Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews capital bill numbers; proposes lowering transfer to free $6.3 million for appropriations
Summary
Fiscal staff presented a revised capital bill and proposed lowering the annual general fund transfer to free roughly $6.3 million for appropriation; the committee discussed moving cash between major maintenance, bond and cash lines and confirmed $2 million already committed to projects described as the "3 B's."
Committee fiscal staff walked members through a revised capital bill spreadsheet that the staff said shows roughly $6.3 million in excess cash available for appropriation if the committee accepts a proposed change to the annual general fund transfer.
Scott Moore, who opened the fiscal overview, said the version under review began with about $4.5 million in excess and described line‑by‑line adjustments including an added $190,000 bonding allocation for the Memorial Courthouse and a split of major maintenance funding between bonded and cash lines to reduce complexity for reporting. Moore said moving some major maintenance from cash to a mix of bond and cash would make accounting cleaner for the Department of Buildings and General Services (BGS).
Deputy fiscal officer Emily Burnham proposed reducing the annual general fund transfer (the committee described it as a roughly 4% transfer) from about $14.8 million to about $8.5 million; Moore and other staff said that reduction would free about $6.3 million for appropriations. Committee members discussed that roughly $2.0 million of the available funds had already been committed to a group of projects referred to in the transcript as the "3 B's," leaving about $4.3 million of flexible cash. Members asked for clearer labeling on the bill so approps staff and others do not assume the full amount is uncommitted.
The committee discussed alternatives for freeing cash, including moving only what is necessary from the major maintenance line rather than all of the line, and noted that BGS is accustomed to using mixed cash and bonding approaches. Staff said the change was intended to make reporting cleaner and to leave individual programs able to be adjusted later.
Members took a straw poll and expressed general support for the approach and asked staff to work with fiscal colleagues and with "John" to ensure language and numbers align before the bill is sent to the Appropriations Committee; the committee did not record a formal roll‑call vote. Members also agreed to meet the next morning at 8:30 a.m. to finalize remaining language on several items. No budget adoption or final appropriation occurred at this meeting.
