Appropriations & Finance committee adopts HAFC final package, subcommittee reports and compensation recommendations

The House Appropriations & Finance Committee adopted the HAFC final package during a committee meeting, approving a set of subcommittee funding changes, work‑group recommendations and compensation adjustments assembled from public hearings and weekend work groups.

The measures consolidate changes that members said were developed publicly over the interim and during recent work‑group sessions. Committee staff and analysts presented a collated packet that lists the subcommittee changes and where each item will appear in the General Appropriations Act for FY26.

Why it matters: the package moves recurring and nonrecurring appropriations, across many agencies and programs, into a single bill framework and records the committee’s compensation decisions for state employees and educators.

What the committee approved: Subcommittee A additions included recurring general‑fund increases totaling about $387,000 to support positions such as a senior gaming auditor at the Gaming Control Board, two veterinary positions at the Racing Commission (about $238,900) and $100,000 for contractual services at the Office of Military Base Planning. Subcommittee B held funding flat for the Commission on the Status of Women at FY25 levels and added a $675,000 transfer for Miners Hospital. Subcommittee C investments included about $721,000 for the Livestock Board to stand up a meat inspection division, recurring funding for the Public Regulation Commission and $220,000 for Department of Homeland Security management to support three employees; the committee also approved a $1,000,000 award for the Crime Victims Reparation Commission for victims of sexual assault. Subcommittee D recommended a $1.2 million revenue reallocation for the Ethics Commission and one‑time funding for the Ethics Commission and the Department of Information Technology.

Work groups and compensation: the packet consolidated work‑group recommendations (public safety; economic development and general government; natural resources; health care authority; schools; higher education and others). Highlights included personnel capacity additions across agencies (for example, DFA personnel capacity near $458,000; Economic Development Department personnel about $1,000,000; Museum & Historic Sites $500,000), education funding adjustments that add recurring and nonrecurring dollars to school unit funding and targeted increases for special education and career/technical programs, and a compensation package that staff said diverged from the executive and LFC in details: LFC’s non‑K‑12 compensation average was reported as roughly 4 percent while the executive plan averaged about 3 percent with different longevity and benefit assumptions. The committee also adopted targeted compensation adjustments for select groups such as lower‑tier court employees and the Office of the State Engineer (distribution details to be worked by DFA and agency staff in section 8 of the bill packet).

Votes and procedure: committee members moved and adopted each subcommittee report by voice vote with no opposition recorded for Subcommittees A, B, C and D. The committee later moved to adopt the HAFC final package (motion by Vice Chair Dixon; second by Representative Sanchez). Representative Pettigrew was recorded in opposition to the adoption of the HAFC final package. The committee also voted to adopt a reauthorization scenario for stranded special appropriations (motion by Representative Garrett; second by Representative Silva) and recorded Representative Pettigrew in opposition to that motion as well.

Budget technicals and follow up: staff pointed to a large packet (table of contents and a map of where each item will appear in the General Appropriations Act) and indicated further “catch‑up cleanup” items would be resolved in a follow‑up session the next day. Committee members flagged several items for cleanup or further cross‑referencing with bills that may be introduced (for example, funded items contingent on legislation that would change trust‑fund distributions). Several members questioned details and asked staff to confirm fund sources for specific line items (for example, child care trust fund transfers, career and technical education funding sources, and whether some initiatives were recurring or one‑time).

The committee chair closed the item and set a follow‑up schedule for catch‑up cleanup and remaining technical fixes before the bill packet moved on for drafting into the committee substitute.

Ending: the committee adjourned to reconvene for catch‑up cleanup the following morning; staff will finalize the compiled bill language that reflects the adopted HAFC package and the technical reauthorizations the panel approved.