Bills: HF2740, HF2901, HF4443, HF3943

Keywords: affordable housing, housing finance, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, MHFA, low-income housing tax credit, LIHTC, Section 42, compliance period, housing stability, rental housing, affordable rental housing, homelessness, housing insecurity, housing supply, preservation, recapitalization, distressed properties, regulatory relief, local affordable housing aid, Interagency Council to End Homelessness

Transcript Highlights:

• Our critique of the state-based LIHTC program is nothing new for us.
• Our critique of the state-based LIHTC program is nothing new for us.
• Our critique of the state-based LIHTC program is nothing new for us.
• The LIHTC model creates a secondary market to monetize tax credits.
• The LIHTC program never has been perfect... It can be a blend.

Bills: HB2388, HB2804, HB2926

Keywords: HB2388, Arizona Commerce Authority, ACA, small modular reactor, SMR, nuclear energy, advanced nuclear, data center, data centers, economic development, study, appropriation, general fund, jobs, wages, tax revenue, broadband, infrastructure, secondary businesses, tertiary businesses

Summary: The committee began with short presentations highlighting historic sites in Prescott, including the Arizona Pioneer Home and the First Territorial Governor’s Mansion/Charlotte Hall Museum, framed as ways to showcase rural districts and Arizona history. Members discussed the importance of using committee time to feature district-specific projects and tourism assets before moving to legislation. The main action was on HB 2804, a bill creating a state rural development and housing tax credit tied to the federal low-income housing tax credit for projects in counties under 800,000 population. Supporters, including the sponsor, the mayor of Flagstaff, housing developers, and other local officials, argued the credit would help finance affordable housing for seniors, veterans, and low-income residents in rural areas where projects are otherwise not feasible. Opponents, including the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, argued the program is inefficient, difficult to police, and disproportionately benefits intermediaries and developers. After extended questioning and debate about whether the bill truly helps veterans and seniors, the committee passed HB 2804 on a 7-0 vote. The committee then heard HB 2388, which directs the Arizona Commerce Authority to study the economic benefits of small modular reactors and data centers and report findings to the governor and legislature. The sponsor described it as a data-gathering measure to inform future policy, while supporters said it could help assess energy and job impacts, especially for Hispanic workers. One member suggested adding information on utility-rate impacts and waste/storage issues through amendment. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, Senator, so LIHTC is the low-income housing tax credit.
• Our low-income housing, our LIHTC solutions have not made housing more affordable, right?
• Off the top of my head, I'm trying to remember... ...three resources to the federal LIHTC program.
• And I know LIHTC is not the only program you administer, but it's an incredibly important one.
• side. ...the work that the agency is doing when it comes to the LIHTC side.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met to consider Ruby Dylan Williams for Director of the Arizona Department of Housing. Chair Jay Kaufman opened with remarks about the committee’s role in scrutinizing nominees’ commitment to faithfully executing state law. Williams, who has served in housing roles since 2020 and as interim director since March 2025, described her background in both public service and the private sector and said her priorities would be expanding housing supply, preserving housing stability, and improving technology-driven operations and transparency. Members questioned Williams extensively about department oversight, fraud prevention, auditor general findings, homelessness policy, budget priorities, and the cost of affordable housing programs. She said the department had strengthened internal controls, added verbal verification steps for wire transfers, increased site inspections and grantee monitoring, and was tracking 68 performance metrics. She also defended the use of LIHTC and other federal housing programs as key public-private tools, said the department was working on a real-time homelessness data system, and explained that if state funding were cut, staffing would likely be reduced before core programs. Several members pressed her on past fraud and audit findings and on whether the department had been sufficiently proactive in preventing them. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive. Developers and industry representatives praised Williams’ experience, her knowledge of housing finance, and her role in streamlining the qualified allocation plan and improving the department’s responsiveness. They argued that her leadership has helped attract investment and increase housing production in Arizona. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to recommend Williams’ confirmation to the full Senate, with Senators Kavanagh and Shope voting no and Senators Bravo and Ortiz voting yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• the lihtc the lihtc credit<00:44:50.599> so<00:44:50.880> yeah<00:44:51.040> I'm
• But they can still be allocated the credit for development through the state LIHTC program through a
• But they can still be allocated the credit for development through the state LIHTC program through a
• LIHTC and RRF are a critical source of funding to ensure that these projects can pencil.
• LIHTC and RRF are a critical source of funding to ensure that these projects can pencil.

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:

• HB 2804 because this bill creates a state affordable housing tax credit that pairs with the federal LIHTC
• I just wanted to share three very quick and very powerful examples of what the state LIHTC has done in
• We saw this during the 2016 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, when the LIHTC lobby fought to protect the value of
• HB 2804 does not fix... ...inflation in Seattle and Phoenix LIHTC projects.
• Fraud in the LIHTC program? Mr.

Bills: HB2352, HB2388, HB2418, HB2499, HB2500, HB2579, HB2584, HB2804

Keywords: funding, auditor general, county treasurer, procedural reviews, state appropriations, HB2388, Arizona Commerce Authority, ACA, small modular reactor, SMR, nuclear energy, advanced nuclear, data center, data centers, economic development, study, appropriation, general fund, jobs, wages

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2584, which would prohibit public funds from being used for genetic sequencing equipment made by companies owned or controlled by entities domiciled in a foreign adversary. The sponsor said the bill is intended to prevent sensitive genetic data from being sold or used against the United States. There was little public testimony, and the committee approved the bill on a 13-5 vote for a do pass recommendation. Members then considered HB 2804, a rural development and housing tax credit bill that would let the Department of Housing allocate up to $2 million per year in credits for qualifying rural affordable housing projects, with the program set to expire in 2037. Supporters, including the sponsor, the mayor of Flagstaff, and housing investors and developers, said the credit would leverage federal LIHTC dollars, attract private capital, and help finance affordable housing for seniors, veterans, and low-income residents in rural Arizona. Opponents from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club argued state LIHTC programs are inefficient, costly, and hard to oversee. The committee passed the bill 13-4. The committee also heard HB 2388, as amended, which appropriates $100,000 to the Arizona Commerce Authority to study the economic benefits of small modular reactors and data centers, with a report due by June 30, 2027. Supporters said the study could help Arizona plan for future energy and data-center growth, while opponents argued the agency already has other funding sources and should not receive additional money for the study. The amended bill passed 10-7. After a presentation from Auditor General Lindsay Perry on county treasurer procedural reviews and the Santa Cruz County embezzlement case, the committee approved HB 2352, which provides $2,385,900 in FY 2029 for the Auditor General to continue county treasurer reviews, on an 11-7 vote. The committee then unanimously approved HB 2418, as amended, which directs $600,000 to be evenly distributed among five major incident task force counties and codifies the longstanding distribution practice. Finally, the committee took up HB 2499, the first of two ESA administration bills, which would appropriate $2.6 million and 12 FTEs to the Department of Education for ESA administration and oversight beginning in FY 2027; the bill drew extended debate about ESA growth, accountability, testing, and spending oversight, but the transcript cuts off before the final vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we looked at LIHTC projects, so these projects are funded by low-income housing tax credits, and
• We looked at LIHTC projects, so these projects are funded by low-income housing tax credits.
• But what I would say to you, the problem is love it or hate it, the LIHTC system is the baby, not the
• With LIHTC, for example, the more expensive it is, the more LIHTC you get.
• I think it was great to hear people talk about LIHTC.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• “Yeah, okay, that’s LIHTC, right? Does this apply to LIHTC?” “Right, it does not.” “That’s LIHTC.
• Does this apply to LIHTC?” “Right, it does. Or does not?” “It does. Right.
• We’ve just confirmed that this bill does not apply to LIHTC.” “Right. Right, that’s right.
• But Senator Hosea, Senator Menna does not apply to LIHTC. Thank you. That’s good news.
• But if LIHTC is out of here, I’m total green light to get this bill to the governor.

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, approved the previous day’s journal, and received a House message announcing passage of HB 4 on public school accountability and assessment. The chamber also recognized the Doctor of the Day, adopted SR 520 honoring Rosser Coke-Newton Sr. for his biography of former Governor Richard Coke, and adopted SR 518 recognizing Texas Moral Injury Awareness Day, with remarks focused on the impact of moral injury on veterans and first responders. The Senate later adopted SR 395 honoring the ninth class of Governor William P. Clements, Jr. Scholars, and several other resolutions were adopted by voice vote, including college savings awareness recognition and other member-sponsored recognitions. The body then took up several bills and resolutions on the floor. HB 3307, allowing online continuing education for arbitrators in property tax appeals, passed unanimously after suspension of the rules and the three-day rule. HB 913, renaming and reorganizing certain state hospitals, and HB 2970, governing the Gulf Coast Protection District and coastal barrier design, also passed unanimously. HJR 1 and HB 9 advanced a proposed constitutional amendment and statutory change to raise the business personal property tax exemption from $2,500 to $125,000; both measures passed, with HJR 1 receiving one no vote and HB 9 passing unanimously after a clarifying amendment. The Senate also passed HB 1151, which limits child removals and termination of parental rights based solely on parental medical treatment decisions, and HB 116, which revises grounds for involuntary termination of the parent-child relationship by removing the “O grounds” and requiring support from financially able parents whose rights were terminated. HB 1899 lowered the age for pyrotechnic operator licenses and fireworks display permits from 21 to 18. SB 1285, as amended, passed to protect bats by prohibiting entombment while preserving removal options from unoccupied spaces, and SB 2847 passed to promote innovations in core curriculum for faster bachelor’s degrees. On criminal justice, SJR 87, a proposed constitutional amendment requiring denial of bail for certain repeat violent felony offenders, passed after two floor amendments clarifying due process and representation language; Senator Eckhardt spoke against it on final passage, arguing it lacked judicial discretion and a clear-and-convincing standard. SB 3073, requiring magistrates to make written findings in certain criminal proceedings, also passed. Later, SB 128, requiring hospitals to report suspected child abuse-related information to HHSC, advanced on a divided vote, and SB 2619 and SB 2972 passed on public school accountability and expressive activities at public colleges, respectively, with Senator Eckhardt opposing SB 2972 as too restrictive on campus protest rights. The chamber also heard extended debate on HB 21, targeting “traveling” housing finance corporations and their use of tax exemptions for apartment projects, with supporters arguing it curbs abuse of the tax code and critics warning about unintended effects on affordable housing; the discussion continued with questions but no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And these bonds are critical for all 4% LIHTC-financed housing. Yes.
• Uh, per federal law, all 4% LIHTC projects must have funded 25% by bonds.
• All new LIHTC construction. Yes. Except for 9% LIHTC. Okay.
• LIHTC projects.
• I think you're asking how does the state LIHTC incentivize development of housing? Is that your...

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees heard testimony on five housing-related measures. SB 2232 would create a three-year tiny home grant pilot program within HHFDC, with annual reporting to HHFDC and the Legislature; testimony was mixed, and the bill was later recommended for passage with amendments, including a full-time housing development specialist, a residential-use-only restriction for the tiny homes, and a blanked appropriation. SB 2192 would bar county down-zoning that reduces housing capacity unless equivalent capacity is added elsewhere in the county; it drew support from housing advocates and comments from planning officials, and was also recommended for passage with amendments. SB 2378 would clarify insurance requirements for single- and multifamily projects seeking expedited county permitting; engineers and housing groups supported it, while one testifier opposed it, and it was recommended for passage with a technical amendment. SB 2524 would appropriate funds to the City and County of Honolulu for housing-related departments to comply with prior acts; the Honolulu department supported it, and members asked about prior spending and funding sources. SB 2398 would require residential housing utility availability maps; the Honolulu Board of Water Supply opposed the bill as written, citing infrastructure security, accuracy, liability, and administrative burden concerns, while supporters said it would improve transparency for developers. The chair proposed amendments to make the maps broad and geographic rather than parcel-specific, remove contested-case and reliance provisions, allow disclaimer language, and change the date; the bill was then recommended for passage with amendments, with one member noting reservations. All five measures were ultimately passed out of committee with amendments, with votes recorded and some members excused.

Bills: HB293, HB 1173, HB3753, HB4999, HB5696, SB2145, HB5689, HB5690, HB5694, HB5698, HB293

Keywords: HB 293, Texas housing tax credits, low-income housing, affordable housing, private activity bonds, PAB, qualified allocation plan, TDHCA, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, state representative objection, housing development approval, municipal notice, county commissioners court, extraterritorial jurisdiction, LIHTC, bond-financed housing, homelessness, housing services, Texas Department of Housing, municipal programs

Transcript Highlights:

• As a reminder, the Senate version also added a new exemption for certain LIHTC, or federal low-income
• it also includes the new exemption added by the Senate version for tenancies in certain qualified LIHTC
• The Senate version for tenancies in certain qualified LIHTC properties.

Summary: The conference committee met on engrossed House Bill 1217 and received a staff briefing on the proposed conference striking amendment S-3395.2. Staff explained that the amendment would set rent increase limits under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act at 7% plus CPI or 10%, whichever is less, retain and modify various exemptions, update notice requirements, add a July 1, 2040 expiration date, and require the Department of Commerce to create an online landlord resource center. For manufactured/mobile home tenancies, the amendment would limit rent increases to 5% in any 12-month period, adjust exemptions and notice provisions, and align enforcement language with the RLTA changes. The amendment also removes certain miscellaneous provisions from the Senate version, including a social vulnerability assessment and a JLARC review requirement. Representative Lowe raised a procedural point of order about whether the landlord resource center could be added in conference, but the chair ruled the point not well taken under Joint Rule 18. Senator Gainer asked for clarification about the landlord resource center and the referenced RCW 43.31.605; staff explained it would direct landlords to existing Commerce resources, including the landlord mitigation program and related subprograms, and noted that the resource center language was originally in the House bill. A motion was made to reject prior amendments, adopt striking amendment S-3395.2, and give the bill a do pass recommendation. Senator Gainer and Representative Lowe spoke in opposition, citing concerns about the bill’s balance, the landlord provisions, and the speed of the process. The committee then voted 4-2 to recommend the conference committee report, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This current version of the bill allows for the transferability of LIHTC credits and extends the state
• LIHTC credit to 2032.
• This current version of the bill allows for the transferability of LIHTC credits and extends the state
• LIHTC credit to 2032.

Bills: SB2876, SB3253, SB2125, SB2781, HB549, HB1768, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB2140, SB2544, SB2069, SB2697, SB874, SB2043, SB888, SB2721, HB2152, HB1334, HB2385, HB1643, HB2314, HB1688, HB1692, SB2568, SB2983, SB2108, SB3136, HB1959, SB3156, HB1511, HB1753, HB1824, HB2137, HB1810, HB2279, HB2309, HB1548, HB2078, HB2293, SB3262, SB2169, SB2607, SB2964, SB3255, HB2576, HB1481, HB1864, HB1550, SB2818, SB3067, SB2061, HB1728, HB1881, HB2361, HB2395, HB1823, SB2050, SB2397, SB2175, SB2852, SB847, SB3001

Keywords: natural hair braiding, hair braiding, braids, braider, braiding license, cosmetology, barbering, barber board, Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, registration, licensure exemption, sanitation training, health and safety, hair extensions, cornrows, twists, locks, protective hairstyles, beauty industry, occupational licensing

Transcript Highlights:

• On a 4% LIHTC, that would represent about 40% of the cost.
• units of 50 to 60% AMI rentals, or 358 units per year, which is almost exclusively what comprises LIHTC
• HHFDC is currently financing well over 1,000 LIHTC units per year due to such dramatic overbuilding of
• HHFDC is currently financing well over 1,000 LIHTC units per year due to such dramatic overbuilding of
• Over 30% of LIHTC units are being rented by tenants at 30% AMI who are severely cost burdened.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a series of housing measures focused on streamlining approvals, reshaping financing programs, and expanding affordability requirements. SB 27 would exempt state-financed housing developments from County Council approval; SB 38 would bar county legislative bodies from changing housing proposals in ways that increase project costs; SB 25 would let counties reduce housing capacity in one area only if they offset it elsewhere with no net loss; and SB 379 would require perpetual affordability covenants for HHFDC projects and prohibit affordable housing in special flood hazard areas. SB 378 would create an HHFDC working group to identify mixed-use Maui properties for possible acquisition, SB 414 would authorize condemnation proceedings for a new Lānaʻi access road tied to disaster recovery, and SB 13 would eliminate the state income tax mortgage interest deduction for second homes. Testimony was mixed across the bills, with state agencies and housing advocates generally supporting faster permitting and more production, while county planners, NAIOP, Catholic Charities, and others raised concerns about local control, marketability, financing feasibility, and long-term affordability enforcement. A major portion of the hearing centered on the rental housing revolving fund. SB 70 would limit eligible applicants to government agencies or organizations that reinvest all surplus into additional housing; HHFDC said most developers would not object in principle but questioned how the surplus requirement would be enforced, while NAIOP and Catholic Charities opposed it as too restrictive and difficult to monitor. SB 71 would amend the fund’s preference criteria and eligibility rules, and SB 163 would require HHFDC to prioritize projects with the shortest repayment terms and highest unit production per dollar per year. HHFDC and some advocates supported the goal of faster recycling of funds, but NAIOP and Catholic Charities warned that shorter loan terms and narrowed preferences could burden developers and disincentivize projects, especially for lower-income tenants. The chair indicated SB 163 would be deferred and its concerns folded into amendments to SB 71. In decision-making, the committee voted to pass SB 27, SB 38, SB 70, and SB 71 with amendments, and SB 25 unamended. The chair said SB 27 would be amended to include projects with a state financing commitment and a report note that such projects still undergo 21-38 review; SB 38 would receive technical changes and language preventing county bodies from imposing cost-increasing conditions; SB 70 would add language addressing enforcement of the surplus requirement and a preamble citing the need to recycle taxpayer-financed housing value; and SB 71 would be amended to incorporate concerns raised in SB 163, including a broader preamble and revised priority criteria. SB 163 was deferred, while the other measures on the agenda were heard but no final action was described in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, okay, that's LIHTC. Right. Does this apply to LIHTC? Right. It does or does not?
• That's why we have Senate Bill 867, and we'll send that to the House, because that LIHTC...
• Okay, so we're working on LIHTC absolutely. Okay, and I think we need to make sure we do that.
• LIHTC, but we'll still take any other, you know, issues on 867 if that's what we need to do.
• Okay, and with LIHTC out of this bill ... Okay, and this simplifies the equation dramatically.

Bills: HJR1, HB9, HB21, HB26, HB30, HB37, HB116, HB630, HB879, HB913, HB1151, HB1318, HB1593, HB1899, HB2703, HB2809, HB2890, HB2970, HB3307, HB3526, HB5092, SB128, SB203, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB644, SB731, SB801, SB913, SB1071, SB1073, SB1086, SB1087, SB1232, SB1250, SB1262, SB1285, SB1310, SB1359, SB1444, SB1483, SB1705, SB1782, SB1861, SB1897, SB1944, SB2023, SB2043, SB2082, SB2133, SB2215, SB2297, SB2298, SB2309, SB2532, SB2549, SB2566, SB2617, SB2619, SB2639, SB2688, SB2696, SB2717, SB2790, SB2841, SB2847, SB2850, SB2857, SB2891, SB2919, SB2928, SB2972, SB3052, SB3053, SB1, SB260, SB1506, SB1637, HB37, HB109, HB334, HB1130, HB1238, HB1327, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB1689, HB2081, HB2809, HB2884, HB2890, HB4215, HB5092, HCR7, HCR75, HCR86, HCR92, HCR93, HCR126, SB644, SB1086, SB1230, SB1310, SB1361, SB1553, SB1778, SB1790, SB2344, SB2460, SB2515, SB2600, SB2747, SB2751, SB2785, SB2790, SB3047, SB3048, SB3050, SB3051, SB3052, SB3053, SB3056, SB3058, SB3061, HJR1, HB1130, HB1689, HB2884, HB1393, HB2559, HB26, HB3012, HB1327, HB109, HB1238, HB2890, HB9, HB4215, HB2970, HB37, HB1899, HB1593, HB2607, HB3526, HB3810, HB5092, HB388, HB2809, HB1151, HB913, HB3307, HB879, HB116, HB12, HB2703, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB30, HB21, HB2712, HB2692, HB1633, HB1318, HB685, HB630, HB4753, HB2742, HB303, HB198, HB1535, HB762, HB148, HB1520, HB5061, HB2286, HB1606, HB1041, HB132, HB11, HCR7, HCR75, HCR86, HCR92, HCR93, HCR126, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB1310, SB2972, SB1073, SB2847, SB2532, SB2619, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB511, SB2309, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1359, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1285, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB2460, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB2994, SB2747, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB2857, SB128, SB3058, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3050, SB3063, SB3035, SB1790, SB1778, SB203, SB3061, SB2799, SB2790, SB2688, SB2515, SB1230, SB2522, SB2639, SB2459, SB3051, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2617, SB2751, SB2928, SB2566, SB1897, SB1749, SB1361, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1782, SB1705, SB2696, SB1944, SB2215, SB644, SB1232, SB2850, HB45, HB48, HB1261, HB1465, HB1778, HB2596, HB5238, HB33, HB1188, HB210, HB1022, HB1458, HB5560, HB1240, HB1950, HB2027, HB2768, HB2788, HB2791, HB3146, HB3698, HB3699, HB1893, HB3700, HB4850, HB4187, HB1397, HB4885, HB4804, HB3751, HB3611, HB2775, HB2061, HB2003, HB1729, HB1242, HB791, HB2029, HB647, HB2522, HB4738, HB3033, HB3594, HB3474, HB2563, HB2802, HCR90, SJR87, SB2969, SB3073, SB2497, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB781

Keywords: constitutional amendment, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, equipment exemption, machinery, local government finance, school district revenue, county taxes, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax relief, commercial property, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the rental housing revolving fund supports LIHTC projects, which are generally capped at 60%
• projects, revolving fund supports LIHTC projects, which which which are<00:15:33.079> generally
• A portion of the project will be a LIHTC project similar to what was there before.
• project<00:16:08.160> will<00:16:08.320> be<00:16:08.640> a<00:16:08.760> LIHTC
• A portion of the project will be a LIHTC A portion of the project will be a LIHTC project<00:16:

Bills: SB2069, SB2177, SB2342, SB2060, SB2544, SB3011, SB2061, SB2552

Keywords: SB2069, Hawaii housing, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, Dwelling Unit Revolving Fund, equity pilot program, housing affordability, homeownership, first-time homebuyer, for-sale housing, transit-oriented development, TOD, transit-oriented development zone, bus route, bus stop, critical workforce housing, health care workers, educators, law enforcement, correctional officers

Summary: The House Housing Committee opened its Friday morning hearing by noting potentially catastrophic flooding on the island and acknowledging that some members were absent helping their communities, so quorum for voting was uncertain. The committee then heard testimony on several housing-related measures, with most bills drawing support from housing agencies and community organizations and little or no opposition in the room. On SB 2069 SD2, SB 2177 SD2, and SB 2342 SD2, witnesses largely supported the measures. HHFDC supported SB 2069 and SB 2177, and HPHA supported SB 2342. For SB 2342, HHFDC raised concerns that the bill would alter the Qualified Allocation Plan outside the normal open, public process required by federal law and could exclude stakeholders; Kathy Charities echoed those concerns and also objected to changing point allocations in ways that could raise rents and weaken long-term affordability. Members questioned HHFDC about how the QAP is normally updated, the meaning of the point system, and whether a legislative working group could mandate changes; HHFDC said recommendations would still need public hearing and board approval. The committee also heard SB 2060 SD2, which would create a mixed-income subaccount in the rental housing revolving fund. HHFDC said the subaccount would likely use tier-two funds, estimated at about $100 million total, to support mixed-income projects above 60% AMI, citing Front Street Apartments as a possible example. Members asked about project selection and funding needs. On SB 2544 SD2, OHA opposed the bill’s Chapter 6E-related exemptions and mandatory review timelines, arguing that burial review protections should not be weakened and that the SPEED Task Force process was a better venue for streamlining. The sponsor later clarified that the bill was not meant to eliminate the 60-day review process but to make the deadline clearer. For SB 3011 SD1, which concerns public housing and pet ownership, HPHA and several humane organizations supported the measure, saying it would help low-income residents and seniors keep pets and benefit from animal companionship. HPHA explained its existing pet policy, including deposits, monthly fees, and restrictions, and said the requested funding would support ADA-accessible pet areas and related administration. Finally, on SB 2061 SD2, HCDA supported the bill while OHA opposed it unless protections for Hawaiian Crown and Government lands were strengthened. Committee members questioned the project’s 60/40 split between income-restricted and market-rate units, the 10-year owner-occupancy restriction, and the procurement exemption; the sponsor said the exemption was tied to a real estate transaction and that the project would still use 103D-like solicitation procedures. No votes were taken during the hearing, and several items were left for later action because quorum was uncertain.

Transcript Highlights:

• This program, which I believe is called LIHTC, the investors—and they're investors, Mr.
• I was going to show a picture of, um, there's lots of different LIHTC properties.
• The operating math for senior LIHTC does not work; the projects won't be viable.
• of a federal set, because LIHTC is a federal program?
• So depending upon what it is around LIHTC, the state does have some purview.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Bills: SB2060, SB2063, SB2062, SB2069, SB2070

Keywords: rental housing revolving fund, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, mixed-income housing, mixed-income rental project, affordable housing, low-income housing, housing finance, housing development, preservation, rehabilitation, pre-development, construction financing, equity investment, credit enhancement, collateral, gap financing, area median income, AMI, perpetual affordability

Summary: The committee heard five housing measures, with the chair announcing that SB 2060, SB 2063, SB 2062, and SB 2069 were works in progress and that decision-making would be deferred to February 3. SB 2060 would allow HHFDC, with Finance approval, to transfer money within the rental housing revolving fund and its subaccounts without further legislative authorization, including a transfer to the mixed-income subaccount for FY 2026-2027. HHFDC and other supporters said the change would give the agency more flexibility to move projects forward, while Catholic Charities Hawaii and a testifier from Roars and Cares supported the bill but warned that shifting money away from lower-income housing could weaken efforts to serve households under 80% of area median income and people at risk of homelessness. HHFDC said the fund’s uncommitted balance was about $100 million and that demand exceeded available resources. SB 2063 would revise the mixed-income subaccount by changing project priorities, adding new criteria, allowing transfers within the subaccount without legislative approval, and directing conveyance tax revenues into the subaccount. HHFDC, OPSD, LURF, Hawaii Appleseed, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Stanford Carr Development, and Roars and Cares supported the measure, while Catholic Charities urged the committee to keep rental and for-sale housing policy separate and to use other mechanisms for homeownership. Catholic Charities said the rental housing revolving fund should remain focused on rentals, and that for-sale initiatives should be addressed separately. The chair indicated an intent to defer the bill for further edits. SB 2062 would make the dwelling unit revolving fund equity pilot a permanent HHFDC program, allowing the agency to buy equity in for-sale developments to lower initial purchase prices and require repayment through shared appreciation. HHFDC said the pilot had been successful, with 83 units committed and $7.6 million of the $10 million program cap already committed, and said permanence would let the agency pair the program with DERF loans earlier in project financing. The chair said SB 2069 would be used as the vehicle for amendments to the DERF equity program and related changes. SB 2069 would authorize HHFDC to use existing dwelling unit revolving fund balances for the equity pilot; it drew support from HHFDC and several housing organizations. SB 2070 would create a permanently affordable for-sale housing program by replacing the current 10-year buyback restriction with a resale price cap tied to an appreciation index, which HHFDC said would preserve affordability while allowing owners to build equity. In questioning, senators pressed HHFDC on whether the bill was necessary, whether it would remove first-time homebuyer and other ownership restrictions, and whether the new program was truly “permanently affordable” if not tied to AMI. HHFDC said the current statutory restrictions limit flexibility, that the proposal would expand access to local residents, and that the price cap would be based on about 4.5% annual appreciation. Supporters said the approach would help buyers move up the housing ladder, while some senators expressed concern that it could open the program to owners of multiple properties and that the committee should see sales-velocity data on existing restricted units before proceeding.

Transcript Highlights:

• As its Qualified Allocation Plan, as required under the federal LIHTC program.
• This QAP determines the criteria that must be achieved for developments seeking to receive LIHTC funds
• It was essential to reverse the pattern of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments concentrating
• Forms like the two-mile rule have helped improve outcomes, but the overall LIHTC portfolio needs further

Bills: HB22, SB250, SB375, SB536, SB845, SB1633, SB1944, SB1957, SB2081, SB2137, SB2262, SB2299, SB2419, SB2452, SB2522, SB2549, SB2594, SB2605, SB2631, SB2639, SB2675, SB3029, SJR60, HB22, HB1392, HB2525

Keywords: emergency communication, broadband, funding, natural disasters, technology, HB 22, Texas broadband development office, comptroller, emergency communications, early warning systems, disaster alerts, natural disaster notifications, interoperable communications, interoperable emergency radio, public safety communications, 9-1-1, next generation 9-1-1, NG911, broadband grants, low-interest loans

Transcript Highlights:

• , is kind of a specific number of lots, like, for example, on our project. ...because you have the LIHTC
• So they need to then go in with an application, assuming they're going after LIHTC by February of next
• And the Bolo Drrome project is 100% LIHTC. >> No. Uh, that's 4%, what is a combo.
• one unit and they pass away, but the heir makes more than the percentage and doesn't qualify for a LIHTC
• And then that LIHTC with the option of purchase projects, so that purchase price is locked in from day

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Act 279 working group met for an informational briefing with DHHL on its use of the $600 million appropriation and progress on the department’s implementation plan. The chair reviewed the working group’s oversight role, noting that it was created to monitor expenditures, project development, and progress toward reducing the Hawaiian Homes waitlist, and that the group must submit a progress report before the 2026 session and a final report before the 2027 session. DHHL said it had provided an updated booklet reflecting the Hawaiian Homes Commission’s February 2024 recommendations and a detailed accounting of encumbrances and project progress across the islands. DHHL highlighted several implementation themes: innovative financing and construction methods, land acquisitions and exchanges, technology, beneficiary services, and partnerships with counties and private entities. The department described a “project lease” model that gives beneficiaries access to a project rather than a specific lot, with options such as turnkey homes, owner-builder, self-help, or rent-to-purchase arrangements depending on financial qualification. Officials said this approach is intended to serve lower-income beneficiaries, expand access for people on the waitlist, and allow beneficiaries to receive support services such as financial literacy and down payment assistance. The department reported that roughly $511 million had been encumbered for infrastructure, about $152.8 million for acquisitions, financing, and beneficiary services, and about $36 million in other covered costs, with about $588.9 million encumbered as of December 31 and about $120 million expected to be spent by that date. Officials said the original implementation plan covered about 2,722 units, while the updated plan projects roughly 6,000 to 7,000 leases and 2,472 lots to be occupied. They also described phase-two needs for additional funding, including projects on Hawaiʻi, Maui, Kauaʻi, and Oʻahu, and said they would need continued legislative support, including possible bonding and private activity bond set-asides, to complete remaining projects. Members discussed the distinction between encumbered and spent funds, and DHHL explained that encumbrances reserve money for specific contracts while construction spending occurs over time through progress payments. The department also showcased examples of innovative projects, including a high-rise project in urban Honolulu financed through a mix of private activity bonds, tax credits, and state funds, and an acquisition-based project in Kapaʻa, Kauaʻi using multiple funding sources. DHHL emphasized partnerships with the City and County of Honolulu and Maui County, and said it is still assessing future projects to keep infrastructure costs manageable and ensure homes are safe and affordable for beneficiaries.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 42 LIHTC projects, typically.
• So when I was looking up LIHTC and when local governments engage in, I guess, development, it could be
• We envision because we've not had, so now coming out of the LIHTC space into the space where where...
• We envision because we've not had, so now coming out of the LIHTC space into the space where where...
• So now, coming out of the LIHTC space into the space where we want homes to be developed—single-family

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Really appreciate your leadership on those and hope to see the State LIHTC Program, MHP, another round
• sure, would I add up these two tables here between the credits allocated as well as the enhanced LIHTCs
• into this in the next item, but, you know, the commensurate staffing workload for administering the LIHTC
• The first four years of the state LIHTC program produced 25,000 affordable homes and leveraged 5.3 billion

Keywords: 988, house, all