Charlie Shepherd — Charlie Shepard is called to the podium to present RS 33580, introduces himself as the sponsor and representative for District 7, delivers his presentation, and then is invited to stay for questions from the committee.
Charlie Shepherd — Representative Shepard defended the DOGE and JFAC committees, arguing they were being unfairly criticized for simply doing their assigned work. His remarks were then directly referenced and corrected by Representative Birch in the ensuing discussion.
Jason Monks — Makes a motion to introduce RS 33580.
Jason Monks — Requested to be recorded as voting no.
Jason Monks — Moved to introduce RS 33471.
Jason Monks — Representative Monks objects to remarks he считает improper and offensive, saying they assign motives and are out of line. He argues the committee should not dismiss the issue and should hear from the Hispanic Commission before making a decision.
John Woude — Representative John Weber is introduced and then presents House Bill 760, explaining that it concerns a property tax exemption for workforce and affordable housing. The discussion continues with reference to his work developing the bill in coordination with counties and cities.
John Woude — Thanked for steadfast support of Idaho's workforce.
Jason Kreisenbeck — Jason Kreisenbeck is yielded time and then introduces himself as a contract lobbyist in Boise with Lobby Idaho, appearing on behalf of his client Dominium.
Austin Vanderhaden — Austin Vanderhaden of Dominium presents and answers questions on House Bill 406, explaining that the bill would expand a workforce housing property-tax exemption through partnerships between Idaho-based nonprofits and for-profit developers. He says the nonprofit serves as the general partner while the for-profit provides capital, and that the bill is optional for counties rather than a mandate. He emphasizes local control, county approval, and that projects must remain affordable at 60% of area median income, with annual certification and other safeguards. He also notes the proposal is not retroactive and is structured so the exemption cannot simply be offset by raising rents or shifting costs to taxpayers.
Austin Vanderhaden (questionable spelling: 'Oster Vanderhaden') — Name is uncertain in the transcript; likely Austin Vanderhaden.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Vito Barbieri questioned the witness about the structure of the nonprofit/for-profit housing partnership, asking how profits are split and whether the for-profit partner could offset any tax or exemption benefits by raising rents or charges. He then followed up with a related policy question about whether President Trump’s directive that corporations should not own homes affects the bill.
Vito Barbieri — Asked another question about whether the company also develops non-affordable housing and whether exemptions help subsidize other projects.
Richard Cheatum — Asked what kind of nonprofits Dominium typically partners with.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that partner nonprofits must have affordable or workforce housing as a main mission and emphasized the importance of local connection.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that counties retain control and can choose not to grant the exemption, which is why the bill has no sunset.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Said counties may decide later that an exemption makes sense financially and reiterated that the structure is tied to local control and tax credits.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that exceeding 60% AMI would cause loss of the property and potentially receivership.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that foregone property taxes are offset by broader economic impacts and began listing impact numbers.
Jeff Ehlers — Jeff Ehlers is first on the agenda, but he is not yet present because he is presenting in another committee.
Jeff Ehlers — Representative Ehlers was noted in a vote-recording context, then introduced RS 33471 and explained that it is a DOGE Task Force recommendation affecting the Commission on Hispanic Affairs. He said the proposal would remove general state funding and make the commission self-funding while allowing it to continue its mission through private contributions. In response to questions, he clarified that taxpayers and citizens could still contribute, but the state tax-credit language was being removed because the commission was intended to be privately funded rather than taxpayer-funded. He also distinguished this proposal from earlier legislation that would have eliminated the commission entirely, and said he would not characterize the commission as having done something wrong.
Mr. Randor Hayden — Answered that the bill is currently drafted as a yes-or-no decision and noted that developers often add infrastructure improvements through local land use approval processes.
Bobby Joe Muleman — Bobby Joe Muleman was called as the first public witness and then testified on behalf of the Boise Metro Chamber, stating that the Chamber strongly supports House Bill 760 and that housing is an important economic issue for Treasure Valley businesses.
Ms. Muleman — The committee first thanked Ms. Muleman after her testimony, then later referenced Ms. Muleman again alongside others as part of supportive closing remarks. Together, these mentions reflect brief acknowledgments of the witness rather than separate substantive discussions.
Max Pond — Max Pond, Government Affairs Director for the Idaho Realtors, briefly introduced himself and stated that he was speaking on behalf of the organization in strong support of House Bill 760.
Mr. Pond — Committee thanked the witness after his testimony and moved to the next witness.
Alex Labo — Called as the next witness to testify.
Alex Lebo — Testified on behalf of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry in strong support of House Bill 760.
Mr. Leboe — Committee thanked the witness after testimony; refers to Alex Lebo.
Britt Raybould — Representative Raybould first moved to send House Bill 760 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. He then followed up with questions about the bill’s removal of an $80,000 funding provision for the commission, asking whether the commission would still support substance abuse prevention efforts and whether its educational work in that area would be affected without the funding.
Jerald Raymond — Asked whether similar legislation had been introduced earlier in the session.
Jerald Raymond — Asked about earlier similar legislation and then indicated the explanation answered his question.
Jerald Raymond — Said he did not have a question and wanted to comment on the motion.
Jerald Raymond — Responded briefly when the chair asked for discussion on the substitute motion.
Jerald Raymond — Says he opposes the concept but wants a public hearing.
Jerald Raymond — Relays a constituent's view and says the commission helps people adjust to a new home.
Jerald Raymond — Says the commission should get a public hearing before funding decisions are made and supports the original motion.
John Shirts — Representative Shirts questioned why the Hispanic Commission was being targeted and whether it had done anything wrong, then continued by noting Republican gains with Hispanic voters and expressing confusion about the commission being singled out in that context.
John Shirts — Representative Shirts is referenced as having previously questioned why the commission was being targeted, then speaks on the motion to introduce the bill. He says he will support the motion, but expresses skepticism about the rationale for targeting the Hispanic community and says he could understand the bill only if it were tied to a presentation of DEI. He closes by reiterating that he will support the original motion to introduce the bill.
Lori McCann — Representative Birch is introduced and then speaks in support of the substitute motion, arguing that the proposal offers only low-value savings and is morally unjustified. She continues criticizing the measure, referencing Representative Schertz’s earlier question about why the organization is being made to operate under such difficult conditions. A later comment notes that Birch was questioning the sponsor’s motives, reinforcing the same critical theme.
Jordan Redman — Spoke in favor of having a public hearing, while questioning the priority of the RS for the committee.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Described economic benefits including construction jobs, sales tax, and rent savings from affordable housing developments.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Added that developments are long-lasting and can help service providers, teachers, and seniors, while freeing up starter homes.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that his company does not use fees as a barrier and that federally assisted items cannot be charged back to tenants.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Said fees are minimal and that the goal is to keep both rents and fees at maintainable levels.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Confirmed that the organization is both a developer and a property manager.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Explained that the company is a long-term investor and also has an internal management company, allowing direct communication with tenants and community teams.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Stated that the company develops entirely workforce housing, 100%.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Was thanked for his presentation as the committee moved into public testimony.
Mr. Vander Hayden — Noted as one of the witnesses signed up to testify.