Appropriations panel checks off multiple Section C and base budget items; several proposals deferred or reallocated

The House Appropriations Committee reviewed Section C changes and base/one-time items during its March 21 meeting and reached direction-level decisions on multiple line items, while holding other proposals for later discussion.

For the record, Emily Byrne of the Joint Fiscal Office told the committee, “we're going to walk through the section C changes through the big bill,” and presented a draft spreadsheet of sources and uses for committee decisions. Members worked through numerous line items, confirming or deferring changes and asking staff to produce the next iteration of the spreadsheet.

Key outcomes and directions from the session included: the committee agreed to revert the remainder of a previous treasurer appropriation to the general fund (transcript language stated the $20 million proposed elimination left $6 million remaining to revert); the judiciary technology fund request was reduced in the draft by $2,160,000; members tentatively agreed to convert certain vacancy-savings entries into vacancy savings rather than adding new positions for state attorneys and sheriff transport deputies; and the recovery campus pilot funding was removed from the draft because agencies indicated the pilot was not yet ready. Committee members also deferred a broader housing discussion, leaving some housing-related lines (including prior VHCB considerations) for later deliberation.

Staff and members discussed criminal-justice-related staffing and victim services. One proposal discussed reallocating roughly $450,000 from a proposed 1.7 FTE package toward victim services and precharge diversion implementation; staff said providers estimated needing about $1.25 million to meaningfully address a shortfall in victim services funding tied to federal and special-fund cuts. Committee members asked staff to reflect revised mixes of positions and costs in the next spreadsheet iteration.

Health and human-services items were adjusted or split for additional review. Members tentatively approved a funding reallocation that would create a separate line for an $85,000 general-fund contribution intended to tap a 90/10 federal matching stream for family-planning codes (the committee asked staff to move that $85,000 out of the FQHC line and place it in a separate line to allow access to the federal match). The committee discussed a community-based rate study and whether to take the modest across-the-board increase requested or to add roughly $640,000 to reach a full 2% increase for a broader set of providers; members asked staff to return with options in separate rows.

Committee members also discussed the Human Rights Commission’s request for two additional positions (roughly $450,000) to handle an increased caseload after federal changes to fair-housing enforcement; members signaled willingness to consider funding the request from the position pool rather than creating new positions but asked staff to reflect the options in the draft.

Several items were checked off as agreed in the draft spreadsheet (for example, certain public-safety radio and firearm replacement lines, hazard mitigation grants, and returning-veterans grants), while others were left open for the committee’s next iteration. The meeting paused for dinner with plans to reconvene and continue budget decisions later that evening; no formal roll-call votes on these adjustments were recorded in the transcript.

Because the session was working from draft language and fiscal spreadsheets, staff will update the committee’s draft to reflect the changes discussed and return the revised draft for additional committee action.