Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Committee narrowly advances amended Prairie Dog fund grants to pay eligible debt; sends SB 2323 to appropriations
Loading...
Summary
The Finance and Taxation Committee approved an amendment and recommended a due pass on Senate Bill 2323 by a 7-6 vote with one member absent. The amendment shortens the program from six bienniums to two, increases the annual grant to $25 million (about $50 million total) and adds guardrails limiting use to qualifying debt and requiring reporting.
The House Finance and Taxation Committee voted 7‑6, with one member absent, to recommend a due pass on Senate Bill 2323 as amended and re‑refer the measure to the Appropriations Committee. The amendment reduced the original six‑biennium schedule to two bienniums and raised the annual grant amount from $20 million to $25 million, effectively allocating $50 million over two bienniums for the program.
Committee members debated whether the change was an appropriate use of the remaining 1% gross production tax allocation and whether the measure unfairly diverts funds from non‑oil producing cities and counties. Representative Porter criticized the proposal’s impact on non‑oil communities and cited local government debt figures for several jurisdictions: “The city of Mandan... is a hundred and $3,000,000,” Minot “is $104,000,000” and Dickinson “is $89,000,000.” He also cited county ending fund balances for Williams County, Stark County and Ward County and argued the bill shifts money “out of the wrong side of the formula.”
Representative Steiner defended the oil‑producing communities’ investments during the boom and the state’s role in supporting infrastructure: she said the cities “stepped up and took on a lot of debt” to build sewer, water and housing capacity and argued the state benefited from that development.
Representative Nehring warned that the functioning of those cities affects oil production and field operations: “A shutdown well ... doesn't produce a gallon. And if they can't get out and work, or if there's something impeding them, no oil's coming up.”
The amendment’s sponsor and mover, Representative Greenheck, argued the amendment improved the bill; Representative Steiner seconded the motion to adopt amendment 04003. Committee counsel and staff member Brent Bogard described the amendment’s guardrails on the record: “We made sure that it could only be applied for debt, so they can't use it to pay for new projects or anything. ... It actually has to be debt that was incurred in a certain date range, so it can't be applied to debt that they take in the future. It also required ... a report to legislative management of what debt they've used to pay.”
Members who opposed the measure raised concerns the bill frees local capacity to take on new debt and that there are insufficient statutory protections to ensure funds would be used to reduce property tax burdens. Supporters said the amendment shortens the program’s duration and increases upfront funds to make a more meaningful near‑term impact on eligible debt. The committee’s action now sends the amended SB 2323 to Appropriations for further consideration.
Votes at a glance: the committee approved amendment 04003 (motion carried) and recommended a due pass on SB 2323 as amended (committee vote 7 yes, 6 no, 1 absent). Representative Steiner indicated she would carry the bill to the floor.
