Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Cash Fund Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee to meet with Appropriations, JFO and Legislative Council to review cash fund rules and unspent capital balances
Summary
Members proposed an 8‑person working meeting (four Corrections & Institutions members, four Appropriations members) with the Joint Fiscal Office and Legislative Council to clarify statute and process for unspent cash fund balances and to review the 4% capital funding formula; members debated whether to codify the 4% rule or keep flexibility.
On Feb. 12 the House Corrections and Institutions Committee agreed to pursue a focused review of the state's capital cash fund and the statute that governs carryforward and unspent balances. Committee leaders proposed a working group of four members of the Corrections and Institutions committee and four members of the House Appropriations Committee to meet with the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) and Legislative Council to "get the lay of the land" on how money that was appropriated more than two years ago but not encumbered should be treated.
The chair said Appropriations Chair Robin Schein told the committee that a full joint meeting of both committees (22 members) would be difficult for such a technical issue, so the smaller working group is intended to bring expertise from the Repo committee and Appropriations to the table. The chair described the plan for the eight members to meet at 8:00 the next morning with JFO and Legislative Council and return recommendations to both full committees.
Committee members framed the issue two ways. Some members argued for formalizing a move toward paying capital needs with cash to avoid future bond interest costs and to preserve funds for deferred maintenance, while others warned against codifying a fixed formula and said it would be prudent to retain legislative flexibility because revenues can fluctuate in downturns. A staff or member comment cited a version of the formula tying available cash to "4% of the general fund less bond repayment" and said the proposal on the table would make that a definitive 4% allocation.
Members repeatedly raised an operational concern: cash allocated to capital projects but not encumbered can "sit there" for years; one speaker said, "you could have $30,000,000 just sitting there because nothing's gone out the door." Members said part of the review should identify subaccounts in the cash fund that fall outside the committee's jurisdiction and determine process for reallocation or carryforward. Several members asked that Repo committee members participate because they track two‑ and five‑year old cash balances.
The committee did not adopt statutory language at this meeting. The immediate outcome was agreement to hold the smaller working meeting with JFO and Legislative Council and to report back to the full Corrections and Institutions and Appropriations committees. Members said any recommendations from that smaller group would come before the full committees for additional review and possible statutory change.
The committee then moved on to other agenda items.
