Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appropriations Committee adopts rules, advances wildfire relief, housing and insurance bills to suspense or due-pass
Summary
At its March 19, 2025, meeting the California State Assembly Appropriations Committee adopted committee rules and moved several bills — including measures on mortgage forbearance for wildfire survivors, a six-year residential building-code pause, and steps to stabilize the FAIR Plan — to the suspense file or out on a roll call for further action.
The California State Assembly Appropriations Committee on March 19, 2025, adopted its committee rules and advanced multiple bills addressing wildfire recovery, housing development timelines and insurance-market stability, placing several measures on the committee’s suspense file and moving others out on a roll call for further consideration.
The committee approved its rules by an 11-0 roll call. Later in the hearing the panel put multiple fiscal or contested measures on the suspense file and recorded “due pass” or “out on a roll call” dispositions for several bills, which the committee said it would post on the committee website following the hearing.
Why it matters: The bills the committee considered would affect mortgage relief after wildfires, the pace and cost of residential construction statewide, and financing options for the California Fair Plan — the state’s insurer of last resort. Committee action on the suspense file advances these measures toward full Assembly floor consideration while deferring final fiscal decisions.
Mortgage forbearance for wildfire survivors (AB 238) Assemblymember Herbedian, the bill’s author, said AB 238 “provides [a] crucial safety net for LA County wildfire survivors,” allowing borrowers to request an initial mortgage forbearance of up to 180 days with “the option to extend for additional relief if needed for up to 1 year maximum.” The Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) fiscal analysis cited implementation costs, including a “one-time expenditure exceeding $150,000” for an examiner and IT updates. The Consumer Federation of California’s Robert Harrell testified in support.
Industry witnesses raised implementation and investor-market concerns. Vanessa Lugo of the California Bankers Association told the committee the industry has “significant concerns with the current version of the measure” and asked for changes to align the bill with existing federal loss-assistance programs from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the FHA, VA and USDA. Representatives of the mortgage servicing…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
