Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workforce Training Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to expand MJ Foster Promise eligibility; senators ask for funding safeguards
Summary
Lawmakers voted to report House Bill 395 favorably after testimony about expanding the MJ Foster Promise scholarship program to support workforce needs tied to major LED-attracted projects; committee members pressed for appropriation and limits so existing need-based applicants are not displaced.
House Bill 395, which would broaden eligibility for the Murphy J. Foster Promise scholarship program and create an expedited process to expand approved programs for specific LED-backed projects, was reported favorably by the Senate Education Committee after extensive testimony about funding, eligibility and implementation.
Representative Brass introduced the bill and said it aims to align scholarship eligibility with workforce needs when large economic projects are announced, enabling quicker program approval and local training pipeline development. Secretary of the Louisiana Economic Development (LED) and the Louisiana Workforce Commission told the committee they support the concept as a tool to attract and staff major projects, and that incentives and training commitments are part of project recruitment packages.
Witnesses and agency officials described current program capacity and constraints: LOSFA reported about 17,350 applicants apply and roughly 6,182 individuals have been funded to date; program dollars were largely exhausted early in prior cycles and only about $220,114 remained for ongoing enrollees at the time of testimony. Commissioner Kim Hunter Reed and workforce officials said demand is high and that the program cap had been raised in statute to $40 million, but current funding appropriations are smaller and additional appropriations would be needed if eligibility expands broadly. The workforce and education agencies pledged to work with the sponsor and senators to limit expansion tied to LED-announced projects and to seek additional appropriations.
Senator Miguez proposed (and then withdrew) an amendment to remove the provision changing income- and employment‑based eligibility until funding and program implications were clarified; the committee agreed to work together and to route the bill through Senate Finance for further fiscal consideration. The committee adopted amendments prepared by House staff and moved the bill forward, with members requesting technical revisions and a funding plan before final passage.
