SBCC legislative committee reports testimony on two Senate bills, urges timing change for kit‑home rules

The Building Code Council legislative committee met Thursday, March 27, but was one seat short of a quorum and did not take any formal votes. Committee members reviewed testimony they had provided on two Senate bills—SB 5055, an agritourism permitting exemption measure, and SB 5552, a bill addressing building standards for kit homes—and described next steps for tracking those bills through the legislative calendar.

The committee’s update, delivered by Justin, a staff member, said the group had testified on both bills and had submitted language suggestions to the sponsors. On SB 5055, the committee recommended inserting the word “incidental” when describing agritourism activities that take place inside certain buildings; the committee said it believed that wording would “help preserve the agricultural nature of the building and discourage modifications that might align the building with a different occupancy or use as a primary nature,” Justin said. The committee’s recommendation was meant to limit changes that could convert agricultural structures to nonagricultural primary uses.

On SB 5552, concerning kit homes, the committee told the sponsor it preferred to have any new kit‑home standards included with the 2024 building codes rather than require separate rulemaking with a December 31, 2025, deadline. Committee members said compressed timelines made a December 2025 rulemaking deadline difficult to meet and that including kit‑home standards with the 2024 code cycle would align rulemaking with the planned implementation date of Nov. 1, 2026. Justin said some jurisdictions already have specific kit‑home standards and that the sponsor had signaled interest in options; his feedback was that adopting highly prescriptive standards in statute could limit the council’s flexibility to set technical standards through its usual code process.

Committee members also reviewed the near‑term legislative calendar the staff shared. Both bills the committee had testified on were listed for executive session on two separate dates (each listed twice on the published schedule to allow for carryover if the item is not taken at the first meeting). Committee staff noted two legislative deadlines: the opposite‑house policy committee cutoff at the end of day on Wednesday, April 2, and the opposite‑house fiscal and transportation committee cutoff at the end of day on Tuesday, April 8. Justin said the committee would monitor both cutoffs and notify members if the council’s high‑priority bills or recently testified items were scheduled for hearings.

Todd, a committee participant, said he had received “very positive feedback from the industry and the trade associations” and that stakeholders might pursue several pathways—off‑cycle rulemaking, a petition to the International Code Council (ICC), or other routes—to advance kit‑home standards. Todd said trade groups appeared willing to help do the legwork for inclusion through ICC processes.

Because the committee lacked a quorum, members did not vote on formal positions, but they discussed possible follow‑up: writing letters to bill sponsors if substantive modifications are proposed that warrant comment and continuing to monitor schedules so staff can alert the committee when bills are set for executive session.

The committee adjourned after the brief update; staff said they would continue to track both bills and the April cutoffs and would inform members of any action items.