Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Program Maintenance Packets topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Joint committee reviews maintenance packet, ‘clear language’ and reappropriation authorities ahead of budget votes
Summary
Keith Bybee of the Legislative Services Office walked the Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee through the program maintenance packets on Jan. 15, explaining the committee’s standard “clear language” categories and how maintenance motions will be structured.
Keith Bybee, division manager for budget policy analysis in the Legislative Services Office, briefed the Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee on Jan. 15 about the program maintenance packets that will underpin maintenance‑budget motions during upcoming votes.
Bybee said the packets collect standard “clear language” that the legislature has used previously and organized it into four main categories: (1) exemptions from the statutory restriction on transfers between expenditure categories and programs (citing Idaho Code § 67‑3511), (2) reappropriation authority (often used for multiyear capital or ARPA projects), (3) conditions, limitations and restrictions that apply to appropriations (what Bybee and the co‑chairs termed “clear language”), and (4) accountability audits and reporting requirements.
The presentation included examples across functional areas: judicial retirement account transfer language, continuous appropriation for the Endowment Fund Investment Board, DEQ direction for remediation funds in the Coeur d’Alene Basin, transfers between water pollution and remediation funds, and reappropriations for broadband and capital projects. Bybee said the committee will vote on maintenance figures and associated language after statewide decisions on personnel benefits, statewide cost allocation and change‑in‑employee compensation are resolved.
Members asked whether prior intent language in the packets is binding; the co‑chairs and Bybee clarified that language included in the maintenance bills is intended to be law once adopted and that the committee has discretion to add, remove or modify language when it considers maintenance and enhancement bills. Senators and representatives were encouraged to read packet language in advance and to request additional reporting requirements if they want the legislature to require follow‑up from agencies.
Bybee told members to expect the maintenance motions to start with the 2026 base, add personnel benefit costs, statewide cost allocation, and change‑in‑employee compensation, and then arrive at the total program maintenance figure. The committee adjourned for the day with staff and members noting additional review of the packets would be needed prior to votes.
