S.B. 39 Investment Zones Amendments

What this bill does

S.B. 39 moves existing investment zone and housing incentive laws from several parts of Utah's code into one consolidated section with its own definitions, and shifts housing incentive programs from Workforce Services to the governor's Office of Economic Opportunity. As amended, it makes no new policy changes, does not expand any zones, and removes a proposed school facility provision.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 5 yes, 1 no, 1 absentSenate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee: vote to approve it · Jan 23, 2026Who voted how
• 23 yes, 1 no, 5 absentFirst of two Senate votes · Feb 5, 2026Who voted how
• 23 yes, 2 no, 4 absentFinal Senate vote · Feb 6, 2026Who voted how
• 6 yes, 1 no, 3 absentHouse Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 46 yes, 22 no, 7 absentFinal House vote · Feb 19, 2026

Hearings and debates

• Jan 23, 2026 Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (31 turns)

  1. Committee chair34:24

     Senator Harper, we'll turn the time over

  2. Sen. Wayne A. Harper34:27

     to you. Okay. Mike's, Mike's on. Yes, we're good. Well, thank you, uh, chair and committee for, uh, uh, reviewing this bill. This bill was an interim committee bill that, uh, received a 10 to one vote. The one vote said he just isn't like Bill going directly to the floor. That's why it didn't, it was not unanimous. The intent of this is to go through and conform to several changes that have been made. The governor's office of, uh, the governor's, the governor and his staff decided to go through and move incentive programs from various different state agencies into one under undergo. So we have several, um, housing incentive programs that are already currently in code. This bill does simply, it simply goes through and takes and renumber and makes coordinating and correlating changes to make sure that this is clear. The intent of this bill is transparency and the ability to go through and follow more con completely the public or anybody else, how this process goes. We're not changing out processes of how this has started. Any of all these, uh, zones are already in code. They are started by the action of the elected officials in their, in their, uh, boundaries. It goes through a process and up to a committee that is, um, appointed by or consisting of, um, elected officials. There is one change in the bill. It's on line 61 26 and 27 and 58, 63, 58 through 59, expanding that out to a school facility that as I read through it and after call from a couple people, I realized that was not correctly stated. So, um, I will be making an amendment on the floor to remove that because it's way too broad for what I want to do. Okay. Otherwise, with that, the bill is exactly what is in code, and I believe this enhances transparency. Okay. Is that the end of your Presentation? That it is.

  3. Committee chair36:40

     Okay. Questions from the committee. Senator Sandall.

  4. Sen. Scott D. Sandall36:44

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I appreciate that. 'cause that was one of the questions that has been brought up to me too, is on the school. Um, could you speak to the other question, I guess that is out there and that is the density of housing, uh, that, uh, is talked about. I haven't found it in the bill yet, but apparently it was brought up to me that, um, inside that one zone, that density of housing could be or will have to be one or six homes per one acre. Are are you familiar with that?

  5. Sen. Wayne A. Harper37:15

     Yeah, there are, there are several zones. There's the convention center reinvestment zone, which is designed for Salt Lake City, which has already been adopted and is in place. You have the housing and transit reinvestment zone. Those are within either a third a mile, see, a third, a mile of a tracks or a a or a front runner station, or 40 units per acre in around a, within a quarter mile of A BRT station that's already in code. The intent of that is to go through and state, we've got a lot of public investment in mass transit. Let's have some density around that, and then not impact the rest of the community because you've got people who want a lifestyle where they're right next to tracks and other services. But again, that's already in code. The six units per acre is the first home investment zone, and that is intended to spur single family owner, home ownership con and construction within an area, taking some of the, uh, uh, taking some of the money allocated by cities and by the state, putting in place where we can grow single family for sale homes, owner occupied.

  6. Sen. Scott D. Sandall38:34

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. One follow up. Yes. So, just to be clear, and and I understand, and I remember when some of those were debated and talked about mm-hmm. Especially around the, the track stations, but this bill doesn't expand or contract on any of those density requirements, correct? It

  7. Sen. Wayne A. Harper38:51

     Does not. Okay. I

  8. Sen. Scott D. Sandall38:52speaker not certain

     just wanted to make that clear. Okay. Thanks.

  9. Unknown speaker38:56speaker not certain

     Alright. I, I had some of the same concerns. I think you've answered those satisfactory for me.

  10. Committee chair39:03

      So seeing no other lights, let's, uh, go to public comment now. Um, how many would like to speak to this bill? Okay. I'm thinking how many's for the bill, how many's against it? Okay. Let's just do two and two. So, uh, hate to do that. Well, Senator Harper, why don't you, I will vacate over here and let's have you come occupy it. So, 1, 4, 1 against each of the chairs, uh, rules are that we don't need repeats. If your point has been made, we don't need to hear a second time. We're trying to be, uh, we've got a lot of bills on this agenda today to get through. Uh, and then state your name, who you're with, and, uh, we'll, we'll give you a couple of minutes. Go ahead. Perfect.

  11. Cameron Diehl, Executive Director, Utah League of Cities and Towns40:02

      Thank you Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Cameron Dale, executive director of the at Utility of Cities and Towns. I wanna thank Senator Harper for the effort to, uh, re codify and do this technical cleanup that, uh, does not make any new policy changes, but, uh, simply goes through and makes some reification to better organize the code. And Senator Sandall, you, you asked some questions about those, those policy zones and those policy topics, and you're exactly right. This bill does not make any policy changes to those zones. Uh, those zones exist in current law. Um, this bill is a reification and Senator Harper, thanks for all the work during the interim to make sure to get the re the reification correct.

  12. Committee chair40:42

      Thank you. Alright, next.

  13. Jen Brown, President, Utah Citizens for the Constitution40:49

      My name is Jen Brown. I'm president of Utah. Pull up closer. I don't know if it's, I think that's on, it should be on. There We go. Okay. My name is Jen Brown. I'm president of Utah Citizens for the Constitution. And, um, I do appreciate, uh, Senator Harper speaking about the, the areas are one fourth of a mile around the schools, because that was a substantive change and we would feel more comfortable if that weren't passed out of committee yet until that change were put in there. Because that can impact every community across the state. Uh, within that it can, these new zones could qualify for, uh, around school facilities. But what we're, what we're really asking is that we don't make any expansion or changes unless there is an audit done of the taxpayer dollars. What's happening with the authority zones, uh, with the zones in the authority districts. There's not transparency with how the money is being spent nor who the private partnership is. And we feel that there needs to be, uh, some important guardrails put in place before, uh, we continue forward with anything. And so with that, we hope that we can, uh, get some of these clarifications for the taxpayer before we continue forth. Thank you.

  14. Committee chair42:21

      Thank you. Next,

  15. Andrew Gruber, Director, Wasatch Front Regional Council42:23

      Mr. Chair and members of the committee, I'm Andrew Gruber, executive director of the Wasatch Front Regional Council. Whether you like the tools in law for housing and growth or not, uh, I know that they are complicated and they can be challenging to understand, which is why we appreciate this bill. Uh, because by re codifying, we think it provides more clarity and transparency about what the tools are in law. So, uh, we appreciate the work on this bill. Thank you.

  16. Committee chair42:53

      Thank you. Okay. Next.

  17. Christy Henshaw, Utah County Republican Party43:02

      Thank you, chair. Uh, my name is Christy Henshaw and I am here representing, uh, Utah County Republican Party. We recently passed a resolution, uh, that was also passed on the SEC as a resolution in defense of local control on planning and zoning for municipalities. I come here with a large caution. The state of Utah is in big trouble. As we have tried to fix our housing problem, we may have created ourselves a much larger problem for billion dollars is on the line here. Um, when we are talking about messing with the debt, the overlap that we are allowing corporations to take out on bonds, we may be potentially putting ourselves, um, not only in reputational liability, but the co approval liability is yet to be determined and may be determined through lawsuits. Right now, you have, um, huge, huge caution regarding all of these. I, I strongly urge the legislature to step back, do an audit, take a look at what we have done. I think we are having unintended consequences throughout the state regarding, uh, these interesting, uh, financing options and mechanisms that we were trying to use to solve a very real problem. And I, I appreciate all the effort that it has been put into that, but I think that we would be, uh, very neglectful as we look at centralizing our housing to not step back, take a look at what has already been done and see what the ramifications are. I urge you to vote no. And I'm asking for a moratorium right now. Thank you.

  18. Committee chair44:26

      Okay, thank you. Alright, we do have one online. Who is it? Jennifer Garner. Jennifer Gar. Jennifer Garner. Oh, Jennifer Gardner. Okay. If you'll, uh, unmute and turn on your camera, we will give you two minutes. Uh, state,

  19. Jennifer Garner, resident44:48

      Thank you so much. My name is Jennifer Garner. I'm not with any group. I'm just representing myself. Thank you. Um, however, I do work with young adults who have a greater burden of depression because of the constant crises. Um, they're losing hope that they will ever be able to purchase a home. And these government in interventions that have incentivized and messed with the free market, um, these incentive have these incentives, have left developers filling their pockets with taxpayer funds instead of doing their own research on a prop on the properties. ROI This has contributed to the detrimental housing market. We ask that you put down the shovel that keeps digging us steeper. These policies keep robbing the people that you're supposed to be representing. If you want more suicides, vote yes. If you want more people moving out of Utah, vote yes. Ruining the future of Utah will not save your own families. This whole unconstitutional policy of public infrastructure districts, and this financing needs to be, um, needs to be pulled from our laws. It is theft. And I ask that you do not condone it. I would also reiterate the request for moratorium. Thank you.

  20. Committee chair46:06

      Thank you. All right. We will close public comment then. All right, one more. Okay.

  21. Laurene Starkey, resident46:14

      My name is Laureen Starkey. I'm a citizen. I'm, I'm against as well. I, I just wanted to explain what happened in Coalville in December. My husband is a second generation, third generation from Coalville. It's a, a city, a small town of 1500 people. The two public infrastructure districts that were created seven years ago are now in bankruptcy with a tune of what was reported in the newspaper was 86 million, but it could be up to $500 million owed by this company with foreign investors who have promised those that have, um, invested that they could have permanent residency in this golf communi community. The, the, um, question at hand is who will pay? And the people that are responsible now are the citizens that they, that were not informed correctly or fully about what they were getting into. I think that we can step back and be more, um, as, as Jen Garner just explained to us, if we can step back and allow the free market and not try to ask the public to pay for something that the developers could be, that would be, uh, helpful for the small communities and I, of which I am one. Thank you.

  22. Committee chair47:49

      Thank you. Alright. Hey, now wait a minute. That's one thing I won't allow. I do appreciate the support and we can tell that there's a lot of interest here, but let's not let this get outta hand. Um, we'll close public comment. Who are coming back to the committee? I get Senator Bus. Is that you? Oh, Sandel. Let's go to you.

  23. Sen. Scott D. Sandall48:17

      Thank you. I don't know. Okay.

  24. Sen. Scott D. Sandall48:24

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I'm gonna make a motion, then I'm gonna speak to it. I'm gonna move that we pass favorably, uh, Senate Bill 39 from this committee. Um, first of all, speaking to that, um, I do appreciate the sponsors, um, listening to the expansion of, uh, district around, uh, a school facility. I, I have no doubt whatsoever that that will be out of the bill when it gets to the floor. The sponsors never said that and not done it. So I'm, I know it's gonna happen at 20 plus years and he, he's, he's gonna do that. Um, I, I am, uh, very cognizant of the testimony around whether you like or don't like PIDs and what they do. And possibly, uh, we do need to take an audit and look into deeper into PIs. But that's not the point of this bill. The point of this bill is to consolidate all of this into one statute that then would be a easier place to make that deep dive and to look to find out if PIs are working and how much they're involved in. Just because we consolidate them doesn't create any expansion and doesn't do anything different to, to hold this bill up would be to hold up possibly an audit on transparency. So, I, I don't, I don't see that. And, and that's why, um, I'm, I'll move to move it ahead.

  25. Committee chair49:59

      Okay. Further discussions to the motion.

  26. Unknown speaker50:02speaker not certain

      Uh, I think, uh, you brought out some good things and, and you're right. Uh, this is, in my opinion, codification moving from one section of the code and codifying it in a section that now will have total responsibility to follow up on it. Which in your, uh, respect, I mean, an audit would be easier if we're auditing one section instead of trying to go through the whole code to, to say, yeah, we, we've got a loophole over here. Um, I appreciate the effort. Uh, it's been long and coming, uh, and it was done throughout the summer. It wasn't just thought up in the last two weeks.

  27. Committee chair50:46

      So with that, um, I will call the question then what for some Oh, yes. Oh, I appreciate both. Go ahead and sum, I appreciate both of you doing those, those summations.

  28. Sen. Wayne A. Harper50:57

      I believe this bill enhances transparency and if you like these investment zones or you don't like, it's gonna be easier for you to, to make your case.

  29. Committee chair51:09

      Okay. I'll waive. All right. With that being done, uh, all those in favor of the motion to favorably recommend this, uh, bill, Senate bill 39 favorably to the Senate floor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay. Okay. So we got Senator Buss an nay, and the rest. Thank You. Hey, that does pass. Thank you. Um, oh, uh, while we're kind of waiting for the next presenter, but, uh, let's go back and we will, uh, need the approval of the minutes of March 4th, 2025.

  30. Sen. Scott D. Sandall51:54

      So moved. Thank you,

  31. Committee chair51:56

      Senator Sandall discussion to the motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, that is unanimous. Two. Senator Sandall, uh, let's call you, uh,

• Feb 5, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (20 turns)

  1. Senate President (presiding)1:14:50

     Senator Harper, Thank you.

  2. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:14:52

     Um, I move to adopt amendment number one under my name.

  3. Senate President (presiding)1:14:57

     It's in order you wanna explain the amendment Senator? Yeah.

  4. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:15:00

     This entire bill is a reification, but during the interim we decided to have one clarification and there was some, uh, concern with that. So I'm just removing the addition of, uh, school zones and then, uh, clarify or correcting cross reference.

  5. Senate President (presiding)1:15:18

     Thank you. Have, uh, a motion before us. I think it's amendment one and Senator Harper's name. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will let. Motion passes the bill as amend now to the bill.

  6. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:15:33

     Thank you. Over the last number of years, the state has been very diligent in dealing with, uh, housing and CR and, uh, maximize maximizing investment into, uh, our state, uh, transportation transit system. This, you may call it the alphabet soup bill. So this goes through and takes CCRZ, CCRZ and a convention center, HTRZ, FHIZ, hops, fizz, everybody else TRZ and Senator. Say that again A little faster. Yeah. What we're doing here is we're just taking all these disparate section of codes, putting them under goo and having them in one place with their own definitions and their own part. So it's much easier to follow and comply with. There's no policy changes. It's a recon.

  7. Senate President (presiding)1:16:25

     Thank you. It. Senator Winterton to the bill.

  8. Sen. Ronald M. Winterton1:16:31

     I don't know if it's a question or, or a comment, but, uh, I want him to repeat that again because all the emails I've got is that he is creating a new district here and we've hid it. Would he please tell me that we're not? Yes, Senator Harper, will you yield?

  9. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:16:51

     Yes, I will Go ahead to the question. Are you creating a new district? There are no changes in this bill. Now with the amendment, all we are doing is you need to understand we had part of these undergo part of these under workforce surfaces, part of 'em under the county section of code, some within the city, city section of the code. So we're just putting those all into a single section of the code with their own definitions. There is no new policy. It is the existing stuff, but much more transparent and easier to follow, easier to Read in the statute. Senator

  10. Sen. Ronald M. Winterton1:16:52

      Are you creating a new district?

  11. Senate President (presiding)1:17:25

      Sandall?

  12. Sen. Scott D. Sandall1:17:27

      Thank you Mr. President. Uh, uh, I just want to remind anyone who might be listening to this, this is what, uh, the good senator agreed to do, uh, as this bill came out of committee. Uh, just wanna make sure that they understand that, that he did, uh, reverse what was in there so that there were no changes. And, uh, people can be comfortable that now if they don't like the idea of a pit or some taxing district, they know where to go find it in the code. So it does actually make our code more readable and easier to find. Thank you, Mr. President.

  13. Senate President (presiding)1:18:02

      Thank you. Senator Stevenson, are you up at all? Senator Rebe?

  14. Sen. Kathleen A. Riebe1:18:09

      Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, to reiterate, Senator Winton's point, uh, my district is, um, impacted by this, um, housing and transit reinvestment zone and they have been concerned that this is expanding it, not recreating a new one, but I just wanna go on record making sure that we are not expanding any of these zones. We're just putting it in a different section of code.

  15. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:18:31

      Senator Harper, That is accurate. No expansion.

  16. Senate President (presiding)1:18:35

      Thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none going to you for summation and a motion. Thank

  17. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:18:41

      You. I brief. I appreciate everybody's review of this. It's important that we get things correct and cleaned up, so it's much easier if you like these things. It's much easier to follow if you don't like them. It's much easier to follow. So with that, Mr. President, I move that Senate bill 39 as amended Be read for a third time. Thank

  18. Senate President (presiding)1:18:59

      You. The question is, shall Senate bill 39 be read a third time? Roll call vote.

  19. Senate Clerk1:19:03

      Senator Vickers Baldry. Lewin Aye. Brammer bus Colmore. Escamilla Fillmore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper. Aye. Hankins. Ipson Aye. Johnson Juab McKay. Mikel Johnson. Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Aye. Sandal Aye. Stevenson. Aye. Stratton Aye. Bickers. Weiler Wilson. Aye. Winterton Aye. Weer Aye. President Adams Aye. Senate Bill 39.

  20. Senate President (presiding)1:19:59

      Having received 23 a votes, one na vote, five being absent shall be read a third time. That concludes our work. Senator Kwan, do you have a personal privilege? Go ahead or announcement.

• Feb 6, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (7 turns)

  1. Sen. Wayne A. Harper31:36

     There's no policy change in it. The governor made the decision to move all housing programs under goo. So while uh, with that decision, we took, uh, sections of the code dealing with the, uh, housing, HT hts, fiz hops, ccs, ts, whatever it may be. Put 'em in an in goyo no change. Put all the definitions together so it's clear to follow and clear to administer. That's what the bill does.

  2. Speaker (presiding)32:06

     Thank you, Senator. Again.

  3. Speaker (presiding)32:08

     We heard this bill yesterday saying, no discussion.

  4. Sen. Wayne A. Harper32:11speaker not certain

     I'm gonna go to you for a motion. Thank I'd move that Senate Bill 39 passed.

  5. Speaker (presiding)32:15

     Thank you. And the question is, shall Senate bill 39 passed Roque? Call vote.

  6. Speaker (presiding)32:18

     Senator Vickers Baldy Lewin Brammer Bus Colmore has Camilla Fillmore Grover Harper Ayes i Johnson Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Pickers er Wilson Aye. Winterton President Adams Aye. Senate Bill 39. Having received 23 a votes, two nay votes, four being absent, passes this body and will be sent to the house for their consideration.

  7. Speaker (presiding)33:17

     It's now moving unless somebody wants to circle off of the third reading calendar, the second reading calendar. First bill up is first substitute Senate bill 101st Substitute Senate bill 100. Federal guidance letter amendments. Senator Stratton. Senator Stratton. Thank you Mr. President.

• Feb 17, 2026 House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (22 turns)

  1. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:28:01

     No, you're not. That's okay. All right. Senator Harper.

  2. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:28:06

     Thank you. Um, Senate Bill 39 is a simple reification. It's a big bill. Okay. Uh, what happened over the summer was, uh, the governor was looking at whether where to put all the housing incentive programs in the state. It was going back and forth between GOO and Workforce Services. Uh, the executive branch made a determination to move everything in under goo for the incentives, um, and, uh, which would require some statutory changes. I took that opportunity to go through and take all of the, the housing incentives and move them from, um, the county code, from the city code, from Workforce Services and merge them together. We had definitions for like the CCRZ over in the HTRZ. So you're having to wiggle back and forth to find everything. So if you want to take a look at CC Zs or HT Zs or Fizz, or whatever the incentive program is within, it's in it's little section there. You'll have everything and you're not going through six or seven different sections or titles of the code in order to find everything. So this is clearly just a reification, there's no policy change. It is a great reorganization. So you can follow what is going on better if you choose to use it or not. It's in one section of the code. Just a nice reification to cleanup.

  3. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:29:41

     Thank you. Does that conclude your presentation? That

  4. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:29:43

     It does.

  5. Unknown speaker1:29:44speaker not certain

     So I, I have a, just a question or a comment. Uh, it seems like, um, sometimes we do these, uh, reification and something inadvertently gets changed and we find out about it later. Uh, was there a committee involved in this reification, or tell us a little bit more about the reification, uh, and, and how you ensured that policy changes weren't included in this? There was one policy change, which, which we, we removed in the, uh, in the, uh, Senate committee. So it's just a pure reification. We've had, uh, every stakeholder that that is wishing to take a look at it. And nobody's found any policy changes. It was never the intent to have a policy change just to reorganize and clean up.

  6. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:30:34

     We'll turn to the committee for clarifying questions. Comments? I think that's Representative Shelley.

  7. Rep. Ryan Shelley1:30:45

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, just a, just a clarification. Um, Representative Roberts just did a whole restructuring of the housing and, and basically put it under one roof. Does this conflict with that or does that compliment it? No, he and I have been working on, on this together. He's doing some policy, some other things. I just wanted to clean up the code so it'd be easier to read and if you wanna make any changes in another bill, it would be easier to do. But yeah, his and mine are compliments. We have not found any conflicts as to this point. Perfect. Thank you.

  8. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:31:26

     And Representative Hansen, did you have a question or I just leave your light on? No,

  9. Rep. Lisonbee Hansen1:31:29

     I just have a question, please, if I could, um, lines 5 7 0 2 and oh three, what does it mean that the property tax increment distributed to a PIs is not revenue of the taxing entity or municipality?

  10. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:31:44

      Say that 5 7 0 2. Yep. Oh, that one is, that one is with a convention center reinvestment zone. Again, that's existing language that clarifies the CCRZ was put in place and has been triggered for the Salt Palace Bra, Vanel Hall, and the Utah Museum of Culture and Arts. Um, it's just clarifying that that is not municipal funds. Those are funds that go to the county pursuant to what they're collecting. Thank You.

  11. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:32:27

      Go to Representative Fiefia.

  12. Rep. Doug Fiefia1:32:29

      Thank you Mr. Chair. Uh, thank you Senator for your work on this. Does this bill increase the duration amount or scope of tax increment that can be captured compared to the current law?

  13. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:32:41

      Is there anything changing in Any of this? No, nothing is changing there.

  14. Rep. Doug Fiefia1:32:44

      Okay. Thank you.

  15. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:32:50

      Seeing no other questions, we'll go to the public for comment. Is there anyone who would like to speak to this bill? Seeing none. We'll go back to the committee for clarifying questions or action. Representative Jack.

  16. Rep. Colin W. Jack1:33:10

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I don't see any amendments or, or subs on this. Is that right? There are none. Then I would make a motion that we pass out SB 39 Investment zones amendments with a favorable recommendation. That motion is in order to pass out with a favorable recommendation, SB 39 Investment Zone Amendments.

  17. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:33:33

      Any discussion to that motion? Seeing none will go to the sponsor. To some,

  18. Sen. Wayne A. Harper1:33:38

      No. I appreciate the, uh, the questions here. The intent of this is not to make any policy changes, but if you like these things, then it's easier to follow. If you don't like these things, they're easier to follow and make, you know, any changes thereafter. It's just a good cleanup.

  19. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:33:55

      Thank you. And back to the maker of the motion.

  20. Rep. Colin W. Jack1:33:57

      Yeah, thank you. That's, that's why I like the bill is to clean up and, and, uh, consolidate all the things in one area. Thank you.

  21. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:34:07

      All those in favor of, uh, recommending favorably to the full house SB 39 Investment Zone Amendments. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say nay. Nay. That passes, uh, six to one, I believe. Thank you. Thank you very much.

  22. Committee chair (Rep. Paul A. Cutler)1:35:16

      That concludes our agenda for today, unless a committee has any other items for discussion Aurn. So, uh, that's non debatable. Motion to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We're adjourned early. Thank you for, uh, all of you who came and, uh, participated in our committee.

• Feb 19, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (11 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)50:52

     Senate Bill 39 Investment Zones Amendments by Senator Harper. This bill was heard in Economic Development and Workforce Services with the vote of six 13, the House sponsored Representative Whyte. Representative Whyte.

  2. Rep. Stephen L. Whyte51:06

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. SB 39 is a reification bill that has been worked on during the interim to consolidate and bring together all in one place for easy access statutes that relate to investment zones. There is no new policy that is contained in this bill. This reification puts all investment zone programs into one code section with each having their own part for easier access for everyone. This is a cleanup bill, a reification, and a consolidation of current statutes. And this concludes my presentation.

  3. Speaker (presiding)51:45

     Thank you Representative Whyte discussion to the bill Representative Shelley.

  4. Rep. Troy Shelley51:51

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the, uh, sponsor yield to a question? Representative Whyte, will you yield to a question? Yes.

  5. Speaker (presiding)51:57

     Yes. Representative Shelley.

  6. Rep. Troy Shelley51:58

     Thank you. Um, on line 9 68, I'll give you a second to get there. So this doesn't change the language of the bill. I'm just wondering, when it says a home ownership promotion zone, is that a zone that is created by the municipality or is that a zone that bypasses the municipality and allows a state entity to determine that zone?

  7. Rep. Stephen L. Whyte52:33

     Yeah. Thank you Mr. Speaker. You know, nothing in this bill is changing any existing policy. These are all statutes that have been passed previously to get into that specific detail on line 9 68, I might need to do a little bit more information here just to confirm I have it correctly, but, um, yeah, this is no change of existing statute or policy.

  8. Rep. Troy Shelley52:59

     Okay. Thank you Mr. Speaker.

  9. Speaker (presiding)53:00

     Thank you, Representative Shelley. Further discussion to the bill. None. Back to Representative Whyte for summation.

  10. Rep. Stephen L. Whyte53:10

      Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, there's questions been asked throughout this process, if there's any new statutes that are coming into this, which the answer is no. This is a consolidation of Housing Pro programs from as workforce Services services has moved to goo, it created an opportunity to be able to re codify and to Renu Renumber to make it have an easier access for everybody involved. Appreciate everyone's consideration.

  11. Speaker (presiding)53:37

      Thank you. Representative Whyte Voting will now be open on SB 39. Representative Zaby, seeing all present, having voted voting is now closed. SB 39 passed this body of 46 Yes votes 22 no votes will be sent to the Senate for its consideration or signed by the speaker sent to the Senate for the signature of the president, Madam Reading Clerk