Lawmakers passed several significant bills out of their respective chambers Tuesday, April 4. Photo by Niki Kelly for Indiana Capital Chronicle.

By Whitney Downard
Indiana Capital Chronicle

INDIANAPOLIS — Lawmakers in both chambers moved a flurry of bills on Tuesday, including several headed to the governor’s desk.

Some, however, will be heading back to their original chamber for a concurrence vote or conference committee, depending on whether or not the original chamber accepts amendments.

Housing Bill Draws Concerns

House Bill 1005, a priority for the chamber’s Republican caucus, moved out of the Senate with unrelated language that gave some lawmakers pause amended in. Now the bill must win the approval of the House.

Sen. Linda Rogers, R-Granger. Photo from the Indiana Senate Republicans website, via Indiana Capital Chronicle.

The bill establishes a revolving loan fund that would cover infrastructure costs associated with housing developments to spur more construction to address the state’s housing shortage. Supporters sought more dedication to building affordable housing while Senate sponsor Sen. Linda Rogers, R-Granger, added another measure into the housing effort.

Rogers’ Senate Bill 300 passed the Senate on a 28-19 vote, with several Republicans voting against the proposal alongside Democrats. It would have lowered the guardrails around implementing residential and housing tax incremental financing (TIF), meaning homeowners could be on the hook for developer costs — which some have said is a conflict of interest for Rogers, a home builder.

The House had not given a hearing to the bill.

A handful of Rogers’ Republican colleagues who voted against her other bill expressed their dismay with the changes to House Bill 1005, some noting that it weakens the voice of school corporations in TIF discussions.

“Ninety percent of this bill, I like. However, I will be voting no because we do not need yet another expansion of TIF which our locals are, I think, using inappropriately and without a lot of oversight,” said Sen. Mike Bohacek, R-Michiana Shores.

After passing the Senate on 32-16 vote, with nine ‘no’ votes from Republicans, House Bill 1005 moves back to the House for further consideration.

Action In The House

After years of repeated efforts, a bill the would increase the threshold for eligibility for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and raise benefits for the first time since 1988 passed the House on a 93-4 vote.

Senate Bill 265 would expand eligibility from 13-17% of the federal poverty level to 50% over two years and increase benefits for families. Currently, the fixed maximum is $155 for one child or $255 for one parent and child. This proposal would increase that amount to $248 for one child and $409 for one parent and child.

“The increase in cash assistance can make a big difference for vulnerable families with children that encounter an unexpected hardship,” House sponsor Rep. Ed Clere, R-New Albany said. “Beyond the increase in cash assistance, increasing the eligibility levels will give many more Hoosier families access to wraparound services that are available to TANF recipients regardless of whether they are taking cash assistance.”

Such services include subsidized child care, transportation related to job interviews as well as education and training opportunities. Ways and Means voted to add a provision that eliminated an automatic cost-of-living adjustment, which the Senate will need to approve.

Four Republican representatives voted against the bill: Jim Lucas, of Seymour; Zach Payne, of Charlestown; J.D. Prescott, of Union City; and Heath VanNatter, of Kokomo.

The Senate must still approve small changes to the bill.

Additionally, the House voted to move a bill on a 69-28 party-line vote that would bar municipalities from banning certain counseling and behavioral health services, inspired by a West Lafayette dispute with a local pastor over anti-gay conversion therapy.

Senate Bill 350 now also moves back to the Senate for another vote, since the House made a minor committee amendment.

See the original story here.