Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Budget Appropriations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriations trims and keeps: land bank at $7.5M, mixed funding across housing programs
Summary
The Appropriations Committee stripped appropriations from H.479 so funding will move into the budget; committee staff summarized winners and losers in the net funding picture, including a $7.5 million land bank appropriation and partial funding for manufactured‑housing and rental programs.
Appropriations staff presented the committee with a line‑by‑line summary of what the committee kept and what it removed from H.479 when it substituted its amendment for the Ways and Means report.
James Duffy, committee staff, provided a staff chart showing how the Appropriations recommendation changed the bill’s funding. Appropriations removed many of the bill’s direct appropriations and planned to consolidate them into the statewide budget. That substitution keeps some major line items while trimming or removing others.
Major items noted by staff and committee members: - Land bank: Appropriations recommended $7.5 million for the land bank. - Manufactured home programs (MIR/manufactured home repair and improvement): Appropriations recommended funding and staff said the MIR program was fully funded; other manufactured‑housing and middle‑income homeownership programs received funding though sometimes below initial requests. - Rental revolving loan funds: Appropriations recommended funding, though some amounts were less than requested. - BACB (presumed housing capital authority): $5 million was listed in the appropriations summary. - BHIP (behavioral health housing initiative): staff said BHIP was funded but not all requested positions were included. - Sash for All pilot: not funded in the Appropriations recommendation; staff warned that without other funding sources the pilot would not continue. - Recovery residence support: one recovery residence item was funded at $300,000; however staff said the five‑month first‑month fee coverage for residents entering recovery was not funded and other recovery grants were not included.
Committee chair and members discussed the limits on funding during the appropriation process and how the Appropriations Committee aimed to consolidate appropriations in the budget. Members noted choices between devoting funds to middle‑income homeownership, manufactured housing, rental revolving funds and smaller pilot programs; several members said they were disappointed to see pilot or targeted programs reduced or removed.
Ending: Staff advised members to consult the full appropriations chart on the committee page for itemized line items and dollar amounts; the committee agreed to hold further discussion if members seek additional follow‑up on specific appropriations.
