Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Disaster Recovery Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers discuss guardrails for S 60 revolving loan aid for flood‑hit businesses
Summary
State lawmakers discussed an amendment to S 60 to add guidelines limiting duplicate payments and annual reuse of state revolving loan funds intended to help flood‑impacted businesses, including farms; no formal vote was taken and language will be circulated for review.
Representative Branning told a legislative committee that S 60, a provision tied to the VIDA bill, needs clearer rules to prevent duplicate state payments to flood‑impacted businesses and farms.
"S 60 came to my attention while we were working on the VIDA bill," Branning said, adding that he is "putting together and working on, with NOFA, some kind of guidelines to make sure that the funds are used, with some guardrails."
The proposal discussed would limit use of the revolving loan fund so businesses could not draw repeatedly for the same kind of loss or receive overlapping state funding for a single loss. Branning said the intent is "to make sure that it's not a $20,000 loss that they're getting $20,000 from 1 organization in the state and a second $20,000 in another."
Committee members questioned how S 60 would interact with VIDA and other programs. Representative O'Brien asked whether other funds, including existing state loans and insurance, would affect eligibility. Branning said the VIDA program is a revolving loan fund intended to be available long‑term and described the VITA (VIDA) fund as "only $2,000,000," noting the amount would cover many businesses beyond agriculture.
Representative Nelson pressed whether S 60 would be counted as part of a business plan; Branning replied "Yes" to a question about whether S 60 would not be part of a business plan, and clarified that S 60 currently lacks a guaranteed funding stream and may include provisions that, by percentage, limit amounts available per applicant (Branning used a 5% example: "if it's a million dollars, it's $50,000"). He and other members said they intend to draft language that prevents duplicative state aid and limits the fund so it is not used repeatedly for the same losses.
No committee motion or formal vote was recorded during the discussion. Branning identified the amendment as his own, not a committee amendment, and said he expects to circulate language to the committee for review; staff and members agreed to pause and review proposed text before further consideration.
The discussion clarified several practical points raised by members: that the revolving loan fund is intended for uncovered losses (losses for which a business has not already received payment), that insurance or federal programs which pay for losses would likely make those losses ineligible for duplicative state funds, and that the VIDA/VITA fund’s limited size means it is not sufficient by itself for large losses cited in 2023 flood cases. Branning and members did not adopt final statutory language during the session and said they will return with draft amendments for committee review.
