Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: Welcome everybody to the House Committee on General and Housing. It's Thursday, 05/20/2026, and we are still in session. What we're meeting on right now is S-three 28. S-three 28 is kind of an omnibus housing bill that has in it all of the housing provisions that the House has passed, plus a few that came up from the Senate that we concurred with, and its last stop here, it went through Ways and Means, which have a number of amendments which we, I think, have reviewed and were acceptable, in fact, many at our suggestion, and then it went to Approach today. Approach voted 11 zip and added two amendments, which our illustrious Legislature Council is now going to tell you about, but which really are perfectly appropriate for the bill.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: For the record, Cameron Wood, Office of Legislative Counsel, happy to be back. As you mentioned, Mr. Chair, I'll just briefly comment on both very quickly. The Ways and Means amendment that ultimately came out have a few instances of amendment. First, the off-site construction pilot program going from DHCD to the state treasurer's office with some changes there. There was the adding in the rental housing revolving loan program through BHFA, adding that into statute here, sub section 5B, and then making a change to the criteria for that program to
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: remove the floor for income
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: targets of who the program is to serve. It's designed to help build multifamily housing developments that were to serve individuals between 65150% of area median income. This removed the floor, so it's expanding the program to allow it to serve individuals of lower income. And then you have the two sections down here towards the bottom, page seven and eight, the third instance, and the fourth instance of amendments, which were to add sections in to allow a municipality that wants to take advantage of the special assessment bonds that you all created. If they create the special assessment, they can use revenue bonds to help build infrastructure for that special assessment backed by the special assessment itself. These two sections were being added in to make sure that the municipality that has a TIP district or a CHIP district can take advantage of the special assessment revenue bonds, as well as those districts. Just to clarify, these were the ways and means amendments. Correct. Now,
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: most of those amendments were made either at the request of VHFA through us, or Michael Bond, but that's for Michael. He's with the bond bank through us, and Ways and Means cooperatively added them all. Did we ever vote? No. Okay, so I'm going to ask, apparently we didn't do a straw poll on the Ways and Means amendment, so our committee assistant tells us. So those are what they were. Again, they clarified things with the bonds. They put into state statute, rather than session law, the rental revolving loan fund, and they, with a tiny change, one small change, but otherwise identical language, What is the other one they did?
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: You have the off-site construction pilot? Oh yeah,
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: the off-site. Remember, DHCD was supposed to run the off-site construction pilot. They said they couldn't do it at the last minute because they didn't have the people. We went to the treasurer, and the treasurer said we could do it. We negotiated substitute language with the treasurer, and there it is. Those are it. So I would ask for a straw poll for those who are in favor of the amendments Raising means. Of
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Okay. I mean,
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: just to clarify, they're putting all that stuff in that they said they were going
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: to take out. They're putting it No,
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: this is Ways and Means, not Senate.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: Not the Senate. This is just Ways and Means, and the stuff they put in is the stuff we wanted them to put in. We want that. Yeah. And Joe, are you going to vote no, or are you a zee? Guess we'll find out. What? Are we doing a straw poll? Yeah. Yes.
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Yes. All those who are voting against it, please raise their hand.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Well, it's a question here. If I agree with the Ways and Means amendment or if I agree with
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: Just the Ways and Means amendment. With their amendment. No, no. The Ways and Means amendments. You can vote no on the bill. Okay, I am fine with this. Okay, that's recorded at 12345678, right? 368803. Okay.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. Very quickly, because it's only one page, this is the amendment that was just approved by the Appropriations Committee. So it's amending your report first in section two. Bob, do
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: you have that 803? I'll report it, Doug.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Section two is the Service Supported Advisory Council that was in the Senate bill. This was not in 8775. You all kept it. It's the advisory council that would exist under Gayle, Department of Aging and Independent Living, to further the work that the study committee did over the past summer of trying to help develop housing for individuals with developmental disabilities. If you remember, you made some minor tweaks to it based on making sure the language was accurate. That was a request from Representative Burrows. And then you added in the final report that they could come back let's get to the language real quick. This is this advisory council. And you added in that the council, when VHCb that they provide advice, the council has to provide advice to VHCB regarding expending funds to develop permanently affordable housing for individuals with developmental disabilities. And then you added into the report that the committee should look at not only recommendations for future legislative action, but also look at funding sources to help develop this housing or housing for this population of people. But those were the changes that you all made as a committee to this section. What the Appropriations Committee is doing is they're adding in a subsection G, so for members of that council who are not otherwise compensated for their time. Most of the members on the council are state employees, but there are some members who are appointed by private entities. So this says for those members who are not otherwise compensated, they can receive a per diem for the monthly meetings, and the per diem would come out of Gayle's base budget.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: I should add that the JFO, the twenty fiscal office report, thought that would amount to about $8,000 a year, which is de minimis compared with the Gayle budget. So they were up for that.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: And then the second instance of amendment here is striking section 13. And section 13, if you recall, as we were discussing this council itself, VHCB came in and said, hey, we still have some money in this appropriation from FY24. And can we expand the appropriation of these funds from FY24 to allow us to utilize these monies to possibly help build additional housing for these individuals with developmental disabilities. So you're amending FY24 budget appropriation to expand the use of those funds to include building housing for those who need service supported housing or for individuals who receive Medicaid funded development disability services. This made its way through the budget compromise between the House and the Senate. So because it's in the budget at this point, the Appropriations Committee is recommending striking it out of of this bill. So it would strike that section. Because it's in the budget. That exact language is in the budget. And so that's the two instances on the appropriations committee. So
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: how much was that amount?
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Initially, was $10,000,000 I don't know how much is left. $2,000,000
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: The testimony we got was that the amount left that could be so allocated is $2,000,000
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Is that the total left that they have? That's all that they had left for the '24 budget? From this appropriation, was
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: $10,000,000 As you can
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: see, this is all under the umbrella of $50,000,000 that was appropriated to BHCB.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: I don't know what, I'd have to go
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: back and pull what the remainder of those monies were appropriated for. But this $10,000,000 bucket was, as you could see, provides support and enhanced capacity for emergency shelter and permanent homes for those experiencing homelessness. And my understanding is there's $2,000,000 left in that And
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: VHPD testified that, and it was corroborated informally by the chair of HealthInServices, that they did not have any projects left that at this time they could spend the 2,000,000 on for the homeless, so they wanted to just use it for the Medicaid funded developmental disability houses. I
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: guess it'd be a side question whether there's any laptop that fits in a different body.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: I think that's interesting, I don't know. It's an interesting question. So, in sum, what just happened by a vote of eleven-zero is that the Appropriations Committee proposed an amendment. The amendment strikes the reference to the VHCb use of the $2,000,000 because they put it in the budget, So it's in the budget, in the conference budget. And they added a per diem for the Disabilities Council, because there was, when the Senate sent it over, and I knew this right away, when the Senate sent it over, there was no provision for per diem. They put the per diem in, comes out of the Gayle budget. Already in the budget, in the conference budget, is a position for a disabilities coordinator, and this group would help them, but just provides them for dealers. So that's the amendment. They voted eleven-zero in favor of their amendment, and eleven-zero in favor of the bill as amended by ways and means, and them. So what we have to do is take a straw poll only on the appropriations amendment, those two items, the per diem and taking out language they put in that is in the conference budget, which is kind of housekeeping. So I am asking how many people would, in a straw poll, vote in favor of the ways of the appropriations amendment? Okay, that's 3,792, right? $9.00 2. Okay, that's it. To clarify or repeat what Joe said, this is not a vote. You can vote any way you want on the floor. This is just, you know, we have to stand up. It's going to be Tom. He's going to be asked. After his report, it'll be somebody, I guess Charlie, from Waves and Means will get up, and after that Tom will be asked what's the straw poll on that. Then be Lynn Dickinson will get up, she'll give her report, Tom will be asked, what's the vote? That's it. Then there will be debate and action. My hope, personally, is that we can get this thing out as quickly as possible, because it has to go back to the Senate. Remember, the Senate took out the whole housing accelerator. Not because they disapproved it, but because at the time there was nobody who was owning it. DHCB said they wouldn't own it. No one had talked to the treasurer today. Thoughts?
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Yes? When you just mentioned a disabilities coordinator position being added. Was that shorthand for the developmental or intellectual disability housing coordinator position being added to Dale, or was that a totally separate new thing that has been?
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: Can you refresh my memory? What passed out of here? Didn't we pass a bill that said that there would be an ADA coordinator?
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Yes. State That bill, that died in the Senate. That was not taken up in Senate
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: That must cover be the other, because I've heard repeatedly that there is a position in the conference budget, and I don't know what it is, we better find out. Do you know who would know? It was Tiff. She brought it up, affirmatively. So let's find out.
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Okay, thank you. Just want to make sure that there's
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: any So at the moment, we don't have anything else. Oh, news. You want to report on what happened in Senate Economic Development? This morning? Yes. The
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Senate Economic Development Committee voted out their version or their recommended amendment to the Senate judiciary report for H. Seven seventy two, which was the landlord tenant bill that the House passed, based on the Senate judiciary's report, Senate Economic Development's amendment to their report so let's assume that both of those are agreed to by the Senate. So these are proposals at this point. The Senate Economic Development Committee was proposing to strip everything out of the bill other than the trespass language and the court. And they added in a requirement that the court administrator come back to you all at the end of this year or note, the beginning of next year. I think it's January 1527, maybe January 30, either way, '27, come back to you all with a report on how to implement a dedicated residential rental docket in the court system. So those are the only two sections that would be in the bill if the Senate agreed to the amendments from the Senate Economic Development Committee. So they stripped everything that's out of them.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: In other words, if our bill let me put it as nicely as I can. If our bill was like 100 points, this bill was like seven.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: They got rid of the bifurcation too?
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: They got rid of everything, but everything except them. Was just described. There's a trespass provision, which covers pretty much everything we pat and trespass. They kind of squished two sections together a little, and they have this idea that the court is going to tell them what it thinks about a landlordtenant docket, and what that would be like. That's it. There is nothing else in the bill. Now, this is merely as it came out of the committee. It is now on the Senate floor where anything can happen. Yes. So that trespass was for, like, let's say you evicted somebody, and then even though they might be visiting somebody there, say you're not allowed on common property, and that's like the only thing that's in there right now? No, no, no, it's more than that, but you know what, I haven't seen the language. My understanding is it covers people who've been evicted, It covers visitors who are engaging in illegal activities. But you don't have to prove that. I've got to look at the language. But it's a frack. Again, ladies and gentlemen, for your consideration, I don't know how much brain cells you should waste on it until it's out of the Senate, I haven't wasted any brain cells on it, is whether or not we A, concur on the theory that, well, a tenth of a loaf is better than no loaf, whether we, B, sequest a conference. I mean, we could theoretically concur with an incident of amendment of everything we want, but I don't know that that would go great far in the Senate. But anyway, this is something in
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: the next day or so, I guess, will come, if anything happens at all. I just want to waste one brain cell. What does illegal activity mean? Like, But the state
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: I don't know. When and if it gets here, I have a feeling we will have our illustrious counsel in to advise us on the meaning of the whole.
[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: Okay, just that one right step. So,
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: also $7.57, our manufacturedmobile home bill is inapprove.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It was voted out of Senate Finance yesterday, and so it was on the notice calendar today. I don't know because I was not on the Senate floor, so I don't know if it's been referred to Senate appropriations or not. I assumed it would be, but I'm not sure.
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: So in short, our stuff is still sort of at play. Let's put it this way, we can end up with nothing or a lot, and I have no idea which at this point. Any other things before we adjourn? Please watch your messages, because we may be called in because of some action on this thing. Okay? But at this point, Miriam, is it true we have nothing on our schedule? There we are, classic end of session. Hurry up and wait. Stay cool. Thank you everyone, we are adjourned.
[Cameron Wood (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: What is that? Who is signing
[Marc Mihaly (Chair)]: up?