Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House backs revisions to Military Installation Development Authority Act after debate on local control
Summary
The House passed changes to the Military Installation Development Authority Act to enable project areas adjacent to military installations and allow local jurisdiction representation on the authority board; debate focused on local zoning, sovereignty and scope of project areas (up to 100 acres).
The House approved Senate Bill 216 on March 10 after extended floor debate about the balance between economic development opportunities near military installations and local governments' zoning authority. Representative Dee moved to uncircle the bill and sponsor Representative (floor sponsor) described the bill as a tool to allow a Bridal Board (Military Installation Development Authority) to develop up to 100‑acre project areas that may include a hotel for military use and a film‑production studio.
Supporters emphasized economic development potential, job creation and partnership with the military. Representative Ota said the concept is an "incredible" development tool citing Hill Air Force Base examples and projected construction and jobs. Opponents including Representative McKiff and Representative Johnson raised concerns about overriding local zoning and the bill's effect on county sovereignty; Representative Powell offered an amendment to clarify county classifications that was debated but ultimately failed.
Sponsors said the bill includes representation for local jurisdictions on the authority board and is permissive—not a taking—and that project areas require landowner consent for private land inclusion. The House recorded the final vote: "Senate bill 216... having received 49 yes votes and 23 no votes, passes this body." The bill will be returned to the Senate for signature.
