HB 4044 creates a new Office of Resilience and Emergency Management within the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS). The office is made the principal DHS unit for coordinating emergency preparedness, response, and recovery activities that affect human services programs and clients, and for supporting the public during emergencies and other major disruptions. It is also authorized to coordinate with the Oregon Department of Emergency Management, local and tribal governments, and other entities to support mass care, individual assistance, human services recovery, and intermediate housing.
The bill also establishes two new emergency assistance programs. The Oregon Public Assistance Grant Program, administered by the Oregon Department of Emergency Management, would provide grants to state agencies, local governments, tribes, school districts, education service districts, and certain nonprofits for emergency-related work protecting public health, safety, or property, including debris removal and restoration of public services and infrastructure. The Oregon Individual Assistance Program, administered by DHS, would provide direct assistance to qualified individuals displaced by emergencies, whose homes are uninhabitable, or whose homes are inaccessible due to disability-related impacts. Eligible help could include temporary rental assistance, home repair or replacement, immediate needs, and other critical recovery services.
HB 4044 also amends Oregon emergency-management statutes, including the definition of “emergency” in ORS 401.025 and the Oregon Disaster Response Fund in ORS 401.534. The bill creates separate treasury accounts for the new grant and individual assistance programs, makes the funds continuously appropriated, and sets reporting and rulemaking requirements. It also appropriates $500,000 from the General Fund for the biennium ending June 30, 2027, to carry out the individual assistance program.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available legislative history is favorable. The House committee voted 7-0 to do pass with amendments and refer the bill to Ways and Means by prior reference, indicating unanimous committee support at that stage. The bill was still in committee upon adjournment, so it did not complete the full legislative process in the available record.
There is little direct evidence of controversy in the provided materials, but the bill’s likely points of discussion are administrative structure, funding, and the scope of emergency aid. The measure shifts some emergency-response coordination into DHS, expands state grant and assistance authority, and creates new ongoing funding mechanisms, which can raise questions about cost, eligibility, interagency roles, and how broadly emergency assistance should extend to individuals and nonprofits.
HB 4044 would add new provisions to Oregon’s emergency-management framework by creating the Office of Resilience and Emergency Management in DHS, establishing two new emergency assistance programs, and amending ORS 401.025 and 401.534. It would expand state authority to provide both public-sector recovery grants and individual emergency assistance, create dedicated treasury accounts for those programs, and require interagency data-sharing, rulemaking, and reporting. The bill would also appropriate $500,000 from the General Fund and make program funds continuously appropriated, affecting DHS and the Oregon Department of Emergency Management as the primary administering agencies.
The available voting record suggests strong support for the bill, with the House committee approving it 7-0 and advancing it with amendments. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate to indicate opposition or divided views in the provided materials. The bill appears to have been viewed as a practical emergency-preparedness and recovery measure rather than a controversial policy change.
No specific objections are documented in the provided record, but the bill’s structure suggests potential areas of contention: whether DHS should house a new resilience office, how much authority and discretion the Governor and agencies should have to activate and administer the programs, and whether the state should create new continuously appropriated accounts and a General Fund appropriation for emergency aid. Stakeholders most likely to care about these issues include emergency-management agencies, DHS, local governments, tribes, nonprofits that provide critical services, and budget-focused legislators concerned about program cost and eligibility standards.