House amends large supplemental budget bill after intense sage grouse funding debate

Representative Brown brought House Bill 2 to the floor as a substantial current‑fiscal‑year supplemental appropriations bill on March 11. The bill adds $541,212,500 to operating and capital budgets and incorporates extensive intent language for how funds should be used.

A contentious exchange focused on a $2 million line item intended to address the greater sage‑grouse issue. Representative King proposed an amendment to split that $2 million into $1 million for habitat improvement and $1 million for lobbying aimed at influencing federal decision‑makers; King argued the split would show both habitat commitment and engagement with federal officials. Representative Noel and other supporters argued the full allocation is necessary to avoid a listing and emphasized the state’s prior multi‑year investments in habitat restoration and related programs, warning of large economic impacts if the species were listed.

King’s motion to split the appropriation failed. Later, Representative Dunnegan successfully moved an amendment reducing one $2 million line to $1,360,000 and adjusting a separate line to $391,000 — changes tied to subcommittee priorities and prior base budget items. Sponsors explained much of the funding is allocated via RFP to contractors for habitat or legislative engagement, and that intent language governs spending. Representative Brown noted the bill incorporates many subcommittee decisions and passed the House 68–1.

The bill includes appropriations across multiple funds and carries substantial intent language; sponsors said detailed line‑item allocations and the work plan would be managed through subcommittee processes and fiscal‑analyst oversight.