ITD asks JFAC for expanded reappropriation authority and large transfers to finish multi-year road projects

The Idaho Transportation Department told the Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee at a budget hearing that it needs expanded reappropriation authority, one‑time general‑fund transfers and ongoing federal appropriations to complete multi‑year construction commitments.

Department officials said the request is driven by a large volume of multiyear contracts and a limit the Legislature placed on how much prior‑year appropriation the department can carry forward. Dave Tolman, ITD chief administrative officer, told the committee, “As of the end of FY 24, our obligated unspent construction program was a little over $600,000,000 across multiple funding sources.”

Why it matters: ITD said the current $250,000,000 reappropriation cap can leave the department short of spending authority in years when large projects reach stages that trigger large contractor payments. Director Scott Stokes said the problem is not that money is missing from agency bank accounts but that “we came dangerously close to this last fiscal year … of running out of spending authority,” forcing short‑term deferrals of some payments.

Requested items and amounts: Brooke Dupree, LSO budget analyst for ITD, identified a set of requests in the construction and right‑of‑way division: a $60,000,000 supplemental (split as $10 million from State Highway Local and $50 million from State Highway Federal) for FY25 excess receipts; an ongoing capital increase tied to IIJA federal receipts (about $57,276,000); an additional ongoing capital request of $55,000,000; a request for authority to reappropriate up to $250,000,000 (the department asked the committee to consider removing that cap); and two 1‑time general fund cash‑transfer requests — $99,704,000 for safety and capacity projects and $212,000,000 for road and bridge maintenance. Dupree explained that historically 60% of strategic‑initiative cash transfers go to ITD and 40% to local governments.

How the law and financing fit: ITD described the role of GARVEE bonds and the Transportation Expansion and Congestion Mitigation (TECM) sales‑tax diversion in the department’s capital program. Dupree noted that GARVEE bonds (Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle bonds) have a weighted average interest rate around 3.4% and that the current outstanding GARVEE debt is scheduled to be paid off in 2040; TECM is funded through a 4.5% diversion of sales tax subject to minimum and maximum thresholds that affect how much flows to ITD versus local governments.

Agency view and cash position: Director Stokes and staff said the cash needed to complete work is largely on hand but that statutory or appropriation limits prevent spending it in some years without explicit legislative authority. Stokes told the committee the department has “a very large amount right now contracted in multi‑year projects” and that monthly construction payouts in season can run “between $50 and $80 million a month.” Tolman said the strategic‑initiatives fund is continuously appropriated in code, and when the Legislature sets a single‑year appropriation it can restrict access to prior‑year balances needed to finish multi‑year contracts.

Committee questions and options: Committee members pressed how much unobligated cash remains and whether the request is for new projects or for finishing work on projects already under contract. ITD answered that much of the spending is to complete projects already under contract and that the reappropriation language or cash transfers would smooth payments without changing previously approved contracts. Staff and financial officers said an accurate estimate of available fund balances could be provided to the committee if requested. Several committee members framed the issue as one of aligning appropriation authority with the contractual cadence of construction payments.

What’s next: ITD asked the committee to consider language that would (a) allow the strategic‑initiatives fund to be spent under its continuous appropriation in code instead of an annual appropriation that limits access and (b) increase reappropriation authority so multi‑year commitments can be paid without short‑term delays. The committee did not take an immediate vote in the hearing; members asked for follow‑up detail on current project obligations and the department’s cash balances.

Ending: ITD officials said they will provide the committee additional detail about cash balances and project status; the department emphasized the requests aim to avoid delaying contractor payments and to maintain the pace of multi‑year highway projects rather than to start unspecified new projects.