Transcript Highlights:

• , all multifamily housing above three stories, no matter how many units are being built.
• of housing in terms of fire deaths.
• It would encourage development of family-sized units in urban and suburban areas and expand housing supply
• It would encourage development of family-sized units in urban and suburban areas and expand housing supply
• And at a time when housing and remove unnecessary barriers to housing production.

Committee: Senate Housing and Human Services

Summary: The Senate Committee on Housing and Human Services met with a quorum, adopted the June 16, 2026 minutes, and then unanimously adopted S-1 substitutes for House Bills 5570 and 5571. The chair said the committee would take testimony and likely not move to final passage that day, in order to allow more discussion and questions. The bills, as substituted, would allow local governments to permit certain multifamily buildings up to four stories to be built or converted with a single staircase, subject to conditions such as limits on units per floor, floor size, and existing fire safety requirements. A sunset provision was described as ending the statute once LARA adopts corresponding building code rules. Representatives Fairbairn and Wooden testified in support, saying the bills are intended to address Michigan’s housing shortage by making smaller infill and “missing middle” projects more feasible and less costly. They argued the current two-stair requirement drives up costs, makes land assembly harder, and limits development on narrow or irregular lots. Senators asked about stair width, emergency safety, the choice of four stories instead of six, and why the American Institute of Architects opposed the approach; the sponsors said the 48-inch stair width was intended to allow two-way movement, four stories was a compromise aligned with expected code changes, and the architects preferred rulemaking over statutory change. Supportive testimony came from Pew Charitable Trusts, which said research from New York City, Seattle, and other places found fire death rates in modern single-stair buildings to be indistinguishable from other multifamily buildings, and that modern safety features such as sprinklers, alarms, and fire-rated construction make these buildings safe. A developer from Ann Arbor and the Michigan Home Builders Association said the reform would improve floor-plan efficiency, reduce wasted circulation space, lower construction costs, and help smaller projects pencil out. Abundant Housing Michigan also supported the bills, estimating they could reduce apartment construction costs by nearly 13%. The clerk read in numerous written cards in support from business, housing, municipal, and advocacy groups, while the Michigan Association of Fire Chiefs and the Michigan Professional Firefighters Union were listed as neutral. The committee adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• in Unit 18, you would be able to hunt in those units if you had one of those tags because those tags
• units?
• There are currently no hunts in Unit 13 or 18, and this does not add any hunts to Unit 13 or 18.
• both be able to hunt in those units as well because those tags can be for any unit where there is an
• CWD units are spreading across the... ...and chronic waste units.

Summary: The Resources and Conservation Committee first took up Fish and Game Rule Docket 13-0104-2401, a broad cleanup and consolidation of licensing, tag, permit, and hunt-allocation rules. The department explained that the rule implements a new non-resident draw framework, moves licensing language into one chapter, adds or clarifies definitions, changes some controlled-hunt thresholds, expands landowner appreciation and permission hunt provisions to include turkey on smaller eligible acreage, and adds or revises provisions for refunds, exchanges, special big game tags, and bighorn sheep auction/lottery areas. Members questioned the non-resident draw structure, landowner tag sales, and the addition of Units 13 and 18 for bighorn sheep auction/lottery tags; department witnesses said those units were only being added as possible hunt areas if seasons are later set, not creating new hunts. After debate, a substitute motion to approve the docket as-is failed on a tie vote, and the committee then approved the docket with exceptions removing Sections 700.02 and 800.02. The committee then quickly approved Rule Docket 13-0117-2401, a repeal of the bait-for-big-game chapter because the content had been moved into another chapter. It next heard Rule Docket 13-0108-2401, which would revise big-game hunting rules, including weapon definitions and validation/tagging language, allow future electronic tagging, add a center-fire open-site season, update archery and muzzleloader provisions, revise motorized hunting restrictions, authorize certain predator hunting near feeding sites, create herd-health kill authorizations for disease management, and make permanent the temporary bait rule with a grizzly-bear reporting requirement. A major portion of the docket would restrict certain high-tech hunting tools—such as thermal optics, night vision, transmitting trail cameras, drones, and aircraft—during big-game seasons, with narrower exceptions for wolves and private land. Department staff said the proposal came from extensive public engagement and was intended to preserve fair chase while still allowing wolf management tools and livestock-protection measures. Public testimony on the technology rule was sharply divided. Supporters argued the restrictions were needed to protect fair chase, prevent unfair advantages, and preserve hunting traditions; several said the process was thorough and that other western states already restrict similar technologies. Opponents, including trappers, livestock interests, and some hunters, argued the rule would reduce wolf-management effectiveness, conflict with Idaho law requiring all methods of take for wolves, and limit tools useful for finding wounded or dead game and for chronic wasting disease response. After hearing testimony, the chairman moved to hold Docket 13-0108-2401 in committee, and that motion passed, so no final action was taken on the technology rule at that meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today is Tuesday, April 27, 2026, and this is a meeting of the House Education Committee.
• And they do believe that the United States is an enemy nation.
• States under Section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, 50 United States Code 4565.” 50, United
• States under Section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, 50 United States Code 4565. 50, United
• House Bill 1084. Would you like to read that in? Okay. We'll have... House Bill 1084.

Committee: House Education

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 399 by Senator Bass, which would create the Louisiana Higher Education Research Security Council to review and potentially block certain gifts, contracts, academic partnerships, and research partnerships involving foreign adversary sources. Bass said the bill is intended to protect university research, intellectual property, and students from foreign influence, and would also require public disclosure of certain foreign-linked arrangements and a plan to eliminate foreign-adversary-linked software. Supporters from State Armor argued Louisiana universities have been vulnerable to Chinese Communist Party influence and intellectual property theft. Representatives from Tulane University and Lenovo raised concerns that the bill could create duplicative review, delay research, raise costs, and sweep in legitimate private or multinational entities; a proposed amendment to exempt entities operating under a CFIUS national security agreement failed 4-8. After debate, the committee moved SB 399 favorably. The committee then considered Senate Bill 310 by Senator Cloud, presented by Representative Carlson, which would require public school and college health centers to display information about pregnancy resources available in Louisiana. Supporters from Louisiana Right to Life said the bill would help connect pregnant students with existing state and private assistance programs, while the ACLU submitted a red card in opposition without speaking. The bill was moved favorably without objection. The committee also advanced House Resolution 171 by Representative Turner, which calls for a study of the workforce-oriented TOPS Tech and M.J. Foster programs, with business and workforce groups supporting the study as a way to measure outcomes and return on investment; it was moved favorably. Next, the committee took up House Bill 1084 by Representative Turner, a tuition autonomy bill for public post-secondary institutions. An amendment was adopted to add a conceptual framework for tuition-setting considerations, but the bill would still remove the existing 10% over two years cap and allow institutions to set tuition more freely. Turner argued universities need more flexibility because state funding has declined and campuses face deferred maintenance and operating pressures. Several members, especially Representative Carlson, warned that higher tuition could reduce access and that the bill did not address broader structural problems in higher education. Despite those concerns, HB 1084 was moved favorably by an 8-3 vote. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 351 by Senator Jackson Andrews, which would let families apply for child care assistance through CCAP once pregnancy is known, rather than waiting until after birth, to help move them up the waiting list. An amendment was adopted to have BESE, rather than the department, handle rulemaking and to allow the House and Senate education committees to approve the implementation process. The bill was then discussed as a way to help parents return to work sooner, and the hearing continued with questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• up to 10-unit projects on infill sites.
• up to 10-unit projects on infill sites.
• California's housing crisis continues to limit homeownership opportunities and increase housing costs
• Housing experts have estimated a shortage of between 840,000 and 3.5 million housing units.
• And then, of course, the housing market collapsed and nobody was building any housing for a while, so

Committee: Senate Housing

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Housing heard two substantive housing bills and two consent items. SB 1116 by Senator Caballero would update the Starter Home Revitalization Act (SB 684) by clarifying development standards for small infill housing, reinforcing ministerial approval and timelines, improving state oversight and reporting, updating subdivision rules, and addressing private restrictions such as HOA or deed provisions that can block housing. The author and supporters, including California YIMBY and a small developer, said the bill responds to implementation problems and would help produce more starter homes; there was no opposition testimony. Members generally supported the measure but noted concerns about local implementation and the broader impact-fee/infrastructure context. SB 1117 by Senator Cervantes would clarify ADU fee law so local governments assess impact fees only on the portion of an ADU above 750 square feet, rather than on the full unit, while keeping the existing 750-square-foot exemption intact. Supporters argued the current fee structure discourages larger ADUs and creates a sharp production drop above 750 square feet; a homeowner witness said fees on an 800-square-foot ADU would have exceeded construction costs. Local government and fire-related organizations opposed or opposed unless amended, arguing impact fees fund essential infrastructure and services and should remain tied to nexus studies. Several senators said the bill was narrowly tailored but emphasized the need to address broader infrastructure financing. The committee also took up consent items SB 1267 by Senator Allen and SB 1426, the committee omnibus bill. After the committee obtained a quorum and later reconvened, it approved the consent calendar 10-0, SB 1117 10-0, and SB 1116 8-0. All measures were ordered out to the Senate Local Government Committee, and the hearing was adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• President, I transmit herewith House Bill 551, House Bill 526, House Joint Memorial 11, and House Bill
• 544, which had passed the House.
• House Bill 551, House Bill 526, House Joint Memorial 11, and House Bill 544 will all be referred to the
• United States, the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled
• to the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States, to the congressional delegation

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> housing</c><00:27:56.480><c> can</c><00:27:56.640><c> be</c> Two units of manufactured housing can
• </c> manufactured housing units of the same manufactured housing units of the same exact<00:28:43.200
• </c><00:28:53.600><c> as</c> manufactured housing units to be used as manufactured housing units to be
• c><00:29:27.440><c> and</c> manufactured housing unit as an ADU and manufactured housing unit as an ADU
• units under its housing infrastructure municipal grant program.

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , and they're critical units.
• </c><00:25:21.240><c> and</c><00:25:21.840><c> um</c> units and they're critical units and um units and
• </c><00:29:41.880><c> units</c><00:29:42.240><c> across</c><00:29:42.519><c> the</c> in developing housing
• units across the in developing housing units across the state<00:29:43.080><c> and</c><00:29:43.200>
• </c> any vacant units and the vacant units any vacant units and the vacant units day<00:35:35.119><c>

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several housing-related measures. SB 38 SD2 drew mixed testimony on changes to 21H projects, with HHFDC supporting and county and community groups split between support and opposition. In discussion, members focused on how county legislative bodies can alter projects in ways that increase costs, including changes to AMI mixes and fee waivers. The committee later recommended passage with amendments, limiting county changes that would impose stricter conditions than HHFDC, stricter AMI requirements, or reduced fee waivers; the motion passed with one member voting with reservations and two members excused. A major portion of the hearing focused on SB 71 SD2, which would revise the rental housing revolving fund. Catholic Charities Hawaiʻi, Hawaiʻi YIMBY, and NAAP Hawaiʻi opposed the bill, arguing it would weaken support for deeply affordable units, eliminate the 5% set-aside for households at or below 30% AMI, and create a funding gap for households between 60% and 120% AMI. Supporters of the bill, including public housing and some development interests, emphasized the need to redirect funding and make the program more flexible. In decision-making, the committee described the bill as making comprehensive changes that would narrow Tier 2 toward higher-income projects and favor shorter loan terms, then moved it out with amendments. The committee also heard and advanced several other measures with little or no opposition: SB 40 SD2 on state finances, SB 378 on HHFDC, SB 572 SD1 on housing, SB 1229 ST2 on the dwelling unit revolving fund, and SB 602 on the Hawaiʻi Public Housing Authority all received support testimony and were moved forward. For SB 65 SD2, HPHA and other agencies supported the measure, and HPHA testified it sought roughly $8 million to $10 million for repair and maintenance of units not covered by CIP funds. The committee also took up SB 826 SD1 on the low-income housing tax credit, where HHFDC, the Tax Foundation, and DHHL expressed confusion over the bill’s intent and whether it would bar state agencies from using LIHTC financing; no action was taken on that item in the excerpt. SB 944 SD2 on LIHTC transferability drew support and a suggestion to keep clarifying language that notifies the tax department, and the committee indicated it would keep the provision in.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please read the House bill.
• The House bill is here.
• The House bill is here.
• Please read the House bill. Committee Substitute for House Bill 915.
• Please read the House bill. Committee substitute for House Bill 915.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Summary: The Senate convened with opening prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance led by pages, and several guest recognitions before moving to the special order calendar. The chamber first took up a series of claims and relief bills, including SB 6 for L.E. against DCF, SB 26 for the estate of Mark Legata, and later other measures such as child welfare, public records, and professional licensing bills. Most of these bills were explained by sponsors as targeted fixes or relief measures, and several were substituted with identical House bills before final passage. Votes were overwhelmingly favorable on these items, including unanimous or near-unanimous approvals on the claims bills and education-related measures. A major floor debate centered on CS/CS/SB 354, the Blue Ribbon Projects bill, which would create a new framework for large-scale planned developments on at least 15,000 acres with substantial conservation set-asides. Supporters argued it would provide a structured path for long-term growth and development, while opponents from both parties warned it was too vague, could undermine local control, and lacked enough specificity on conservation, infrastructure, and land-use protections. After extensive debate, the bill was temporarily postponed rather than brought to a final vote. The Senate also passed SB 21 on land-use regulations tied to hurricane recovery, SB 530 on lottery operations, SB 556 on Special Olympics as a PE substitute for students with disabilities, SB 688 on naturopathic medicine, SB 758 on the Justice Administrative Commission, SB 830 creating public-records exemptions for certain local officials and their families, SB 878 on clinical laboratory personnel, SB 914 on dry needling by occupational therapists, and SB 1002 on child welfare and parental drug abuse. Another lengthy and contentious discussion involved CS/CS/SB 1632 on ideologies inconsistent with American principles, which included provisions on foreign law, domestic terrorist designations, and restrictions on public support for designated organizations. Senators debated an amendment to remove references to Sharia law; that amendment failed. A second amendment with broader revisions and notice procedures was then taken up, with questions focused on notice, appeal rights, and the designation process. The transcript ends during that amendment discussion, before final disposition is shown. Throughout the session, many bills were substituted with identical House companions and then passed by recorded vote, often with strong bipartisan support.

Transcript Highlights:

• House members? Senator Polsky? Senator Rodriguez?
• And that's really what's at issue on that unit. The next unit is the security services unit.
• And that's really what's at issue on that unit.
• The next unit is the security services unit, that's correctional officers and correctional probation
• The next unit is a law enforcement unit that's sworn law enforcement officers across several agencies

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Summary: The Joint Select Committee on Collective Bargaining met to hear informational presentations on several state employee bargaining units at impasse. The Department of Management Services outlined the status of negotiations for FDLE special agents, correctional/security services, sworn law enforcement officers, Florida Highway Patrol troopers, and Florida State Fire Service employees. In each case, most contract articles had been resolved, but key disputes remained over wages and several non-economic provisions such as hours of work, grievance language, safety, grooming, seniority, equipment, travel, and on-call pay. DMS emphasized that the state had offered competitive pay increases, special pay, recruitment/retention funds in some units, and that insurance costs would remain unchanged for employees. Representatives for the Florida State Fire Service Association argued that the state was requiring firefighters to perform work far outside their job descriptions, including major construction and renovation, and that wildland firefighters were being undercompensated for long hours, on-call duty, and callback work. They also pressed for higher wages, an incentive-based pay plan, additional compensation for firefighter-EMTs, more protective clothing, and stronger decontamination and cancer-prevention measures. The Police Benevolent Association’s Florida Highway Patrol unit sought a larger career development plan, veteran stipends, broader grooming/tattoo allowances, improved vehicle safety, and more pay, while the law enforcement unit raised concerns about vehicle safety, performance evaluation quotas, and a $7,000 across-the-board raise. The security services unit representing correctional officers, probation officers, and ISS officers focused on a substantial wage increase, retention pay, special pay for death row and close management assignments, and overtime treatment for lieutenants and captains. Committee members asked only a few clarifying questions, including whether correctional officers receive overtime, which DMS confirmed they do. No votes were taken and no formal action was scheduled; the meeting was expressly for information only. The committee thanked the presenters, noted that the materials and testimony would be taken under advisement, and adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• totals into support units.
• And so that's where the support units are going to play in, because how many support units I have as
• “Is tied to those units and variables tied to other statutory formulas unrelated to support units still
• I'm not aware of the housing comment, but I do know that going back to housing issues, that that is a
• Just to clarify, I wasn't referring to teacher housing. I was referring to student housing.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation on the K-12 public school support budget, including how support units, career ladder funding, health insurance, discretionary funding, transportation, facilities, and the Public Education Stabilization Fund (PSIF) work. Legislative Services explained that FY 2026 support units were revised downward, creating a $22.3 million ongoing general fund reduction, and walked through the FY 2027 agency request and governor’s recommendation. The governor recommended no increase for population forecast adjustments, but did recommend some statutory and policy changes, including shifting certain interest earnings to the general fund and reducing funding for some virtual school and IDLA-related items. The agency request also included one-time proposals for a high-needs special education fund and a regional service model for related services. Members asked extensive questions about how career ladder dollars are distributed, how health insurance and discretionary funds interact, why the health insurance increase in the budget differed from current plan estimates, and how facilities money under House Bill 292 is used. There were also questions about the size and use of the Idaho Career Ready Students fund, the maintenance-of-effort implications of special education funding, and whether some special education costs are being used for student housing or other noninstructional expenses. The superintendent and budget staff emphasized that many of the budget lines are formula-driven or statutorily required, that local districts determine actual staffing and spending within those formulas, and that special education costs continue to outpace available funding. Superintendent Debbie Critchfield then framed the budget request around enrollment trends, shifting demographics, and the need for more flexibility in how districts use existing dollars. She highlighted proposed categorical flexibility for some funds, changes to digital content and curriculum distribution, continued literacy gains, growth in career technical education programs funded through Idaho Career Ready Students, and the importance of endowment and Millennium Fund support. She also described the special education proposals as a temporary bridge while the state considers larger formula changes and noted a near $100 million gap between special education spending and funding. She further outlined planned federal waiver requests on assessments and flexibility, and said the department is seeking more state control over testing and reporting requirements. The committee did not take final action on the budget during this portion of the meeting. Members raised concerns about interest transfers from dedicated funds, the complexity of the funding formula, special education accountability, and whether the state should revisit the overall school funding model. Several follow-up data requests were made, including information on health insurance participation, regional special education service needs, and school contingency fund balances.

Transcript Highlights:

• The last In the lots that are developed, you'll lose units.
• A lot of them tend to worry that they won't be able to rent units or sell units above the third floor
• , so, you know, they can won't be able to rent units or sell units above the third floor.
• It doesn't direct L&I to ...won't be able to rent units or sell units above the third floor.
• For these reasons, NEI requests that members of the House Housing Committee support the removal of Section

Summary: The committee heard three housing-related bills. SB 5937 would regulate smart access systems in rental housing by requiring landlords, on tenant request, to provide non-biometric and non-app-based alternatives such as physical keys, key fobs, or key cards, and by adding privacy-policy and data-minimization requirements for smart access systems. The bill’s sponsor and a tenant testified in support, describing concerns about app-based entry systems tracking movement and collecting personal data. The Washington Multifamily Housing Association testified neutral, saying the bill had been improved through stakeholder work and amendments that allowed privacy-policy links and delayed implementation until January 1, 2027. The hearing on the bill was closed with no vote taken. The committee then heard ESSB 5156, which directs the State Building Code Council to allow smaller elevators in apartment buildings up to six stories and 24 units and creates a technical advisory group to review certain elevator safety requirements. The sponsor and several supporters argued the bill would reduce elevator costs, improve feasibility for small multifamily and middle-housing projects, and increase accessibility and age-friendly housing. The National Elevator Industry opposed the bill’s harmonization language in Section 2, paragraph 2, warning it could create ambiguity, multiple standards, and litigation, but said it would be neutral if that language were removed. Other industry and housing advocates supported the measure as a way to lower costs and expand housing supply. No action was taken during the hearing. Finally, the committee heard SB 6237, which would require landlords to disclose flood risk information to tenants for leases entered into after December 31, 2026. The disclosure would note whether a property may be in a flood hazard area, where tenants can find county flood information, and that the landlord’s insurance does not cover tenants’ belongings. The Washington Multifamily Housing Association testified neutral, saying the bill had been narrowed to a more manageable disclosure and that removing a requirement to recommend flood insurance addressed concerns about landlords acting as insurance advisers. The hearing concluded without a vote, and the chair announced the committee would meet again the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• units of Housing and create over 2,000 units of Housing and again<00:19:23.320><c> as</c><00:19:23.480
• I</c> should be housing units created as I should be housing units created as I said<00:31:01.720><c
• I'd like to see the uses narrowed to conversions that are going to yield housing units.
• Those affordable housing units where we're so short.
• </c> than 100,000 housing units which I know than 100,000 housing units which I know you've<01:14:33.920

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:27:16.480><c> 10-year</c> 1,200 units of housing in a 10-year 1,200 units of housing in a 10-year
• Approximately a 100,000 housing units are needed to meet our current demand.
• Approximately a 100,000 housing units are needed to meet our current demand.
• So, how... what... how mediocre of a house... Not building, but one unit.
• I I do for more housing units. I I do appreciate<01:37:50.400><c> it.

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's because our housing units are housing fewer people.
• So obviously, we need more units to house the same number of people.
• And though we all need that, we know that we need to increase housing units.
• We know that we need to increase housing units.
• housing unit someone can build or buy.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 211, which would appropriate $5 million for the Las Vegas Rodriguez Park. Senator Campos said the money would help continue upgrades to baseball, softball, and little league fields and address fencing, flooding, and other park improvements as part of a larger regional park plan. There was no public opposition, and the bill received a unanimous do pass recommendation, 7-0. The committee then took up Senate Bill 131, a broad housing and zoning reform measure sponsored by Senator Maestas. The bill would allow more housing types by right, including accessory dwelling units, duplexes, townhomes, apartments in commercial zones, small-scale commercial uses in neighborhoods, and would eliminate minimum parking mandates; an amendment to remove height restrictions was adopted unanimously. Supporters, including Pew, housing advocates, chambers of commerce, builders, and some local officials, argued the bill would increase supply, lower costs, and modernize outdated zoning. Opponents, including the Realtors, Municipal League, neighborhood representatives, and several senators, argued it would preempt local control, ignore community differences, and could create infrastructure and neighborhood impacts. After extended debate, the committee tabled SB 131 by a recorded vote. Senate Bill 183 was next, proposing a feasibility study for a regional urgent care or emergency facility in Torrance County. The sponsor and local officials described long ambulance transports, heavy use of I-40, and the need for quicker access to care for rural residents and travelers. The bill drew support from a former hospital administrator and no opposition, and it passed 9-1. The committee then considered Senate Bill 222, which would appropriate $20 million for physician residency programs outside the federal system to help retain doctors in New Mexico. The sponsor and supporters said the state loses many medical graduates because of limited residency slots, while one witness urged accountability for large hospital systems. Some senators questioned the premise and feasibility, but the bill advanced on a 6-4 do pass vote to Finance.

Transcript Highlights:

• It has unlocked nearly 5,000 units of affordable housing.
• We are into preserving 30,000 precious public housing units.
• The multifamily housing program in 2025 created 769 units at a cost of $300,000 per unit.
• The mixed how the multi-family housing program in 2025 created 769 units at a cost of 300,000 per unit
• We have built and developed over 7,000 units of affordable housing.

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard two housing-related trailer bill items tied to the Governor’s reorganization plan. The first item would codify the creation of a new Housing and Homelessness Agency and a Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency structure; the second would further streamline the state housing finance system by creating a Housing Development and Finance Committee and reserving most private activity bond capacity for affordable housing. Administration officials said the changes are intended to reduce duplication, speed awards to construction, and make housing funding more predictable and efficient. Agency leaders described recent housing investments and implementation steps, including work groups, coordination with Finance, the Controller, and the Treasurer’s Office, and development of new guidelines and staffing. Members raised concerns about limited funding, the need for better program-by-program outcome data, youth homelessness, excess sites, and fraud prevention. The Interagency Council on Homelessness presented new three-year action plan metrics, including goals to increase exits from unsheltered homelessness to 70% and move more people into permanent housing, while also noting current performance data and quarterly public reporting. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said it had no concerns with the first trailer bill, but supported the general concept of the second while recommending changes, including removing or revising the proposed 50% bond-cap floor for the new committee and adding attention to 9% and state tax credits. Public commenters, including local governments, nonprofit developers, housing authorities, and advocacy groups, largely supported the reorganization and streamlining goals, but several urged stronger protections for deeply affordable housing, earlier reallocation of unused bond authority, continued access to 9% credits, and more funding for housing programs. No votes were taken in the portion provided; the chair closed item one and moved to item two after member and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• You should know what the average cost per unit is that the Arizona Department of Housing is playing a
• units built.
• units built.
• But So you're... ultimately limiting the number or quality of housing units built.
• Arizona continues to face a severe affordable housing shortage with a deficit of over 93,000 units.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Director Nominations met to consider Ruby Dylan Williams for Director of the Arizona Department of Housing. Williams described her long career at the department, her work on operational improvements, housing development, manufactured housing, and efforts to expand supply, preserve existing housing, and improve transparency through data and technology. She also said she would work with the legislature, local governments, tribal nations, nonprofits, and private partners, and emphasized the department’s role in addressing housing affordability and homelessness across the housing continuum. Members questioned her about the department’s response to Auditor General findings, including fraud prevention, payment verification, site inspections, and oversight of grantees. Williams said the department had rewritten policies, retrained staff, added stronger controls, and implemented verbal verification steps for wire transfers after a fraud incident. Senators also pressed her on budget priorities, possible cuts, and her view of homelessness policy, with some members characterizing her approach as closer to shelter or transitional housing before permanent placement. Williams said interventions should be individualized and that the department works with local jurisdictions and service providers to match people with appropriate support. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive. Developers, housing industry representatives, and nonprofit partners praised Williams’ private-sector housing finance experience, her knowledge of LIHTC and the QAP process, and her leadership in making the agency more efficient and business-friendly. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to recommend her confirmation to the full Senate. Two members voted no, citing concerns about her answers on fraud oversight, cost controls, and homelessness policy, while the majority supported advancing her nomination.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are an owner-developer, and we have a portfolio of about 700 units of affordable workforce housing
• The bill still allows communities to have up to 1.5 spaces per unit for workforce housing or one parking
• The bill still allows communities to have up to 1.5 spaces per unit for workforce housing or one parking
• The bill still allows communities to have up to 1.5 spaces per unit for workforce housing or one parking
• </c><01:32:55.840><c> or</c><01:32:56.119><c> one</c> unit uh for Workforce housing or one unit uh for

Committee: Senate Commerce

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we knew that the problem wasn't just too few housing units.
• Over new units of low-income housing.
• </c><00:28:45.200><c> units</c> tracking over 62,000 housing units tracking over 62,000 housing units
• ><c> more</c> 3,000 housing units while building more 3,000 housing units while building more than<00
• > units</c><00:48:48.559><c> and</c> than 12,200 temporary housing units and than 12,200 temporary housing

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The House bill is here.
• Please read the House bill. House Bill 61.
• Please read the House bill. Committee substitute for House Bill... House bill is here.
• Please read the House bill. Committee substitute for House Bill.
• The way that the House bill currently is... ...favor of certifying the bargaining unit.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• different living units, six different lives.
• When we're putting six different dwelling units, six different living units, family units, whatever they
• might be, there's a different risk category than if it's just your own single unit, your dwelling unit
• in housing.
• So it's 2381 because we had middle housing, which was getting confused with the middle housing as defined

Summary: The committee held its first official work session with member and staff introductions, then received an update from the State Building Code Council on the current three-year code cycle and several legislatively directed code changes. Council staff said the council is moving toward CR-102 rulemaking and final adoption in the spring, with legislative mandates nearing completion on minimum dwelling unit size, emergency shelters, single-exit stairs for buildings up to six stories and 24 units, and sixplexes in the residential code. Members asked about how technical advisory groups are selected, and staff explained that the council advertises seats, reviews applications and recommendations, and approves members in public meetings, typically including firefighters, engineers, architects, and other subject-matter experts. A major portion of the meeting focused on the single-stair and sixplex work and on how fire safety, egress, and local service levels are being considered. Council representatives said the single-stair proposal includes emergency escape and rescue openings on all levels and is intended to provide more options for safe egress while reducing building footprint and cost. They emphasized that the recommendations are still entering the public rulemaking process and that cost-benefit considerations were part of the legislative intent. Members also raised questions about whether self-rescue devices or other builder options could be codified, and council staff said such ideas are considered through the advisory process, though not all become required code provisions. The second half of the session covered performance-based codes, prompted by a bill referred to as HB 2381. Todd Byrd explained the difference between prescriptive codes, which specify exact solutions, and performance-based codes, which set outcomes and allow designers and manufacturers more flexibility in how to meet them. He described the bill as a narrow proposal for low-rise residential buildings up to 24 units and under the high-rise threshold, with third-party or state certification and local jurisdiction approval still required. He cited international examples, especially Japan and Sweden, where performance-based approaches supported innovation and prefabrication, and said such systems can lower costs while maintaining safety. Members discussed seismic safety, builder participation, embodied carbon, and energy-code interactions, and council staff said the proposal could help align material, energy, and design optimization without changing the existing energy code. The committee took no vote and adjourned after the informational presentation and discussion.