People and businesses hoping to score cash for their legal judgments against the state in the next fiscal year may be dangerously close to becoming victims of budget cuts.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe recommended not funding any judgments because we do not have that money right now,\u201d said Cody Allen Wells, a spokesperson for the Division of Administration. \u201cIt\u2019s now in the hands of the Legislature.\u201d<\/p>\n
Traditionally, no money is set aside in the governor\u2019s budget proposal for judgments. The money is usually added instead by lawmakers, who have to contend with a budget for the next fiscal year that\u2019s $750 million short of being fully funded.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s uncertain, when stacked against the popular TOPS scholarship program and health care funding, how judgments will fall in the pecking order.<\/p>\n
During the 2014 session, it looked like lawmakers were prepared to forgo paying judgments due to a lack of cash, and the budget was sent to the Senate with nothing set aside. Only when money from a pharmaceutical settlement arrived did lawmakers mix some judgment payments into the budget.<\/p>\n
There likely won\u2019t be a surprise settlement to save lawmakers for the next fiscal year. But the decision could be kicked into the second special session, where the Legislature will have to come up with the money needed to right the budget.<\/p>\n
Around this time last fiscal year, $11.7 million in judgment payments had been made. A division spokesperson said in 2015, annual payments averaged $10-12 million.<\/p>\n
Proposed judgment payments are moved through the process as legislation, with the bills passed being put through a secondary vetting process conducted by the Attorney General\u2019s Office. Just because a judgment bill is passed by lawmakers doesn\u2019t mean it will be paid.<\/p>\n
All the talk about potentially not paying judgments next fiscal year has brought attention to a little-known state law that doesn\u2019t allow the treasurer to pay any debt or claims after 10 years have lapsed. Few are confident about exactly how that statute can be applied.<\/p>\n
Fallout Over Budget Begins\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Hinting at a second special session that may start the day after the ongoing regular session ends on June 7, Gov. John Bel Edwards made a personal appearance before the House Appropriations Committee to reveal his proposed budget changes to address the $750 million revenue shortfall for the next fiscal year.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re going to live in the real world,\u201d Edwards told lawmakers.<\/p>\n In what used to be a rare occurrence, but is becoming the norm for this governor, Edwards took questions from the committee about the cuts he proposed, which, he said, amounted to $792 million in all.<\/p>\n It\u2019s now the job of the budget-drafting committee either to approve the revisions to the spending plan that takes effect July 1 or alter them.<\/p>\n In his questioning of the governor, Appropriations Chairman Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, attempted to make it clear that it could be the prerogative of the committee to shake up the priorities outlined in the governor\u2019s plan.<\/p>\n Regardless, the governor wants lawmakers to return in a second special session to come up with the revenue, possibly through tax increases, in order to compensate for the cuts.<\/p>\n \u201cWe came up short in the [first] special session. We do need additional revenue,\u201d said Edwards, adding that he avoided contingencies, fund sweeps and other financial maneuvers that were commonplace in recent terms. \u201cYou\u2019re not going to see gimmicks. We\u2019re not going down that road.\u201d<\/p>\n Many conservatives would still like to see the governor hold off on calling a second special session until late summer or the early fall. Conservatives are hopeful tax collections might pick up in the coming months, or that the revenue bills approved over the past year will bring in more money than anticipated.<\/p>\n Some Democrats are unhappy about the cuts to hospitals and health care services in the budget bills inside HB 1, as it stands now with the administration\u2019s revisions. Lawmakers who voted with the governor on tax increases earlier this year were particularly displeased to see cuts to health care services in their districts.<\/p>\n After the long hours his team put into crafting the proposed budget changes that were recently announced, the governor will certainly not want to hear from the Democrats who are whispering about not even wanting to pass a budget in the regular session when a second special session will be needed to create the revenue needed to fully fund priorities.<\/p>\n And one set of votes to cut services in the regular session, followed by another set of votes to possibly raise taxes in a second special session, is not a preferred method of moving forward for many conservatives.<\/p>\n Edwards said that if Medicaid were expanded, the budget will see $184 million in savings, of which $50 million will be directed to the TOPS scholarship program. But even with that infusion, TOPS will still be short $183 million of full funding.<\/p>\n The governor did say he was in favor of proposed legislation to cap TOPS, so that it doesn\u2019t grow alongside tuition and fee increases in the future.<\/p>\n Higher education would suffer a 6-percent cut under the budget changes presented by the administration, while the judicial and legislative branches would be saddled with 10 percent reductions.<\/p>\n Another $70 million is needed to right the budgets of the state\u2019s safety-net hospitals. Only five of the nine have \u201cstandstill funding.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not my plan to close any of them,\u201d Edwards said, again urging for more money to be raised in the second special session.<\/p>\n The Edwards administration held a private meeting in April with the operators of Louisiana\u2019s safety net hospitals to begin the arduous task of renegotiating the public-private partnership contracts that the state can no longer afford. State health care officials have hinted in recent weeks that new contracts could be part of a larger reform effort.<\/p>\n The meeting \u2014 attended by Gov. Edwards, DHH Secretary Rebekah Gee, DHH Undersecretary Jeff Reynolds, Commissioner of Administration Jay Dardenne and Chief of Staff Ben Nevers \u2014 was described by those in attendance as congenial. Everyone remained in the room throughout the meeting.<\/p>\n The governor asked which hospital operators would be willing to change their contracts. Given that all nine of the hospitals have different needs connected to the $780 million in state and federal funding that\u2019s annually doled out, the providers were eager to hear what the administration is interested in changing.<\/p>\n It was likely the first of many meetings. But all involved are under a tight timeline with budget talks just beginning, and the fiscal year coming to a close on June 30. That the hospitals also have a 60-day notice walk-out clause in their contracts is only adding to the pressure.<\/p>\n In related news, a tax reform task force that was created in the first special session of the year is meeting. It was charged with drawing up a policy agenda for the 2017 regular session. Edwards called on the task force to generate some ideas ahead of the second special session that\u2019s expected.<\/p>\n He said a \u201cdown payment\u201d on tax reform is needed to go alongside whatever revenue lawmakers raise in early June. Edwards said he will present lawmakers with a policy road map several weeks before the second special session convenes.<\/p>\n Lawmakers Dive Deep On Immigration<\/strong><\/p>\n Two bills that have been moved to the House floor in Louisiana could put pressure on law enforcement agencies in major metropolitan areas to cooperate with federal officials when they\u2019re policing undocumented immigrants.<\/p>\n After hours of debate and several amendments for each bill, the House Judiciary Committee advanced HB 151 by Rep. Valarie Hodges, R-Denham Springs, and HB 453 by Rep. Jay Morris, R-Monroe.<\/p>\n Hodges\u2019 HB 151 prohibits laws creating \u201csanctuary cities\u201d where law enforcement do not cooperate with federal immigration officials in the detaining of immigrants who are in the country illegally. HB 151 prevents the State Bond Commission from issuing bonds to such cities.<\/p>\n An original draft of the bill prevented sanctuary cities from receiving any state funding, but Hodges, along with Attorney General Jeff Landry, who testified in support of the bill, decided to lessen the punishment.<\/p>\n Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who also testified in support of the bill, argued that New Orleans and Lafayette are the state\u2019s two major sanctuary cities.<\/p>\n Due to a clause in a 2012 agreement between the city and the U.S. Department of Justice, the New Orleans Police Dept. doesn\u2019t hold detainees for federal immigration officials. Lafayette will only do so with a court order.<\/p>\n Rep. Robby Carter, D-Amite, took issue with one piece of the bill that he interpreted as enabling racial profiling by police, since it allows them to ask any person their citizenship status. He supported an amendment that limited the question being asked only of those suspected of or are witness to crimes.<\/p>\n Other critics of the bill said that the \u201csanctuary city\u201d label is a misnomer. Fernando Lopez of the Congress of Day Laborers, which represents manual laborers in the New Orleans region, said undocumented immigrants are already racially profiled and subject to unjust policing in the Crescent City and that the bill would open them to further mistreatment.<\/p>\n \u201cThere are no such things as sanctuary cities in Louisiana,\u201d Lopez said.<\/p>\n HB 453, a \u201ccompanion bill\u201d that allows victims of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants released by police to sue the city or parish was passed by the committee unanimously.<\/p>\n Legislators Seek To Regulate Driverless Cars<\/strong><\/p>\n A pair of bills passed by the House Transportation Committee addresses a new level of automotive technology by implementing new layers of regulation for autonomous vehicles, or those that don\u2019t necessarily require a human driver. There may also be new fees for owners of electric cars.<\/p>\n The full House is now prepared to vote on HB 1143 by Rep. Julie Stokes, R-Kenner, which creates a framework for the Dept. of Transportation and Development and the Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections to adopt rules and regulations for driverless cars.<\/p>\n You can\u2019t yet purchase these rolling robots. But most luxury manufacturers are expected to have models in showrooms by 2020.<\/p>\n Stokes\u2019 bill would create a regulatory framework that\u2019s broken down into levels. \u201cIt lays the groundwork for welcoming new technology into Louisiana and it will put Louisiana ahead of the nation for welcoming an innovative industry,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n The five levels range from the lowest, or first, which includes automated breaking and cruise control with some human cooperation, to the last, or fifth, which is complete automation.<\/p>\n In the second level, the driverless car is able to stay in a lane, but requires the driver\u2019s help for other maneuvers; the third level relates to vehicles that drive themselves but still needs a human being calling the shots; and the fourth level is basically automated, but only in a limited geographic region.<\/p>\n Stokes said her legislation is about an independent future for all walks of life.<\/p>\n \u201cI bring this on behalf of all senior citizens who lose their ability to drive,\u201d she said, adding, \u201cI can get ready on my way to the Capitol and on the way home read bills. It will free up my life.\u201d<\/p>\n Also passed was Stokes\u2019 HB 774, which would implement a new $50 annual fee for electric cars. While such vehicles already pay registration fees, the bill mirrors what owners of gas-guzzlers are paying in fuel taxes \u2014 20 cents per gallon, which is dedicated to road, bridge and highway maintenance.<\/p>\n \u201cThis establishes some marker for electric vehicles to be contributing to our roads,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n According to a financial analysis of the bill compiled by the Legislative Fiscal Office, the U.S. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy estimates there were 527 plug-in electric vehicle registrations in Louisiana in 2014.<\/p>\n To the extent that approximately half of these vehicles renew registrations in a given year, the analysis states, the Louisiana Transportation Trust Fund would receive $26,400 annually.<\/p>\n \u201cI do expect this number of electric vehicles to increase pretty steadily,\u201d Stokes said.<\/p>\n For more Louisiana political news, visit www.LaPolitics.com or follow Jeremy Alford on Twitter @LaPoliticsNow.\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" People and businesses hoping to score cash for their legal judgments against the state in the next fiscal year may be dangerously close to becoming victims of budget cuts. \u201cWe recommended not funding any judgments because we do not have that money right now,\u201d said Cody Allen Wells, a spokesperson for the Division of Administration. [&hellip<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":2376,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[63],"yoast_head":"\n