Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Adjustments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
JFAC briefed on growth in deficiency warrants and supplemental requests; committee reminded of emergency-clause rules
Summary
Kellen McGurkin explained how deficiency warrants let agencies spend against the general fund for specific, statutorily authorized purposes, noted that pest-control costs have driven much of the recent growth, and summarized this session's supplemental totals and emergency-clause considerations.
Kellen McGurkin, a budget and policy analyst with the Legislative Services Office, briefed the Joint Finance and Appropriation Committee on Jan. 7 about deficiency warrants, supplementals and rescissions, explaining how each mechanism adjusts appropriations and when the committee must consider emergency language for immediate effect.
Deficiency warrants allow certain state agencies to spend from the general fund for specific, statutorily authorized purposes without a prior appropriation; the legislature later appropriates funds to cover those expenditures. McGurkin likened the authority to a credit card: agencies use the spending authority when urgent needs arise and subsequently seek appropriation to zero out the balance.
Why it matters: Deficiency warrants and supplementals move money into current-year accounts outside the usual appropriation schedule. Supplementals are raised by agencies to address unexpected needs in the current fiscal year. The committee must decide whether to approve requests and whether to include emergency clauses so approved actions take effect immediately.
McGurkin told members the most common authorized uses of deficiency warrants include dam safety, fire suppression and pest control; he said pest-control requests accounted for much of the growth in recent years. He said most deficiency-warrant expenditures are first authorized by the Board of Examiners or the Board of Land Commissioners.
Looking at this session's numbers, McGurkin summarized the governor's recommended supplemental totals at about $604.8 million overall, including $98.8 million from the general fund. He noted the governor proposed a $60 million transfer from the general fund to the fire deficiency fund and said committee members would hear individual supplemental requests during agency budget hearings.
McGurkin also reviewed the constitutional emergency clause: "except in the case of emergency ... no action will take effect until the end of the fiscal year in which that was passed," he said, and that timing determines whether supplemental or deficiency actions must carry emergency language to take effect immediately. Committee members discussed the threshold for declaring an emergency; one co-chair said the committee should reserve supplementals for actual crises rather than predictable budget increases.
Ending: The committee will review the supplemental and deficiency-warrant requests during agency hearings. McGurkin provided a list of pending requests and the governor's recommendations for members to use during deliberations.
