Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Reserve topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debates using budget reserve to pay state settlement agreements
Summary
Representatives discussed Senate Bill 233, which would allow the budget reserve account to be used to pay certain state settlement agreements according to statutory thresholds; members clarified it would not affect the education-designated rainy day fund.
An unnamed sponsor on the House floor on March 4 introduced Senate Bill 233, a measure to formalize procedures for using the state budget reserve to pay settlement agreements arising from pending court cases. The sponsor told colleagues the bill follows an existing tiered approval process in state code: payments under $100,000 can be approved by the agency with the governor's consent; $100,000 to $500,000 require the governor; $500,000 to $1,000,000 come to the Legislative Management Committee; and amounts of $1,000,000 or more must be brought to the full Legislature in a special session.
The bill’s sponsor said the change is procedural: “Basically, what it says, up to a hundred thousand dollars, the agency can, with governor's approval, go ahead and pay those funds out,” and described the scale-based approval steps for larger amounts. The sponsor argued the measure prepares the state to pay settlements if cases are lost and to avoid calling a special session for smaller payments.
Representative Cox pressed whether the change would draw down the separately created education rainy day fund, which she said is funded by income tax and dedicated to education. The sponsor replied the bill does not affect the education-designated rainy day fund and that this measure concerns the surplus budget reserve instead.
Representative Daniels asked how settlements were paid previously and whether the new language simply automates past procedures; members replied the bill would permit some payments to be made without calling a special session. No formal vote tally on Senate Bill 233 appears in the transcript; the record shows the reading of the bill by title and the chamber moving on to other business while awaiting a conference committee report.
The House then turned to other agenda items, including major sales-tax legislation and a conference committee report on bonds. The transcript records no further substantive changes to Senate Bill 233 during the session excerpt provided.
