Key facts
- Congresswoman Norma Torres questioned HUD Secretary Scott Turner on the timeline for disaster recovery aid for California wildfire victims.
- Secretary Turner deflected responsibility for the delay to local leadership.
- Thousands were displaced and an estimated 440 people died in the January 2025 wildfires.
- California's AB 238 provides up to 12 months of mortgage forbearance for affected homeowners.
- The California Mortgage Bankers Association stated that forbearance alone is insufficient for recovery.
- The CMBA advocates for a coordinated federal disaster recovery policy.
During a congressional hearing on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s budget, California Congresswoman Norma Torres pressed Secretary Scott Turner for a timeline on disaster recovery assistance for victims of the January 2025 wildfires. Turner deflected the question, suggesting local leadership was responsible for the delay, a response criticized as inadequate for constituents still displaced months later.
The author argues that disaster relief is a non-partisan issue and emphasizes the need for federal accountability, stating that constituents are seeking the support other affected communities in America expect. The recent wildfires, including the Eaton Fire and Palisades Fire, devastated 59 square miles, displaced thousands, and resulted in an estimated 440 deaths.
The California Mortgage Bankers Association (CMBA), through its CEO Paul Gigliottii, testified that while California's AB 238 provides up to one year of mortgage forbearance, this measure alone is insufficient for recovery. The CMBA advocates for a structured, coordinated federal approach involving state officials, insurers, and the mortgage industry, highlighting that servicers, lenders, and loan officers are on the front lines managing the complex aftermath for borrowers.
The article points out that California contributes significantly more in federal taxes than it receives in federal funding, underscoring that the request for disaster support is not extraordinary. The piece concludes by urging Washington to provide a concrete timeline, resources, and coordination for these families, emphasizing that housing policy and industry advocacy should serve borrowers regardless of political affiliation.