Permanent Building Fund review: $1.9 billion in active projects, lawmakers press timelines and deferred‑maintenance priorities

The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee reviewed the Permanent Building Fund (PBF) budget and the Division of Public Works’ capital project portfolio, which the division reported totals roughly $1.9 billion in active public‑works projects, including about $1.4 billion in capital projects.

Why it matters: the PBF finances construction, alterations and repairs for state facilities including higher education; because many projects are multi‑year and appropriations become continuously appropriated, committee members pressed for better reporting on project status and timelines.

Frances Lippett, the legislative budget analyst, explained the PBF’s structure and revenue sources. She told the committee the fund receives seven statutory revenue sources including a $10 fee on each income tax return, two separate $5 million transfers from sales and cigarette taxes, one‑third of beer tax proceeds, three‑eighths of lottery earnings, interest income, and interest earned on the budget stabilization fund. Lippett said recent transfers of general‑fund balances into the PBF increased available project investments, and that interest earnings have risen in the past two years as a result.

Lippett said the total value of active public‑works projects is about $1.9 billion and that roughly 42 percent of funding for capital projects has been committed. She also noted reporting differences between Idaho’s current accounting system (LUMA) and the prior system, and directed committee members to a November capital‑budget report from the division with line‑by‑line project status available on SharePoint.

Key requested projects the advisory council recommended for FY2026 included: - $6.5 million to expand the Department of Lands’ Ponderosa office for additional office space, restroom/shower facilities, and improved security at the reception point. - $5.56 million to install utilities for a future Idaho National Guard readiness center in Bonneville County that will ultimately support about 350 personnel at peak occupancy. - $5.525 million for the Idaho State Police Lewiston District 2 facility; Lippett said the legislature previously appropriated $9.975 million but attempts to purchase a building proved unsuccessful and the agency now seeks funding to acquire land and build new construction. - $2.5 million to expand labs at the Micron Center for Materials Research at Boise State University, adding 1–3 labs to shelled space. - $14 million toward a life‑science complex at Idaho State University that Lippett said would be funded by a combination of PBF funds, $35.77 million in agency funds and $78 million in bonding for a total estimated cost of $127.77 million. - $8 million for a joint military science and veterans assistance center at the University of Idaho.

The FY2026 recommendation also restores $12.5 million in previously repurposed appropriations (including funds moved in FY2025 to support a minimum security dorm at Orofino Prison) and includes $68.2 million in alterations, repairs, accessibility improvements and facilities maintenance (including $2 million for the Capitol Mall and Chinden Campus).

Committee members pressed timing and prioritization. Representative Miller asked how long projects typically take; Lippett and Division of Public Works administrator Dale Reynolds estimated many projects run about two to four years from appropriation through completion depending on delivery method and scale, with larger construction (for example, a new prison) taking multiple years once construction begins. Reynolds said some projects under contract are not amenable to delay, and he reported the division currently has roughly 500 active projects and is hiring additional project managers to move work forward.

Members recalled recent budget language: lawmakers had required reporting and a four‑year rule that made appropriations available for reappropriation if there was no “shovel in the ground” within that period. Co‑Chair Herrmann and other members asked for a list of projects that have not advanced within four or five years; Lippett agreed to produce that list for the committee.

Cost pressures and industry conditions: Reynolds told lawmakers the construction market has cost escalation and workforce shortages that complicate project delivery; he said escalations have moderated but some materials remain hard to procure. Senator Bierke asked whether the construction market conditions or large projects like Micron should change prioritization; Reynolds said projects underway remain under contract and thus must continue, and the division evaluates new requests against need and feasibility.

Bottom line: the PBF portfolio is large and multi‑year; committee members asked for more granular status reporting, a list of projects that have not met the committee’s four‑year “shovel in the ground” test, and clarity about committed versus unexpended appropriations.