Committee briefed on deficiency warrants, supplementals and emergency clause; pest-control warrants have grown

Kellen McGurkin, budget and policy analyst with the Legislative Services Office, told the Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee that deficiency warrants permit certain agencies to spend against the general fund for narrowly authorized purposes without a prior appropriation; the body then appropriates funds later to zero out the outstanding balance.

"Deficiency warrants allow select agencies to spend monies against the general fund for select purposes as authorized in statute without a prior appropriation," McGurkin said.

Authorized uses and oversight

McGurkin told members the legislature has limited the statute-authorized purposes for deficiency-warrant spending to items such as dam safety, fire suppression and pest control. Those expenditures typically require authorization by an executive board (the Board of Examiners or the Board of Land Commissioners), then a later appropriation by JFAC to restore the account.

He also showed a five-year trend: the dollar value of deficiency-warrant requests has grown over the period, with a majority of the growth coming from pest-control requests. He directed the committee to the scheduled agency hearings (the military division and Department of Agriculture presentations) for more detail on the current-year requests.

Supplemental requests and the constitutional emergency clause

McGurkin explained the difference between supplementals and normal appropriations: supplementals are ordinary appropriations for the current fiscal year (an adjustment to FY2025 in this session); rescissions are reductions; and emergency language is required if an appropriation is meant to take effect before the end of the fiscal year. He cited the Idaho Constitution's emergency clause as the governing provision for whether a bill takes effect immediately or at fiscal year end.

Governor's proposed totals

McGurkin summarized the governor's supplemental recommendation figures shown in the budget book: total supplemental requests of about $604.8 million, including roughly $98.8 million in general-fund requests. He noted the totals include a proposed $60 million transfer from the general fund to the fire deficiency fund.

Committee questions

Senator Cook asked whether an urgent building-repair need (a leaking roof) could be handled as an emergency. McGurkin said that whether a request qualifies as an emergency is ultimately for the committee to decide and that agencies and the Division of Purchasing would address procurement questions if an immediate fix is needed. Committee co-chairs noted the legislature's practice in recent years of reserving supplementals for true emergencies rather than routine budget adjustments.

Ending

McGurkin closed by noting tables and lists of agency deficiency and supplemental requests are available in the legislative budget materials; members said they will use the lists during agency work-group meetings.