Bill would let resort-tax communities use optional 1% for workforce and community housing

The Montana House Local Government Committee on March 11 heard House Bill 162, sponsored by Representative Ken Walsh, which would add "workforce and community housing" to the statutory definition of infrastructure eligible for an optional, voter-approved additional 1% resort tax in designated resort communities.

"The bill is simple. It adds workforce and community housing projects as part of the definition specific to the resort tax code," Walsh said, explaining that the statutory change would allow local resort-tax authorities to place funding for such projects on the ballot for voter approval.

Proponents told the committee the change would help communities where tourism-driven demand has pushed housing out of reach for many local workers. Jackie Haines, director of economic and strategic development for the Big Sky Resort Area District, said resort-tax areas are "the most tourist impacted communities throughout our state" and that adding housing to eligible infrastructure would let those communities acquire land and finance larger-scale housing projects without adding any new tax beyond the existing possible 1%.

John Zirkle, a Big Sky teacher and board member of the Big Sky Resort Area District, gave local context: median single-family home prices in Big Sky were "over $2,000,000" in 2024 and a non-luxury condo median was about "$950,000," making ownership unattainable for many local workers. David O'Connor, executive director of the Big Sky Community Housing Trust, urged a "due pass" and said resort-tax funds have already helped Big Sky produce permanently affordable homes and rental support programs. He told the committee the community still faces a deficit of roughly 1,100 homes affordable to local workers.

Supporters emphasized that the bill would not create a new tax or redirect existing general-resort-tax dollars; rather, it would permit voters in a resort area to approve use of the optional 1% infrastructure allocation for housing projects. Jackie Haines and other witnesses described common financing approaches in resort areas, including using locally elected resort-tax boards, bonding, and interlocal agreements with community housing trusts to purchase land and invest in infrastructure.

Committee members asked about which communities hold resort-tax authority (witnesses stated there are 12 designated areas) and how projects funded via resort tax would be held and managed. Proponents said the details would be resolved locally and suggested community housing trusts or similar public entities would hold land and structure deed restrictions or other tools based on voter approval and local policy.

The hearing produced extended supporting testimony from resort-area leaders and housing advocates from Big Sky, Gardiner, West Yellowstone and Virginia City; no opponents testified in the recorded hearing. No committee vote was recorded in the transcript during the hearing.

Ending: Supporters urged the committee to approve HB 162 so resort communities can use the existing, optional 1% infrastructure portion of resort tax to fund larger-scale workforce and community housing projects.