Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

House committees hear Ways and Means’ tighter guardrails for CHIP, TIF use of education property tax

3822543 · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Members of two House committees spent a full hearing reviewing Ways and Means changes to the Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP) and related tax increment financing (TIF) language, focusing on a new “but‑for” test, location rules, retention rates and caps on losses to the statewide education property tax.

Members of two House committees on Wednesday reviewed amendments from the House Ways and Means Committee that narrow how municipalities and developers could use the Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP) and related tax increment financing (TIF). Charlie Kimball, a member of House Ways and Means and the committee’s reporter on the amendment, led the panel through the measure and its fiscal guardrails.

The change package adds a “but‑for” test, tightens eligible locations, lowers standard increment retention to 60% with an 80% retention available for projects that meet the bill’s affordable/middle‑income definition, sets annual and cohort caps on foregone statewide education property tax revenue, and establishes a pilot sunset and rulemaking requirements.

Why it matters: the bill would allow municipalities to retain part of the increase in property tax revenue generated by a development to repay infrastructure bonds, rather than remitting that revenue immediately to the Statewide Education Property Tax (the “education fund”). Committee members and staff framed the Ways and Means amendments as an effort to permit housing infrastructure financing while limiting possible long‑term drains on the education fund.

Kimball said the committee sought “to put some meaningful, reasonable guardrails around the use of the statewide education property tax.” He explained the package’s main elements: a but‑for test to show that the project would not occur or would be meaningfully delayed without CHIP/TIF assistance;…

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to keep reading

Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.

  • Unlimited articles
  • AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
  • Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
  • Follow topics and more locations
  • 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
30-day money-back on paid plans