ITD asks JFAC for $60 million supplemental, broad reappropriation and two general-fund transfers to cover multi‑year contracts

The Idaho Transportation Department told the Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee on May 20 that it needs immediate spending authority and longer‑term changes to avoid shortfalls while paying contractors on multi‑year highway projects.

"As of the end of FY 24, our obligated unspent construction program was a little over $600,000,000 across multiple funding sources," Dave Tolman, ITD chief administrative officer, told the committee. ITD asked for a $60 million supplemental for fiscal 2025 — $50 million from the State Highway Federal Fund and $10 million from the State Highway Local Fund — to cover payments on projects currently under construction.

Why it matters: many current ITD projects span multiple years and funding sources (federal, state, local, and strategic initiatives). The agency said its existing appropriation rules and the legislature's $250 million reappropriation cap have constrained its ability to make contractor payments when projects accelerate into later stages.

ITD's FY2026 requests include two ongoing capital outlay increases tied to higher federal receipts (a $57,276,000 request and a separate $55,000,000 ongoing request, the latter split $50,000,000 federal/$5,000,000 local). Separately, ITD requested two one‑time general‑fund transfers: $99,704,000 for safety and capacity projects and $212,000,000 for road and bridge maintenance. The department described the typical historical split on such transfers as approximately 60% to ITD and 40% to local governments.

The department also sought to restore continuous access to the Strategic Initiatives Program Fund — currently continuously appropriated in statute — asking the committee not to override that continuous appropriation with a single‑year cap so the fund can be used to pay multi‑year obligations without repeating legislative appropriation each year.

Committee members pressed agency officials on whether the requests were for new projects or to cover payments for work already under contract. Director Scott Stokes and Tolman said the larger share of the supplemental and reappropriation requests were to ensure they could finish paying contractors on projects already bid and underway, not to cover cost overruns.

"We were in danger of running out of spending authority in FY24," Stokes said, explaining that the problem is one of appropriation timing and multi‑year payouts rather than a lack of cash. He added that the department has generally delivered projects within budget, but that contractor payment schedules create a wave of payouts that can exceed a single year’s appropriation when many multi‑year projects complete at once.

Committee discussion also referenced GARVEE and TECM bond programs and the role of federal programs such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) in raising available federal funding that ITD now wants to recognize as ongoing revenue rather than one‑time.

Looking ahead: ITD recommended reappropriation authority up to $250,000,000 (the same cap the legislature set previously), and the governor's recommendation would remove that $250,000,000 limit, effectively allowing broader multi‑year spending authority tied to the Strategic Initiatives Program Fund and other dedicated highway funds. The agency said that without broader reappropriation authority it may again need to delay payments or defer some contractor disbursements during peak construction months, when monthly contract payments can range from $50 million to $80 million.

The committee asked for further details on current project status and on exact cash balances; ITD agreed to provide more detailed follow‑up on obligated unspent balances and the status of specific projects.