Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee reviews House changes to S.328, backs treasurer‑led off‑site housing pilot and raises guardrails on credit facility
Summary
The Senate Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs committee reviewed the House’s amendments to S.328, including a treasurer‑run off‑site construction accelerator pilot and a change to the state treasurer’s credit facility cap. Members agreed to keep the pilot under treasurer authority, asked staff to remove a stand‑alone 1% carve‑out, and pressed for reporting and legislative check‑ins on any new bulk‑purchase authority.
The Senate Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs committee on May 22 reviewed H.775-related amendments to S.328 and discussed changes affecting the state treasurer’s lending authority and a proposed off‑site construction accelerator pilot.
Chair opened the hearing saying the panel was considering concurring with House changes to S.328 and a further‑proposal amendment. Staff counsel Cameron Wood summarized the House file and walked members through draft 4.2 and Ways and Means and Appropriations insertions. He said the clerk’s office had only recently compiled the House amendments into the official document and staff were reviewing multiple versions.
A principal change discussed was an increase in the treasurer’s credit facility cap to 12.5% of the state’s average cash on hand and House language that would, on paper, add a separate 1% credit facility reserved for bulk purchasing of off‑site constructed housing. Committee members raised that the two provisions together would appear to raise the total to 13.5% unless constrained. Staff pointed to operative language that reduces the total credit facility by any amount established under the separate subsection so the cap remains 12.5%.
Peter Traube of the State Treasurer’s Office told the committee the 1% carve‑out was a holdover from an earlier accelerator design and that the treasurer could run a request for information (RFI) or request for proposals (RFP) to test developer and manufacturer demand without needing the stand‑alone carve‑out. "Keeping the language that we worked on...lets us go forward. We'll do this RFI," Traube said, adding the office would report back to the Legislature if they determined the model could be financed.
Members agreed they were comfortable increasing the overall credit facility while removing the separate 1% sub‑carve‑out (staff advised the committee to remove subsection b and sub 2), and to retain Section 4 language transferring the accelerator pilot to the treasurer’s office. The revised pilot narrows earlier plans (it no longer includes streamlining building‑code or regulatory changes) but allows the treasurer to solicit manufacturers and intermediaries to evaluate whether bulk purchasing is feasible and financeable under existing risk parameters.
The committee also reviewed related provisions on VHFA’s rental housing revolving loan program and technical additions to VEDA authority. No formal vote was recorded in the transcript; members instructed staff to prepare the further‑proposal amendment with the agreed revisions and implied they would try to move the measure out of committee promptly.
What happens next: Staff will produce a consolidated document reflecting the committee’s decisions (removal of the stand‑alone 1% carve‑out; retention of a treasurer‑run accelerator pilot) and circulate it for members to consider as the committee works to concur with the House and adopt any further‑proposal amendment.
