The House Appropriations Committee on Dec. 13 discussed S.60, a Senate-origin bill that the House Agriculture committee amended to add forestry operations and to replace grants with faster payments. David Durfee, chair of the House Agriculture, Food Resiliency and Forestry Committee, told the committee the measure grew from proposals by farmers affected by heavy precipitation in 2023–24 and is intended to ‘‘turn around as quickly as possible requests that came in for funding in a weather related emergency.’’

Legislative counsel Michael Grady told members the bill would create a permanent special fund administered by the Agency of Agriculture and a separate review board to evaluate applications. Grady said payments would reimburse ‘‘up to 50% of uninsured, unreimbursed or otherwise uncovered losses’’ and that ‘‘$150,000 is the max payment that can come out of this fund.’’ The House draft replaces the Senate’s grant-based approach with payments to accelerate assistance, Grady said.

Committee members raised equity and administrative concerns. Several questioned first-come, first-served processing and whether more-resourced applicants would gain an advantage; Grady confirmed the bill processes applications in order received but that the review board must decide yes or no within 15 days. The committee noted advocates asked for a rapid turnaround to prevent farms and forestry operators from being pushed out of business while awaiting aid.

Rep. Grama proposed an amendment to include, in the application, any state grants or loans the applicant had received in the past five years, with amounts, sources and purposes. Grama said the disclosure would help the secretary and review board ‘‘understand who would be getting the money’’ and guard against duplication of state resources. Committee members debated whether the data would be used only for information-gathering or could be construed as a demerit; members reported the House Agriculture committee had unanimously supported the amendment. The Appropriations panel said it would tentatively include the change in a committee amendment and finalize language before floor action.

Members also discussed administrative resources. Grady said the Agency of Agriculture would be allowed up to $67,500 to administer the program, and participants warned that limited administrative capacity could hamper outreach to smaller operations. The committee noted that an appropriation of $1,000,000 had been included in the broader budget in an earlier phase but ‘‘did not survive reconciliation,’’ meaning the bill as drafted does not include that earmark; committee leadership said funding would likely be decided later in the budget process.

The panel directed staff to draft the committee amendment (including technical cross-reference fixes and a change to limited uses of the word "climate" to avoid federal-policy conflicts) and reconvene on the issue in January.

The bill remains under consideration; members said they will continue to refine eligibility language, documentation requirements and other technical details before any vote.