. ODOE said its rental home heat pump and community heat pump programs have supported 4,638 installations so far, with a temporary reopening planned using remaining funds. The session ended with a remote presentation from a Community Action Partnership of Oregon representative, continuing the discussion of how community action agencies help deliver energy and anti-poverty services.