Latest news with #Assemblymembers
Miami Herald
3 days ago
- Business
- Miami Herald
State lawmakers considering policy changes after LA wildfires
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Nearly six months after a firestorm ravaged communities across Los Angeles, California lawmakers are crafting legislation to try to protect the state insurance program for high-risk homes from financial collapse. A bill, AB 226, sponsored by Assemblymembers Lisa Calderon, D-Whittier, and David A. Alvarez, D-San Diego, would make the state's insurer of last resort, the FAIR Plan, eligible for loans and bonds from the state-backed California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to avoid running out of money after a disaster. Alvarez proposed the measure last year but it failed to pass. Despite receiving unanimous support in the Assembly, the bill never reached the Senate floor for a vote before the end of the 2024 legislative session. If the measure had passed last year and been signed into law by the governor, the FAIR Plan would have had more flexibility to weather the massive number of claims filed after the January firestorms, Alvarez said. Instead, the FAIR plan was forced to imposed an extra $1 billion in total assessments on insurers that provide homeowners policies in California. To recoup those expenses, insurance companies are expected to hike rates on homeowners through monthly surcharges. "Had they had this option available to them ... they would not be having to hit consumers with price increases on the private market now," Alvarez said. AB 226 is one of many wildfire-related bills still winding their way through the slow legislative process. If passed into law, the measures would protect homeowners from price gouging after disasters, streamline the process for filing claims for lost property and offer financial protections for disaster victims. Lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom in January approved $2.5 billion in wildfire aid after the Palisades and Eaton fires killed more than two dozen people and became the second and third most destructive fires in state history. Legislative leaders at the time signaled for a swift, bipartisan approach to the disaster. "Tens of thousands of our neighbors, our families and friends, they need help. This means that we need to be able to move with urgency, put aside our differences, and be laser-focused on delivering the financial resources, delivering the boots on the ground that are needed and the policy relief that is needed to get neighborhoods cleaned up and communities rebuilt," Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, said after it passed. California's last-ditch home insurer, the FAIR Plan, is meant as a backup for properties deemed high-risk and uninsurable by private companies. A Times analysis found that within the Eaton and Palisades fire zones, the number of homes on the plan nearly doubled between 2020 and 2024 and the plan has become one of the state's largest insurers. Amid lawsuits alleging collusion between private insurers and the FAIR Plan and policyholders raising concerns about delays in payments and smoke damage investigations, lawmakers and insurance advocates have repeatedly called for better safety nets - like the one proposed in AB 226 - to keep the insurer solvent in emergencies and viable as a long-term solution to the state's home insurance problem. This year, Alvarez was joined on the bill by Calderon, chair of the Assembly's insurance committee. It passed through the Assembly at the beginning of March but has not yet seen its first Senate committee. Alvarez celebrated the bill's swift passage through the Assembly and hopes the Senate will work to do the same, "God forbid, if it has to be used because of a devastating fire this summer," he said. Other major wildfire bills being considered by lawmakers include: •AB 493, which would require lenders to pay policyholders interest on disaster insurance payouts that are held in escrow. The measure, authored by Assemblymember John Harabedian, D-Pasadena, would close a loophole in existing law, which already requires interest payments on other escrowed funds. •AB 597, also introduced by Harabedian, which would keep public insurance adjusters from gouging homeowners, especially after a natural disaster or state of emergency. •SB 495, which would prevent insurers from requiring an itemized list of personal property losses from policyholders during a state of emergency, and would require insurers to provide extensions where reconstruction is delayed. The bill, introduced by state Sen. Benjamin Allen - who represents the Pacific Palisades and Santa Monica areas - passed a Senate floor vote on Tuesday and is headed to the Assembly. Most of the pending legislation won't directly support survivors of the Palisades and Eaton fires but are still important to the rebuilding process, said Maryam Zar, president emeritus of the Pacific Palisades Community Council and founder of the Palisades Recovery Coalition. The new laws would help prevent and prepare for future fires, she said, and are a show of goodwill to the communities that are suffering still. Some other fire relief measures focus on easing the permit process for rebuilding, while others extend provisions set by Newsom during the state of emergency - easing tenancy rights for people staying in temporary housing for longer than 30 days, shortening the permit approval timeline and securing mortgage forbearance for destroyed properties for up to a year after the disaster. Others look to address staffing issues for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as fire season turns into a year-round threat. "Wildfire survivors continue to face housing insecurity, financial strain, and emotional trauma long after the immediate danger has passed," Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath said in a statement. "These State bills represent a commitment to meeting people where they are - actively in recovery, rebuilding their lives, and in need of our long-term support." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
State lawmakers considering policy changes after L.A. wildfires
Nearly six months after a firestorm ravaged communities across Los Angeles, California lawmakers are crafting legislation to try to protect the state insurance program for high-risk homes from financial collapse. A bill, AB 226, sponsored by Assemblymembers Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) and David A. Alvarez (D-San Diego), would make the state's insurer of last resort, the FAIR Plan, eligible for loans and bonds from the state-backed California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to avoid running out of money after a disaster. Alvarez proposed the measure last year but it failed to pass. Despite receiving unanimous support in the Assembly, the bill never reached the Senate floor for a vote before the end of the 2024 legislative session. If the measure had passed last year and been signed into law by the governor, the FAIR Plan would have had more flexibility to weather the massive number of claims filed after the January firestorms, Alvarez said. Instead, the FAIR plan was forced to imposed an extra $1 billion in total assessments on insurers that provide homeowners policies in California. To recoup those expenses, insurance companies are expected to hike rates on homeowners through monthly surcharges. "Had they had this option available to them ... they would not be having to hit consumers with price increases on the private market now," Alvarez said. AB 226 is one of many wildfire-related bills still winding their way through the slow legislative process. If passed into law, the measures would protect homeowners from price gouging after disasters, streamline the process for filing claims for lost property and offer financial protections for disaster victims. Lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom in January approved $2.5 billion in wildfire aid after the Palisades and Eaton fires killed more than two dozen people and became the second and third most destructive fires in state history. Legislative leaders at the time signaled for a swift, bipartisan approach to the disaster. 'Tens of thousands of our neighbors, our families and friends, they need help. This means that we need to be able to move with urgency, put aside our differences, and be laser-focused on delivering the financial resources, delivering the boots on the ground that are needed and the policy relief that is needed to get neighborhoods cleaned up and communities rebuilt," Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) said after it passed. California's last-ditch home insurer, the FAIR Plan, is meant as a backup for properties deemed high-risk and uninsurable by private companies. A Times analysis found that within the Eaton and Palisades fire zones, the number of homes on the plan nearly doubled between 2020 and 2024 and the plan has become one of the state's largest insurers. Amid lawsuits alleging collusion between private insurers and the FAIR Plan and policyholders raising concerns about delays in payments and smoke damage investigations, lawmakers and insurance advocates have repeatedly called for better safety nets — like the one proposed in AB 226 — to keep the insurer solvent in emergencies and viable as a long-term solution to the state's home insurance problem. Read more: Insurer of last resort kept growing. Then L.A. fire victims paid the price This year, Alvarez was joined on the bill by Calderon, chair of the Assembly's insurance committee. It passed through the Assembly at the beginning of March but has not yet seen its first Senate committee. Alvarez celebrated the bill's swift passage through the Assembly and hopes the Senate will work to do the same, "God forbid, if it has to be used because of a devastating fire this summer," he said. Other major wildfire bills being considered by lawmakers include: AB 493, which would require lenders to pay policyholders interest on disaster insurance payouts that are held in escrow. The measure, authored by Assemblymember John Harabedian (D-Pasadena) would close a loophole in existing law, which already requires interest payments on other escrowed funds. AB 597, also introduced by Harabedian, which would keep public insurance adjusters from gouging homeowners, especially after a natural disaster or state of emergency. SB 495, which would prevent insurers from requiring an itemized list of personal property losses from policyholders during a state of emergency, and would require insurers to provide extensions where reconstruction is delayed. The bill, introduced by state Sen. Benjamin Allen — who represents the Pacific Palisades and Santa Monica areas — passed a Senate floor vote on Tuesday and is headed to the Assembly. Read more: Did insurers collude to force homeowners onto state insurance plan? What to know from two blockbuster lawsuits Most of the pending legislation won't directly support survivors of the Palisades and Eaton fires but are still important to the rebuilding process, said Maryam Zar, president emeritus of the Pacific Palisades Community Council and founder of the Palisades Recovery Coalition. The new laws would help prevent and prepare for future fires, she said, and are a show of goodwill to the communities that are suffering still. Some other fire relief measures focus on easing the permit process for rebuilding, while others extend provisions set by Newsom during the state of emergency — easing tenancy rights for people staying in temporary housing for longer than 30 days, shortening the permit approval timeline and securing mortgage forbearance for destroyed properties for up to a year after the disaster. Others look to address staffing issues for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as fire season turns into a year-round threat. 'Wildfire survivors continue to face housing insecurity, financial strain, and emotional trauma long after the immediate danger has passed," Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath said in a statement. "These State bills represent a commitment to meeting people where they are — actively in recovery, rebuilding their lives, and in need of our long-term support.' Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
State lawmakers considering policy changes after L.A. wildfires
SACRAMENTO — Nearly six months after a firestorm ravaged communities across Los Angeles, California lawmakers are crafting legislation to try to protect the state insurance program for high-risk homes from financial collapse. A bill, AB 226, sponsored by Assemblymembers Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) and David A. Alvarez (D-San Diego), would make the state's insurer of last resort, the FAIR Plan, eligible for loans and bonds from the state-backed California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to avoid running out of money after a disaster. Alvarez proposed the measure last year but it failed to pass. Despite receiving unanimous support in the Assembly, the bill never reached the Senate floor for a vote before the end of the 2024 legislative session. If the measure had passed last year and been signed into law by the governor, the FAIR Plan would have had more flexibility to weather the massive number of claims filed after the January firestorms, Alvarez said. Instead, the FAIR plan was forced to imposed an extra $1 billion in total assessments on insurers that provide homeowners policies in California. To recoup those expenses, insurance companies are expected to hike rates on homeowners through monthly surcharges. 'Had they had this option available to them ... they would not be having to hit consumers with price increases on the private market now,' Alvarez said. AB 226 is one of many wildfire-related bills still winding their way through the slow legislative process. If passed into law, the measures would protect homeowners from price gouging after disasters, streamline the process for filing claims for lost property and offer financial protections for disaster victims. Lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom in January approved $2.5 billion in wildfire aid after the Palisades and Eaton fires killed more than two dozen people and became the second and third most destructive fires in state history. Legislative leaders at the time signaled for a swift, bipartisan approach to the disaster. 'Tens of thousands of our neighbors, our families and friends, they need help. This means that we need to be able to move with urgency, put aside our differences, and be laser-focused on delivering the financial resources, delivering the boots on the ground that are needed and the policy relief that is needed to get neighborhoods cleaned up and communities rebuilt,' Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) said after it passed. California's last-ditch home insurer, the FAIR Plan, is meant as a backup for properties deemed high-risk and uninsurable by private companies. A Times analysis found that within the Eaton and Palisades fire zones, the number of homes on the plan nearly doubled between 2020 and 2024 and the plan has become one of the state's largest insurers. Amid lawsuits alleging collusion between private insurers and the FAIR Plan and policyholders raising concerns about delays in payments and smoke damage investigations, lawmakers and insurance advocates have repeatedly called for better safety nets — like the one proposed in AB 226 — to keep the insurer solvent in emergencies and viable as a long-term solution to the state's home insurance problem. This year, Alvarez was joined on the bill by Calderon, chair of the Assembly's insurance committee. It passed through the Assembly at the beginning of March but has not yet seen its first Senate committee. Alvarez celebrated the bill's swift passage through the Assembly and hopes the Senate will work to do the same, 'God forbid, if it has to be used because of a devastating fire this summer,' he said. Other major wildfire bills being considered by lawmakers include: Most of the pending legislation won't directly support survivors of the Palisades and Eaton fires but are still important to the rebuilding process, said Maryam Zar, president emeritus of the Pacific Palisades Community Council and founder of the Palisades Recovery Coalition. The new laws would help prevent and prepare for future fires, she said, and are a show of goodwill to the communities that are suffering still. Some other fire relief measures focus on easing the permit process for rebuilding, while others extend provisions set by Newsom during the state of emergency — easing tenancy rights for people staying in temporary housing for longer than 30 days, shortening the permit approval timeline and securing mortgage forbearance for destroyed properties for up to a year after the disaster. Others look to address staffing issues for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as fire season turns into a year-round threat. 'Wildfire survivors continue to face housing insecurity, financial strain, and emotional trauma long after the immediate danger has passed,' Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath said in a statement. 'These State bills represent a commitment to meeting people where they are — actively in recovery, rebuilding their lives, and in need of our long-term support.'
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Nevada Becomes the 21st State To Strengthen Donor Privacy Protections
On Thursday, Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo (R) signed Assembly Bill 197 into law, prohibiting state agencies from demanding or releasing personal information of nonprofit supporters—actions that could potentially chill speech or violate the right to privacy. With the bill's passage, Nevada becomes the 21st state to strengthen First Amendment protections for donors, volunteers, and members of nonprofit organizations. The A.B. 197, which was cosponsored by Assemblymembers Shea Backus (D–Las Vegas) and Gregory Hafen (R–Pahrump), clarifies that state governmental entities cannot require nonprofit organizations that have applied for or received a 501(c) tax-exempt status from the IRS to disclose personal information of their supporters, including names, addresses, phone numbers, and donation details. Only certain exceptions apply, such as when such information is required under federal law or a court order, in which case the state must keep the individuals' personal information confidential. Anyone harmed by a violation of this law may bring a civil action against the state and seek damages. Nonprofit donor privacy is constitutionally protected under the First Amendment, as was first determined in the Supreme Court's unanimous National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Patterson ruling. The 1958 decision blocked the Alabama state government from forcing civil rights organizations to release personal, identifying information of supporters, thereby preventing threats, harassment, and intimidation of individuals for their beliefs. The right was reaffirmed and further clarified in the Court's 2021 Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta opinion, which struck down a mandate from former California Attorney General Kamala Harris requiring nonprofits to provide certain donor information to remain registered with the state. The Nevada bill passed through both chambers of the Legislature with an overwhelming majority and only one vote against it. Even more strikingly, nonprofits from across the political spectrum, such as the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, Americans for Prosperity, Nevada Right to Life, and Planned Parenthood Votes Nevada, supported the measure. "Americans are fed up with the abuse of their privacy and First Amendment rights. No one should face threats, doxing, or retaliation simply for supporting a nonprofit organization," said Heather Lauer, CEO of People United for Privacy Foundation, a national privacy rights organization, in a press release. With the passage of A.B. 197, Nevada joins 20 other states across the political spectrum that have passed similar legislation since 2018. In a time of hyper-partisanship and regular free speech violations—especially from the federal government—it's encouraging to see some state governments still honoring the constitutional protections enshrined in the First Amendment. The post Nevada Becomes the 21st State To Strengthen Donor Privacy Protections appeared first on
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Westerners are up in arms about proposed public land sales. NV Dems don't seem to notice.
Lake Mead reservoir levels have dropped more than 150 feet since 2000. Federal officials project greater drops throughout this year. Echo Bay Marina, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, summer 2024. (Photo courtesy Kyle Roerink) While Lake Mead sits at about one-third full, a bipartisan cohort of Nevada's state lawmakers think now is the time to sell off public lands to support more Colorado-River-dependent homes and businesses in Southern Nevada. On Thursday, Nevada Assemblymembers, the majority of whom are Democrats, overwhelmingly voted to ask President Donald Trump to support selling off tens of thousands of acres outside of Las Vegas as fast as possible. The resolution implores the administration to support federal legislation from Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, the Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act. The news of the 36-6* vote in the Assembly comes as communities across the West are rising up and opposing efforts to sell off public lands. Coalitions of concerned citizens across party lines have reservations about these efforts to build in areas prone to drought, wildfire, or flooding. Nevada Democrats do not. Traditionally, public lands privatization is an issue championed by sage brush rebels and urbane developers aligned with the GOP. The Keep It Public movement in Nevada has some legitimate supporters but a dark underbelly. Thanks to a special carveout in federal law championed by Nevada Democrats in the late 1990s, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) sells off large chunks of public land that facilitates cookie-cutter growth around Las Vegas and praise from politicians. Across the West, the private-sector crowd views many places not named Yosemite or Yellowstone, or lacking a Grand or Great adjective, as blank canvases for industry. The industry du jour changes among the decisionmakers. But the lands are always expendable enough. Today, affordable housing is the artifice by which powerful interests believe they can get cheap land for major projects. For Las Vegas, there's less water in the Colorado River System and rapidly warming temperatures posing deep uncertainty. As for the overall quality of life, it depends on your income bracket. And most of the people championing public land sales don't fret around tax time. Many politicians are, after all, wealthy. For the masses, there are more regressive taxes and higher utility bills across Nevada than decades past. Nevada's public education system still ranks as one of the worst in the nation. The health care system is near the bottom rung. The well being of children is worse in Nevada compared to other states. And, of course, housing affordability is a major problem as investors like Black Rock buy up residential blocks that were, you guessed it, built on lands sold off by the BLM. A quarter century of practice can fairly raise the question: Is the public-lands-sale model working? Now is the time for Nevada to tell the others in the West: proceed with caution. Instead, Nevada politicians of all stripes are saying 'build, baby, build.' The challenge, of course, is finding an effective substitute that meaningfully incentivizes the private sector without further sapping the public in the long run. In Clark County, there are more than 75,000 acres of infill available. But developers aren't buying it at meaningful rates to appease political appetites. We have opportunity zones, abatements, investment trusts, deductions, and credits that industries benefit from in the West. Data centers, energy companies, mines, and casinos are a few industries that can attest to the benefits. Meaningful solutions to the housing problem will require financial tools and reasonable foresight too. And that will require more than milking the sacred cow of legitimized public land sales. We need to put people where there's existing infrastructure, high-rise opportunities, walkability, and mass-transportation options. There must be water and power infrastructure already in-place. But instead, Nevada Democrats just supported putting more folks in the wildland-urban interface so associated with the fringes and foothills of western public lands. These are water-scarce places currently home to desert tortoise and important carbon capturing environments. Many of the very people who attest to giving a damn about urban heat just voted to exacerbate the problem. But don't try telling them that. There's money to be made. The type of sprawl Nevada Democrats voted to support via AJR10 will warrant expensive new water lines, sewer systems, roads, electricity infrastructure, schools, fire stations, and a host of other intangibles that have costs that span decades. These are not one-time expenses. They are forever expenses. Nevada Democrats and Senator Cortez Masto are desperate to expand the existing policy from former Senators Reid and Bryan known because it dispenses proceeds from public land sales. And other states will take notice. Such revenue streams are red meat for states looking to Nevada as an exemplar. BLM accounts for $4 billion in revenue generated from public land sales since the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act first took effect. Public education, regional water managers, and the aviation department split less than $700 million since the genesis of the program, according to a federal report released last summer. New proposals would have to indeed fill the gaps. But it does make you wonder: Are public land sales the only way to support our community? Is it sustainable? Are the funds sufficient to cover the new needs that will inevitably occur. Nevada Democrats think so. But these are folks who also think that, of all things to ask President Trump to do, selling off public lands is the most pressing issue of the day. *The six members of the assembly, all Democrats, who voted against the resolution were Natha Anderson, Venecia Considine, Tanya Flanagan, Selena La Rue Hatch, Cinthia Moore, and Howard Watts.
