Senate committee debates extending CHIP pilot, weighing housing-only versus economic development use

Members of the Senate Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs Committee met Thursday, March 27, to discuss an amendment from the finance committee to the chamber's housing bill that would revise the Community and Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP).

Committee members spent the meeting focused on two central questions: the program's allowable uses (housing-only versus including economic development projects) and the length of the pilot sunset. The committee also divided responsibility for reporting sections of the bill and discussed strategy for moving the measure on the Senate floor later that day.

The committee confirmed reporting assignments for sections of the bill and identified which senators would present specific provisions on the floor at or after 1:00 p.m. Several members named sections 1–19 and specified that CHIP provisions appear in sections 16 and 17. One senator said, “It is Thursday, March 27…we are addressing an amendment to our housing bill from the finance committee,” and outlined who would present which sections.

On CHIP's scope, members debated whether the program should remain explicitly housing-focused or be broadened so projects without housing components could qualify. A committee member said the program has “never been housing only,” and others noted the current draft includes mixed‑use and project‑based options while still containing housing requirements without a specified minimum. Several senators raised an industrial‑park example where no housing currently exists, arguing that restricting CHIP strictly to housing could preclude infrastructure projects the locality already needs.

Members discussed tax‑increment financing (TIF) as an alternative tool for certain industrial or economic development projects; one member asked why a local industrial site had not pursued a TIF option and was told local officials are concentrating TIF efforts downtown rather than at the site west of the airport.

The committee also debated the pilot sunset length. The finance committee's amendment (as discussed) would set a five‑year sunset, another suggestion in the meeting was six years, and several senators urged extending the pilot to 10 years to accommodate financing timelines. One senator said, “I would also entertain a motion from this committee maybe to extend the pilot of Chip to 10 years,” citing financing and the time required to complete projects. Others argued a longer sunset would make it easier to secure support on the floor and in the House, while at least one member said they hoped to revisit creation of a separate economic‑development–specific program in a future legislative session if CHIP remained housing‑focused for now.

No formal motion or vote on a change to the sunset or scope is recorded in the transcript. Committee members discussed the procedural strategy of using the existing vehicle rather than drafting a new measure and noted that any amendment to the amendment likely would need sign‑off from Senate Finance members before the scheduled floor presentation. A senator said if an amended sunset could be arranged by 1:00 p.m., that would be preferable; the transcript records discussion about whether that timeline was feasible but does not record an agreed change.

The meeting included practical clarifications about the bill’s structure: who will answer questions on which sections during floor debate, and an expectation that senators who participated in finance committee negotiations (named individually in the meeting) would be prepared to respond to detailed questions. The committee emphasized the goal of ensuring the proposal can clear both chambers and signaled intent to continue negotiations about scope and sunset length before final passage.

Reporting/drafting assignments and committee strategy were the less controversial parts of the discussion; substantive disagreement centered on whether CHIP should remain restricted to housing and how long the pilot should last. The transcript shows planning to seek an amendment to an amendment to extend the sunset but does not show a formal vote or final direction.

The committee adjourned after confirming who would report the various sections on the floor and discussing timeline considerations for any further amendments.