Subcommittee adopts amendment to adjust allocations after forecast shortfalls in marijuana and criminal fines accounts

House Bill 5049, which adjusts revenue allocations for several state accounts in response to a revised March 2025 revenue forecast, was amended in the Capital Construction Subcommittee on March 7, 2025, and moved to the full Ways and Means Committee with a due-pass recommendation.

Staff described the dash-1 amendment as making small new allocations and several reductions tied to the updated revenue forecast. The amendment adds $120,000 in lottery funds to the Oregon Business Development Department for an economic development management system modernization project and reduces allocations because of projected declines: the Oregon Marijuana Account is reduced by $904,817 and the criminal fines account has a projected shortfall of $6,200,000. As a result of the criminal fines decline, the amendment reduces allocations to the Department of Corrections' Community Corrections program by $5,200,000 and reduces the Judicial Department State Court Technology Fund by $960,000. Staff said those amounts will be backfilled from the General Fund in a related bill.

Staff also described clarifying language added to direct the Department of Revenue to proportionally reduce allocations from the criminal fines account if declines continue; staff said the legislature did not previously include language explaining how to make proportional reductions.

Committee members asked for policy context on the criminal fines shortfall. One legislator asked whether the shortfall reflected reduced enforcement or lower crime rates; staff replied that collections have declined over time and that projected photo-radar revenue had been revised down after earlier estimates did not materialize. The staff witness said they could not fully explain court-by-court collection practices without further investigation.

After discussion, the subcommittee adopted the dash-1 amendment and moved House Bill 5049 as amended to the full committee with a due-pass recommendation. One member said they would not support the measure due to concerns about General Fund backfill and broader policy implications for criminal fines revenue and public safety funding.