House Appropriations Committee votes 8-3 to pass S.127 after debate over education fund impact

The House Appropriations Committee voted 8-3 May 20 to report S.127, a bill related to housing and housing development, after a short debate over whether the proposal would reduce money reaching the Education Fund.

Committee Chair (unnamed) opened the meeting and framed the committee’s immediate task: “our job is to vote the bill and then send it on its merry.” The chair said an amendment is expected and that the measure will go to four committees for straw polls the next day before continuing through the calendar.

A committee member questioned whether the program underlying S.127 would “take money away from the Ed Fund,” and described how the Education Fund functions under the current system. That member explained with an example that if the Education Fund target were $100 million and $10 million were used to offset bond payments in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) communities, the fund’s allocation would be spread across other towns and thus “self-correct” back toward the $100 million target. The member also referenced the Joint Fiscal Office’s prior estimate that the program’s impact could be about $6,000,000.

Another committee member said the change effectively shifts the tax base, which could raise tax rates slightly because the denominator for the rate calculation would be smaller. One member explicitly said she was not comfortable with language that came out of Ways and Means and Maintenance and would not support the bill in its current form, while expressing openness to a forthcoming amendment.

After the discussion the committee moved to a voice and roll-call vote. The clerk recorded the roll call: Representative Bloomley (yes); Representative Pickensett (no); Representative Harrison (no); Representative Consenca (yes); Representative Roche (no); Representative Rawicki (yes); Representative Michael (yes); Representative Steven (yes); Representative Jacob (yes); Representative Jacoboni (yes); Representative Lipschack (yes). The tally was eight in favor and three opposed; the motion to report S.127 favorably passed.

Committee members and staff noted that the bill may be amended in the next day’s committee straw polls and that, if differences remain between chambers, the measure could go to a committee of conference. No formal amendments were adopted during this meeting, and no committee assignment or implementation date was set.

The meeting closed with the chair instructing members to stand ready for the next day’s committee activity; one member said they would withhold final support until they review the anticipated amendment.