Citizen Portal
Sign In

Higher‑education officials detail capital requests as legislature weighs 5% reductions

Legislative Appropriations Committee (Higher Education/Transportation items heard) · January 29, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioner Jeff Landward and system staff briefed lawmakers on SB102 dedicated funds, a proposed partial restoration of prior cuts, and options for a committee‑level 5% ongoing reduction; analysts warned that across‑the‑board cuts could undermine incentives to renovate rather than replace buildings.

Jeff Landward, commissioner of higher education, and Deputy Commissioner Nate Talley told the legislative appropriations committee that the system’s capital request prioritizes renovations and reuse and separates dedicated project requests from non‑dedicated requests. “The Board of Higher Education and the legislature are aligned with the priority being to look at the current buildings… and determine if there is a better path for meeting the needs of the campus,” Landward said.

Staff reviewed balances in the SB102 dedicated capital accounts, noting that a previous session reduced funds by about $49.5 million (degree‑granting fund) and $12 million (technical college fund). Analysts said a partial restoration is on the table: figures shown in committee materials included proposed restorations of roughly $24.7 million and $5.3 million to the two funds if the base bill holds.

Committee staff also presented a committee target exercise of roughly $20 million in ongoing reductions (a 5% exercise). Officials described options that include an across‑the‑board 5% or more targeted reductions, and cautioned that sweeping cuts to ongoing SB102 appropriations could erode the policy that incentivizes institutions to prioritize lower‑cost renovations over new construction. “A reduction in the ongoing higher education capital projects funds… does undermine the policy benefits of the approach that the legislature has taken,” the commissioner said.

Members’ questions focused on the mechanics of dedicated vs. non‑dedicated funds, how EAC set‑asides affect committee allocations, and the revenue drivers that led to the reduction exercise. Analysts said the revenue picture (including recent federal tax law impacts on state collections) and February revenue estimates will influence final decisions. The committee did not take a vote on funding levels during this meeting; instead staff provided options for members to consider.