Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Finance Authority Confirmations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee hears four confirmations to Montana Facility Finance Authority
Summary
The Senate Business and Labor Committee heard four confirmations (SR 54–57) to the Montana Facility Finance Authority, with supporters citing nominees’ experience in commercial lending, banking and health administration; hearings closed without recorded committee votes in the transcript.
The Senate Business and Labor Committee took testimony on four nominations to the Montana Facility Finance Authority (MFFA), a quasi‑judicial authority that issues tax‑exempt municipal bonds to finance health‑care and other facility projects.
Lieutenant Governor Kristen Juras appeared on behalf of the governor to present nominees and highlighted the MFFA’s role and the need for varied professional experience on the seven‑member board. The nominees and proponents included:
- Eric Hansen (SR 54), a vice president at Glacier Bank in Kalispell; Juras said Hansen brings roughly 30 years of commercial lending experience. Adam Gill, MFFA executive director, spoke in favor and said Hansen’s background is a good fit for the authority.
- John Iverson (SR 55), presented for a second four‑year term, was described by Gill and others as having significant public‑policy and legal experience; Iverson spoke briefly to affirm his desire to continue service.
- Vu Pham (SR 56), who joined remotely, described legal and health administration credentials, said he chairs the MFFA, and noted experience with rural health‑care financing and board leadership.
- Mel Reinhart (SR 57), presented for a second term and described as PacificSource Health Care’s regional sales manager, was noted for more than 20 years of health‑care experience; Juras said an amendment was proposed to correct the end date of his term.
Supporters emphasized that the MFFA is a self‑supporting enterprise fund that provides low‑cost capital primarily for nonprofit health‑care projects and pointed to nominees’ relevant financial, legal and health‑care backgrounds. Committee members asked routine questions about nominees’ service and board meeting cadence. The hearings ended with expressions of appreciation for volunteer public service; the transcript records no committee votes during these hearings.
What happens next: The committee closed the hearings and may schedule confirmations for executive action in a subsequent meeting.
