Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget staff lay out 'clear language' and reappropriation rules as committee prepares maintenance votes
Summary
Legislative budget staff described the program maintenance packet and 'clear language' — standard conditions, transfer exemptions and reappropriation authority — that the Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee will vote on when it sets maintenance budgets later in the week.
Keith Bybee, division manager for budget and policy analysis with the Legislative Services Office, presented the Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee with program maintenance packets and an explanation of the ‘clear language’ the committee will consider when setting maintenance budgets.
Bybee explained the materials summarize agency bases and show three columns — 2026 base, the governor’s recommendation and a Committee‑of‑the‑Whole (CEC) column — so the committee can see how statewide personnel benefit costs, statewide cost allocations and change‑in‑employee‑compensation (CEC) will affect each maintenance budget. He asked members to defer detailed numerical votes until the committee takes up statewide personnel and CEC decisions, which will be applied across agency budgets.
Bybee described four common categories of “clear language” included in the maintenance packets: exemptions from the statutory limit on transfers among expenditure categories (commonly cited as a section of state code in the packet), reappropriation authority to carry unobligated balances into subsequent fiscal years (often used for capital projects and ARPA-funded programs), conditions/limitations that specify how funds may be spent, and accountability/audit requirements. He said much of the language included in the packets is carryover language from prior appropriation bills.
Committee members asked clarifying questions. Senator Cook asked whether the example language was a proposal or historical language; Chair Hormann and Bybee clarified it reflected language used in prior appropriation bills and that the committee has full discretion to add, remove or change the language when it votes on maintenance budgets. Senator Wintrow asked about whether the committee can alter or remove prior language; staff confirmed the committee can modify language and that members would vote on each piece.
Chair members also discussed efforts to improve follow‑through and oversight, including better digital access to reports and support from a new fiscal impact team to help the committee track program performance and compliance with appropriation conditions. Bybee encouraged members to review the packet language in advance and to raise questions with analysts.
The committee did not vote on the maintenance budgets during the hearing; staff said formal motions and votes on maintenance proposals and associated clear language are scheduled for upcoming committee work sessions.
