JFAC staff present program-maintenance packets and ‘clear language’ approach; co-chairs say intent language will be treated as binding

Legislative budget staff walked the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee through program-maintenance packets on Jan. 15, previewing the maintenance-bill language that will accompany fiscal-year 2026 base budgets and emphasizing that the committee plans to treat previously used “intent” language as binding directions.

Keith Bybee, Division Manager for Budget Policy Analysis, explained packet contents and said packets include comparative analyses of agency bases, governor recommendations and a draft column for the committee’s recommended changes. He told members the maintenance packets will incorporate three broad categories of clear language: exemptions from transfer limits between expenditure categories, reappropriation authority for multi-year projects and conditions, limitations and restrictions attached to appropriations.

"What we decided to do this year was rather than creating however many, 7 more agency hearings, we could be more efficient by just having hearings on the portion that is a request for an increase," Bybee said, describing the hearing structure. He said staff added a third column to comparative reports that will show the committee’s working numbers.

Chair Horman and other co-chairs described a renewed emphasis on treating the language as law rather than informal guidance. "This is the law," the chair said when describing the committee’s expectation that funds appropriated for specified purposes be used for those purposes.

Bybee reviewed examples: exemptions from a statute limiting transfers between expenditure categories (staff cited the statute number in the hearing materials), reappropriation authority for ARPA and other long-term federal grants and specific accountability-reporting requirements for large programs such as Medicaid. He said the committee will have discretion to add or remove such language when it votes on maintenance budgets.

Representatives and senators asked procedural and oversight questions. Representative Miller urged a systematic approach to performance tracking for long-standing programs and suggested members need easy access to historical intent language and reports. Chair Horman and Senator Wintrow noted the legislature’s new fiscal-impact team and digital records will make it easier to follow up on reporting and performance requirements.

Bybee asked members to review the packets and bring specific questions to analysts; he said committee staff will finalize figures after statewide decisions (personnel benefit costs, statewide allocations and CEC) are decided in later votes.

Why it matters: The committee’s approach to “clear language” — placing conditions, reappropriation authority and transfer exemptions directly in maintenance appropriation bills — sets expectations for how agencies must spend appropriated money and increases the clarity of legislative oversight going into the FY2026 budgeting process.