Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Good afternoon, this is the House Appropriations Committee. It is Wednesday, 01/21/2026. It's just after 02:30 in the afternoon, and we are getting back to a BAA spreadsheet. Emily has worked on doing something, and it's a very fancy one this year. Extra cool things that are happening that she will tell you all about. And at the same time, after the education says, we can also see if there are areas that we can close out while we're talking and maybe Emily can even demonstrate how it works on a screen.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Don't have to.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: I probably won't because James isn't going to have it open as you go through. He's going to
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: He's going to do the
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: cool part of the court.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So the combination is let's hear where we are, but let's also do some markup and get some things
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: off the list that we can.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yes. And this is a work in progress. Say that before we dive into it.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Find the version that I want
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: to share. We are Yesterday, you received the budget, the 2026 budget, and it had to account for the revenue downgrade that was adopted on Friday. Those changes are not in the sheet that you have in front of you. I'm going to add between the governor's recommended column, make it governor's recommended updated column and add in words like there's the and we'll talk about it when we
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: get to it.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: There's a reduction in the amount of one time money needed to go to the Brattleboro retreat for the settlement. There's some increases in some direct apps and reversions that bring it back into balance with the new revenue numbers. So that's just, that's not in here. It will be in the version you see tomorrow. Revenue downgrade. Yeah. Revenue downgrade. I will share my screen and then walk through the
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: details.
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: So you can add those things and maybe shade them with different colors? Yes. Yeah.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Make them a different color. Alright.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Work. Here we go. Okay. So recognizing that last year, when you all saw this budget adjustment sheet, I think more than half of you were new to the committee, and we're trying to figure out what a budget adjustment was. So just at a high level, this spreadsheet is hate gang, what the governor put forward in that big spreadsheet that you have. I'm just trying to summarize all of it. The top part in gray, that's the as past FY '26. So that stuff's not going to change. That's what you would pass for appropriations, the pay act one times the transfers. So the 190 that includes the 77,000,000 that went to the education fund, one with other transfers. We get contingent appropriations and transfers and then what went to the reserves. So that's what we actually did. That's what you actually did.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Won't change what we did because we That
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: won't change. That top part will stay the same across house, gov, senate. That's just a reminder of what happened and where we're starting. So then starting on the orange section, these are all of the adjustments that are listed for the general fund on that big sheet from the administration. The ones that are grayed out with the check, there's now the little, the new feature, there's the little check boxes.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And then so you can check
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: some
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: of As soon as I check it, it turns green.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Right, in our spreadsheet. So as you check things off-
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: you give it a new demonstrate or just
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: have it?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: James has it open. But so as you close things, we'll check the box and it will gray out. And then you'll know that those are ones that are you've settled on. We can always open it back up if you need us to, but
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Use a lighter shade of gray?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: We could use a lighter shade of gray. Yes, could a is good feedback. So, yeah, so we put in What's grayed out already is what you talked about on Friday, I believe, and made some decisions on.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Hopefully that looks familiar. We made that rebate. Yeah. One judiciary thing. Police over time, military.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yep. And then the description is our attempt to say what it is in a few short words. In the notes section, this is where we tried to reference, right? If this is something that has federal match or is a part of a global covenant thing, it has the detail in there. And again, this is just the general fund pieces. And as you make decisions, we'll fill in the House column. If you pick the same number as the governor, we'll put the governor's number in the House column. If you want a different number, we will fill in a different number and add rows as needed if there's things that aren't on the governor's list that you
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: all decide you want. That's the legislative adjustment. Then
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: B1 to remember the base. B is the base. And then, you're on, you have one times.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: You're on, you've got the one times and the changes in yellow on line 81. That's the Brad over a retreat reconciliation payment. I highlighted that one because we know that's a
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: new number. We know what the number is too, but are
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: you just going to put
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: it in on the governor's side?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yes, we'll update it in the governor's. Updated. 5.1 or something like that. That's just more to signal to us. Same with the pilot special fund that I know there's been some discussion about whether or not that transfer needs to happen from the general fund to the pilot special fund. There's also a transfer from the transportation fund to the pilot special fund. There's no big question on whether or
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: not that needs to occur.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: And then on the bottom in green, this is the revenue picture. So just like at the top, those first four lines, that's what was as passed. That's the forecast that was used in the original budget, what the reversions were, direct applications, and what was carried forward from FY 2025. Below that are the adjustments for the budget adjustment. So we have the updated forecast, which includes both the updated forecast and accounting for the sort of revenue changes adopted by the general assembly. You'll recall there were some tax credits adopted by the general assembly, so that counts for those in that 88 number.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Wouldn't the tax credits be a reduction in revenue? Yes and no. Nothing is ever simple. Nothing is ever simple.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Glad Chris is here. This is one that we have talked about how to explain. But when Tom and Jeff do the forecast, they compare forecast to forecast. You guys effectively adjusted the forecast when you did the tax credit reductions, which Tom then had to take into account this new forecast. So you have to account for the fact that the like Tom's going forecast to forecast, but you played with the forecast, if that makes any sense. Then you're not really
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That'd be July? Yes.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: So and this is the July for this is still the July forecast. This hasn't been updated for the new forecast that you did in January.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay. But where did the 88 come from? Because I thought it was 77.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: 77 plus
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: the tax credit pieces.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: I have to figure out a better way to explain it. Okay. But
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: it's a change and it also includes the property transfer tax changes. So there was there's forecast the property transfer tax transfer to the general fund. So that number also gets updated together. Okay. There are also some additional reversions and the governor's recommend some changes in the direct applications or transfers to the general fund from other funds. If you go all the way down to the purple section, you'll see the balance 74,910,000.00. That's the amount that the governor is proposing to reserve in FY '26 to be carried forward into FY '27 to be dedicated to property tax relief.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It doesn't say reserve for FY twenty point seven. James, you can go ahead and
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yes, that's what we reserved in FY26 or FY27. And yes, so as we fill in those, once we update it for the revenue forecast and the additional the new revenue forecast plus the changes that the governor is proposing, he's got some additional reversions and some additional direct applications to help offset the change in the revenue forecast. We'll fill those in, then that will rebalance back out. Right.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And we're in deficit on the House side because we haven't made all the decisions that we need to make.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: We haven't put in all the numbers.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Not to just completely ignore the same.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Totally ignore the House column on the bottom line. Finish making choices. So that's just an orientation to the sheet. I think from here, if you want to take it in terms of going through individual line items, including some mic,
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: you can add.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: One more question just about the sheet. So you've got red and black, obviously, and you've got red in parentheses. The black numbers are additions that the governors would like to spend, and the red ones are where he sees some reductions. I haven't lost it, Marty.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: If it's a wire? Okay, I got it. Okay. Does everybody sort of orient it and kind of know what we're talking about? It's starting to sound familiar, you're a few months away from spreadsheets. So let's start checking some more off. Guys can gray off more things in lighter gray. We can have a few choices we can look at, but a couple of shapes. Let's just start up at the top. These are yours, Trevor.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: No, I think it was Trevor's. I thought we were big of those.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Actually, I did have check marks in 204 and 207. Well, 204 we closed, is judiciary. 20
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: 7.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: 207 is good.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: There's several 207s. Oh, because you're using all the numbers that things over on the right hand side. Okay. Everybody good with that? I'm not
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: All March?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, '15, '16, and '17. Oh, hey. Marty, this was you.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yes. And I this is where yeah. 760,000 is where they are moving it from the inter metal trans interspark metal fund to the general fund because this is where their indirect costs from the grants do not cover their full administrative costs related to the grants. So, order to cover that, they need to supplement from the general fund to the tune of 7 and $60,000 to make it even. And I did ask about that, is there a better way to budget for that? And he says, well, sometimes they can and sometimes they can't. It depends upon the types of grants they have and the conditions on the grants they have and how much administrative work is really associated with. So it's kind of a catch catch can. And in the past, it just gets made up by the general fund because the indirect costs that are allowed with grant money doesn't cover it specifically. They've gone a couple of years and not having to do this because they had some carry forward that they can continue to use. But now they're at the point where they need to fill that hole in the budget for 760,000. I don't what this number was. Questions about that?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: There's two different pieces. One is vision and the other one is the HR internal response. Right. Trying to find my updated. An updated carry forward report
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: on why the visceral bend in this one.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: But it didn't show?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, might show that there's zero. Right? Sometimes we find this is DPS. Yeah. They have an interesting collection of things that they have left. They police they have base left of 350,000, and they have a lot for high flood risk and regional dispatch. I remember working on regional dispatch, it's still
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: here, it's still here.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: FEMA match, so I'm not seeing anything related to that. Sometimes we find things in here that could actually be used elsewhere, but it doesn't seem like we are here. So are people okay with this one? Object? Okay, we can close that one off. Similar to some of these other ones, so that's a contract increase. The theme seemed to be the special fund that's supposed to pay for this doesn't bring in enough money to pay for it. That's a common theme in various places. And then we have the IT system is costing more than we thought it would. Well, that's another one.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: So the Are we gonna
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: proceed The
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: B208, the Internal Service Fund?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, we can check that one out. But then we have Criminal Justice Services. Right. They had a and were approved a
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: couple of years ago to move this particular platform, criminal justice council platform, to the cloud. And they were approved to do that. They were intending to use money in the criminal justice council special fund to do that. Well, that fund has since gone kapooey. But they've already, it's already been approved to do it and they're, no, that's not the one they're
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: right but
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: they are obligated to do it. And so they need this extra $570,000 to finish it. And that will finish it, you think? That will finish it.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes. So we won't see this one again. Tom?
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Going back to your statement about the special funds not having enough money in them. Is this a case where these special funds are being funded by fees that we're not raising or that we're not collecting or that use is dropping off? Or are they what are the other sources of the special funds?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Because
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: the we haven't we heard in the budget address that we haven't raised fees, and we know that fees are for special services and for special funds. Is that what we're fixing here with general fund dollars, surplus dollars that when we talk about when break it down into just simply saying the special funds are not fully funded?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And I think you nailed the two main things. One is that we haven't raised fees in some cases, and in other cases, whatever was being used, there was less of that happening, like with gas mileage is going down. So we have, and there's been some in judiciary, I'm trying to think of them, but I'm not coming to you immediately, but there were fewer people, creating, doing a certain crime or something that they had to pay something for. And so that was good news, but then we weren't getting fees. So the funds and this is a problem that we have with special funds, right? That so often doesn't work over the long term.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Well, the fees in this case, in this particular case, there might be other reasons for that. But in this particular case, again, if fees are not rising to the level of the expense on the wheat falls of the DMV, we're going to see it. We're going have it in FY 2017 with the agriculture, with the waiving of fees that farmers and others or agricultural businesses would pay, the general funds will then take a hit for I don't know what the number is. I just got it from ag like, let's say, 300,000. Sounds like nothing, sounds like a drop in the bucket, but if we are much again, is one of those things that I think fundamentally we're shifting how we're paying for things constantly and then how many years later saying, well we have to shift it back. We're seeing the T fund. So I'm just pointing out like how do we get a handle on what how the administration is treating income and expenses and how we're reacting to it and how we want to see I mean, we can't argue with the fact that we need to pay for ADS, even though we don't like the thought of paying that much money every year for surprises. Just curious how are we going to move forward with I mean, it seems to me it's always been a fundamental thing that gets passed off by saying we're saving people money, but fees are there if you're buying a hunting license it's because you're
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: a hunter.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: If you're paying into the Clean Water Fund, it's because your farms may be resulting in the need to have a clean water fund as opposed to somebody else who's not a farmer. So it's not a question of why should I pay for that, but that's what we hear about everything else. So I'm just, I don't, is that for us to address? Is that for the policy committees to address? Is that for a different, you know, a different way of
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: looking at it? I'm not
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: sure because it's because if I just check this off by saying special fund that
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: we just need to fill for the tune of whatever
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: it Oh, you'd is
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: probably get rid of the special fund. I mean, is a theory about not having special funds or having very, very few special funds and putting everything through the general fund, and then you really know what you've got. These dedicated funding streams rarely work to the benefit of the organization or either one of them in the first place, because they don't always last. And yes, we have an issue of not having raised fees to ten years. But there's sort of the philosophical way to account for it and use it, and then there's the raising money.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: So there's sort of two separate things.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Right, it's just that we're outside of inflation. That's what the '27 budget represents is inflation.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: If
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: we keep putting pressure on the general, if we take away a funding stream and expect general fund to take it, there's a ceiling here if we're not raising taxes or fees. Right.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And we put all the money in the special fund into the general fund, but it still wouldn't be enough to cover. Sure.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: I'm just like, this dilemma is you're I mean this is what I saw clearly with the proposal for the agriculture stuff. Again, have no opinion on it intellectually, but just the idea of saying, well where is that $300,000 going to come? And if we're not raising other revenue, and then if we're using all of our excess revenue to pay down property I mean, it's just not I mean, I know accounting is that for state funding isn't that straightforward. I mean, we just heard three yes and no answers to it. Right. Two questions. So just my non numerical brain is just having a I'm just Yeah. Please be patient with me when
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: I ask stuff over the screen,
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: trying to align it in a way that I understand.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes, well, and that's not always easy either. I mean, not you, but just in general, it gets to be complicated. Wayne, another question.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It's complicated. Some of them are built like the
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: Fish and Wildlife Fund license sales. The intent was that sportsmen were for hunting and fishing, that they should pay for management to the wildlife, the feeds that they
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: pay for what you use.
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: Yeah, and then same thing like the other issue that we heard about recently was that your background checks, there were fewer background That's checks being
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: the second page, and I can tell you about that one.
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: The intent there was to have the people requesting all those background checks pay for it rather than having the general public pay portions of that. So you'd have
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: to look through
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: every line item in state government, look at every special fund and what the intent was for every single one and the intents were different, different ones. And decide, again it's a philosophical thing and it's political.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: But we have the list of them. The list of these in 24 pages.
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: Because we've done all that math, so I don't know.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, let's continue. So did we agree to that one? Yeah. Back to the five seventy? Yeah. Line 20, you can? Then you have the Criminal Justice Council.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: I have the Criminal Justice Council and that's an interesting one. It is for the They're doing a complete review of all This is the Criminal Justice Training Council where people go for sixteen week training to become a police officer as well as don't do other things. They were having a complete review of all their curriculum and updating it and updating materials that they use and using it with new classes. Anyway, it's like a three or four year process. And they need $300,000 They started out with an appropriation from the legislature for 1.2. It turned out that they were gonna need another 300,000. They needed another two, but they took that for some background from a special fund that they had sitting around that they could use. And then they needed another 300,000 in order to complete the project, which they had a bid for it, but they apparently were only appropriated 1.2 instead of 1.5. And we're told to try to figure out where to come up with 300,000. And I've searched it back through apparently for two years, they asked for one time money and were denied both times. And it was apparently in last year's budget, although I don't find it in your official notes of a one time thing, but I find it in the committee's recommendation that they put in $300,000 for one time money to complete that, and that was denied. They're in the process of having all this done. They have a contract by next September, they're gonna need this $300,000 to start paying their last payments on this contract they have. So it's a process, it's a program in process, it's been in process for three years, it's coming to completion, they're gonna have to pay the vendor and they'll get to the last six months and they don't have this $300,000 to finish paying.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So do they have to pay them in September or do they have to pay them in this fiscal year?
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: No, well they pay them monthly and that was my question. Do you need it right now or can they put it in the next budget? They will need it by October or November in order to have enough money to finish it in September '27. So, it either needs to go in the BAA or in the budget. And I would think it would be easier just to throw it into the BAA.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, to remember budget. Anybody else have an opinion on that?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Once that's paid, it's done.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yes, I mean they're working on it, but they're in a contract with a $40,000 a month payment, and they're going to be $300,000 short. We can do that.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, so people okay with doing that? Okay, all right let's check that one off.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Marty I'm sorry was that 1.5 ks?
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: The original boat was 1.5 ks. They were only appropriated from point two.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Whatever. So
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: the price hasn't gone up? Oh, price did
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: not go up. That's kind of amazing. I think, don't know, I can't Okay. Understand right
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And, Emily, do you want to explain line 24?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Sure. For line 24, so there was in the human services budget adjustment, there was a They put all of the costs for the human services SLA in AHS central office in the FY26 budget bill. And then in the budget adjustment, they're taking it out of the central office and then they're reallocating it back to the relevant agencies and departments. We did a double check to make sure that that's a net zero impact. It is a net zero impact, so it doesn't increase the general fund. So that is just a lot. Rather than call it out six separate times, since it's a net zero impact,
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: we just put it all on one line that it's
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Everybody got that? We
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: can make a decision on. Thank you.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, Lynn. We're good on that.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Okay, secretary's office on line 25 is the federal fund reconciliation. That's 540,000 general fund plus federal revenue. It'll be reconciliation personal services. I don't really know any more about it than that, but that might be There's obviously transfers here. Taking out a general fund, we're taking out a federal funds, it's a total negative of $4,000,000 plus. That's for all of those things, including the ADS, general services.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So that's a reduction in general fund of $2,100,000 Yes. Where are we? Page On B300 which is
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: the secretary of all items. Well part of it the ABS, actually a couple parts of them there. They get a total $5,000,000 plus, and they're adding $1,171,000 and that is for digital services level agreement charges. It's charged to the agency of human services. I'm not sure how that works with you, testing it all out and redistributing it, putting it in and redistributing it, but you figured that all out already.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: I think this is additional on top of the service level agreement. We've tried
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: to figure that out with Adam's spreadsheet. It's not working. That's what we're having trouble with.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Yeah, and there's federal funds in there as well.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: According to this yeah.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Well, there is digital services 1.17
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: that makes sense. The By four?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: The little some of the you got to look at the
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: columns
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: and the exponents sometimes.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: The general sign says minus 2,100,000
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: on Adam's bridge. Oh, you know why? It's this SLA. Oh. Right, so the SLA, there's a big chunk of money for the SLA that's going out. That's why the total is less. It doesn't show anything.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: $539,000 but yours says $540,000 I think it rounds out. So that's the general fund piece of the revenue reconciliation. Yep. Which I don't know what that is, but sounds like we have to do it. Wow.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Well, it's only 539,000 for the general fund.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Right, but it rounds up, the system rounds up because you just go to two, we just go to two decimal points. All right. So we like that. Yes. Everybody okay with the general fund reduction okay let's check that out and then the ADS invoices
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: ADA invoices are what they are And we hope that they get Workday going real quick.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: So
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: that one, I would say, is Okay. Then global commitment is the mixing bowl. You take things from choices for care. American Third is a collective bargaining piece that was lower. We have family planning rate changes not being executable as drafted. I'm not exactly sure what that is. And then general fund Medicaid census, that's down. Because I think we have reduced
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: caseload.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: So there would be something for that. And then you have the adult caseload utilization changes as part of it. And then there's an increase in the general fund, federal funds or department global commitment fund adjustments. I'm not exactly sure what that is, but
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: I think that's the increase because of utilization.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Okay, so it's different utilization, but lower.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Not with fewer people, but those who are there are utilizing services. It's all been
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: mixed in, and that is where you combine the federal
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: funds. Right, funds. It's so just the sum of all the ones that happened in all the other human services ones. Usually we do that one last but I don't know if we need to make any changes or not.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Yeah, yeah, well of course then we still have, a thing that's not online, but in B306 is the data administration cost, and that has to do with the service level agreement changes transferred. This is the because that's the, it's 252,000. This is the lease with the expansion of Pilgrim Park, necessitated by the closure of the Vermont That Department of is okay. That is part of the mixing bowl, not quite, I have an asterisk here in the cake that is up there.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So this is the return to office?
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: This is the change in the office from Cherry Street, the way I talked to O'Connell about it, because I asked Alice over the weekend, she didn't really figure out how it worked. But AGS pays for the lease and then they charge it to AHS, which can then draw down federal funds. So
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: we know that the total was $438,000 I think, but 252,000 is general fund because we can draw down federal funds for some of it.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: So that's included probably up in some of those global commitment funds. Right.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: This is actually Dave's area. So I'm going to ask Emily, should we hold off on global commitments at the moment, 03/2001, just hold off on that?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: I would. I think the individual line item, what is tricky, right? We'll use the American Federation of State and County Municipal Collective Bargaining. So, like, that's the impact of the change across all of the You'll see it in Dale is where those changes happen. So, if you accept those changes, right, the need to increase Dale's global commitment appropriations in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement change, then you would also That would be sort of the confirmation of the change that's going to happen in B-three 2001, because that's where you're going to get the federal and the general fund to come in to pay for that global commitment appropriation. So I think
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay. So we'll hold off on that one.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: We'll hold off on 03/2001.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay. So 306 is Dave's.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Yep, want me to take this now?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes, Dave, please.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: B306, there's I think six, one, two, three, four, five, six Diva admin changes. None of these were rejected by either of the policy committee. Now, said that, if James or I don't know if Nolan's
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: here. The
[David Yacovone (Member)]: notes here are skimpy. Maybe before Stephanie leaves, maybe she's already left. She's gone? Yeah. Okay. Don't know, anyway, there is someone that could help enhance these a little bit. Let me just run through them though, quickly. Because I don't wanna say on the, the chair would not wanna say it on the floor. No. Policy committee's agreed and then move on. Hopefully, nobody will raise these. So the first one is the hold on one minute. I'm in the wrong line there. It's the swap of the federal funds for Planned Parenthood. So as I understand it, the feds took away the federal support for Planned Parenthood and we're putting in general fund to cover that.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is that right, Emily?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: That's my understanding.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: That's my understanding.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And that's for primary care non Medicaid services. Yes. Yep.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: So definition three zero seven.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: It's in a couple of places.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: It pops up again. Then the next one, the medical provider contract increases. It says increases. The one I know about is called MEI for the federally qualified healthcare centers for primary care. Diva historically, almost always bumps up the primary care rate correspond to what the Medicare rate is. Not a huge amount of money. Anyway, that's what that is, but I need to just check with somebody at Diva. There may be one or two others like that, I just wanna know what they are. Does say increases, and I know of one of them.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, says medical provider contracts is what they are, One to Doctor. Klein to provide clinical mental health services, another to Doctor. Scholten's contract extension for prior authorization reviews. Okay,
[David Yacovone (Member)]: that's the two increases. Yep, I think there's another one that pops up for the MEA, but I'll keep on going. Okay. Maybe those So next one, I think, is Oracle. Am I skipping the one for the
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Steam staff.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Steam staff. Oracle license increases, it is what it is. The next one, the Gainwell contract amendment, they process all the Medicaid claims. I don't know what the amendment was, I should find out. And then the Medicaid data warehouse and analytical solutions. So there's some IT work going on there that they've incurred and it's over $1,000,000, 1.4.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, and that thing's been going on for
[David Yacovone (Member)]: And it will.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Years or
[David Yacovone (Member)]: I suspect it will continue to. Yeah. And then
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So, Dave, of those are there some you're ready to close out? Of them. Okay.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: I do want to, and James help me on this. There are two editions that I'd like to, we've heard about both of them, and I don't, I think they go on the 03/2006, but I could be wrong. One of them is, you might recall Robin, your transportation director, Jim Moulton. Yes. That's $800,000 for Medicaid transportation. I was thoroughly sold on it, makes great sense. To make a long story short, Diva did not adjust their reimbursement as they typically do. But these Medicaid transportation providers, for people who can't drive a vehicle on their own, many of them in wheelchairs, etcetera,
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: the
[David Yacovone (Member)]: transportation provider is paid $47 per week. Per member. Some of the people might use nothing that week and others might use $97 but it averages out to $47 It's been running greater than that, however. And it has not been adjusted, it needs to be adjusted. There were another provider that's headed towards cashflow problems. Bad things will happen if people can't get to their medical appointments. And also the landscape is changing me. They told me up in The kingdom, I don't know if it's your hospital, John, but one of the hospitals stopped doing dialysis. North country. North country. So the people have to be transported quite a ways further for the dialysis, maybe three days a week. Those things are happening, that they're making much longer trips. So I guess I'm trying to say, I don't know if we would add a line here, B306 medical transportation, but I wanted to flag it.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That was one of the things that came up in the public hearing. So we'll talk about the public hearing things.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: So should I skip those?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Will thank you for flagging it. We will not decide anything right now. That'll be part of the conversation of here are these other requests. What do we think about those?
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Thank you. Okay? Thank you. Then I'll move on. Then I was going to speak to the 2% AAA increase, but we'll do that later. Then the B-three zero nine
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Did you have a question, Emily?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yeah, do you want us to find out if that's a global commitment?
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Yeah. Yes. Where does it go? And James looked into it, right James?
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Yes.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: You were very helpful.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: In FY '25 Big Bill, you all amended at a one time CY '24 BAA and provided one times for NEMT,
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: for non emergency medical transportation probable.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, so let's check that out.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Most recent sub fundal funding is done as a one time
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Okay, so I don't know
[David Yacovone (Member)]: if it'll Thank you. Yeah. And then the Diva three zero nine, of which there's two of them there, I believe. Let me just kick
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: to it. I'm
[David Yacovone (Member)]: sorry, there's three of them. State only, caseload and utilization increase, I can't see the notes if there are any.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Just for that one.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: It's regular old Medicaid. Okay, funding swap and federal funding loss. Again, this is the Planned Parenthood of New England. Swap that they had to do there. And then the clawback, and the clawback as I understand it is, the federal government takes back some of the reimbursement they gave us for pharmaceuticals because we get it elsewhere. And I think we should close on this.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Okay.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Any questions? So we'll close on all 309. Okay.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: And then 3010, Diva admin waiver matched. I don't know what that is. I'm reading it. It's zero. Well, it sounds good.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It's a swap. Sounds like a nice one.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It's the swap.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: It is what? Very small amount of money. $4,000 worth of general fund, which is why it rounds to zero. Okay. But it is there.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Yep. Okay. Then there's non
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: There, okay.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: And then there's another one, non waiver matched underneath it, right? Yep. And that's the children's health insurance program?
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Correct.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: For caseload and utilization. I can't see how much that is, but it's $170,000 and something. Yes,
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: And
[David Yacovone (Member)]: then, I think that's it
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: on Thank the three you, yep. Thank you, Dave. We're back to Lynn with three eleven. Well,
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Administration and Support. That's 311. That
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: one's not on here because it's only the SLA.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Yes, is. Yes, it's only that.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: So it's in that big it's a net zero impact, the BLS.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Public health is a swap of $300,000 This is for family planning service, current to Planned Parenthood, and it's taken out of general funds and taken out of government funds, taken taken out of so an even small office policy, but parenthood, I would say that's fine. Right.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, so that's slide 39 and then we will move to tip.
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: So the healthcare committee in both 03/14 and 03/15 had no problems with any of these. I mean, were PNMI utilization adjustment as in many categories, heightened transportation costs for youth and adults, and there was a federal revenue reconciliation. So the healthcare committee was fine with all of those, as am I.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Everybody alright with those? I'm not seeing any objections. So those are all the '3 fourteen's. Line 43.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Okay. And the thing of note I think
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: in this line item is basically a swap in essence right, it's vacancy savings Vacancy turnover savings in personnel services kind of makes up for increased travel nurse contracts, which I mean in both, once the vacancy turnover is $4,500,000 and the traveling nurse contract increases 4,900,000
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And this is just for Department of Mental Health, not what we've heard about today. Yes, it's
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: just the mental health facilities. Part of their books. Yep.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It'd be interesting to know what they did last year. That's a curiosity thing.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, in terms of the visiting nurses. Yeah, is
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: that going down or is that?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Well, I have to look.
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: Don't remember offhand. It is going well, the overall ask, I mean, my first year on this committee, it was a huge number. It was, I think, almost 89? No, but I think it was close to like 25, 30, I mean, was huge. And that has gone down. But it still results in, and I don't really know what the, I've never seen that in a spreadsheet before, vacancy savings, and
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: nurses like that, I mean, must
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: be vacancy savings in all of these line items that would offset costs, right?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yeah, I think this is just a specific adjustment of like, we're taking it out of, we budgeted to pay for staff. We don't have the staff. We're having vacancy savings associated with that.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: We're going
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: to take that savings and we're to redeploy it to pay for the contracts. Yes, there's vacancy savings everywhere, but it's a unique case. It's more than what they budgeted, and we need to spend the money.
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: Yeah, and they're showing where they have it.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah. So we can cross that off. Everybody good on those lines? Yes. Okay, that's four more down. DCF administration.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Would be Dave.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Dave, is that you? B316? Yep, hold on, catching up.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Is this there? Yep. E315. There it is, yep, DCF admin. It says, CAF funding realignment.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Is that the one?
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Yes. Okay. The million dollars. I'm not that familiar with this. It says is this the one that's net neutral? Yep. So they're swapping the money for federal funds or with federal funds?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: With federal funds.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: They're not earning as much federal funds
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: as they
[David Yacovone (Member)]: They're not earning federal funds, so they're making it up with GF? I
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: love it when they say DCF net neutral, that doesn't really help because we care about general fund net neutral, not their net neutral. I believe it shows up in B317, if you have family services,
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: the reduction in general fund, because they're going to use more TANF funds, I believe. And then in administration, they're going use less TANF dollars and then use the general fund instead. It's just getting the TANF dollars in the appropriation where it's going to be.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Oh, So, that's what we're doing is they were taking it and putting it in the right department. So, there's these four transactions. So, they should both be okay. 1,000,000, what's it, 7,000,000?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Line 51 and line 48.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Okay,
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: we can just check those off. The
[David Yacovone (Member)]: next one is their income, if I'm correct, the income verification system. I don't have a note on that, but it speaks for itself. They're making upgrades to that system.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Are you okay with that?
[David Yacovone (Member)]: It's just
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: part the federal change.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That would be line 49. It's $50,000. Okay, got you.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Then there's in family services, the subacute, my understanding is the subacute adoption coming up. This is, I believe, for residential care placements that were more than what they had, are running higher than what they thought they were.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Subacute caseload and utilization must be higher. Good on that one folks that's slide 52. Sounds like we have to kind of do that one.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: 53.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is that line 50? No.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: That line 50, and there's, I think, the sub adoption The sub care The fund for
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Substitute care.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Substitute care, thank you. Case load utilization is down, but the need for
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: What's the other one?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Substitute adoption caseload is up. There's Okay. So there's two
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: of them that say sub something, and it's about utilization. And I
[David Yacovone (Member)]: explained a couple of weeks ago, the adoption one, whereby the children when they're adopted at a young age, they don't display any parent or outstanding behavior challenges. Often as they hit puberty, they're almost like a different person, sadly to And the they haven't received any training on how to deal and deescalate. So some of them actually try to give up the adoption. So the state increases the, sometimes, the subsidy and the therapy for those families, these go in waves. They're almost predictable. And so I would close
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: that out.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: All right, And then we have the transportation contract increase. You seem to be underfunding. That's another chain. We underfund transportation everywhere. So everybody okay with that one? Okay.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Is the next one the ABD? Yes, it is. So that's one I think we're contract out for the Social Security Administration to do the age of blind and disabled payments. And they do annual increase and inflation increase periodically.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: They're both a reduction. One's a reduction. Oh,
[David Yacovone (Member)]: so then case load's running down a little bit, sorry.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Good on that, everybody? Okay. Then we're at DCFGA. Are we back to Tiff? Is that you? Yeah, it is. Okay. Yeah. Skip. So
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: you know I would like to
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: well I would like to recommend that we hear from Chair Wood, again or at least I, I, after today's testimony, I feel the need to step in, chair would. So, we'll put all these things. Yeah, I
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: don't feel comfortable with where we are today.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: I think we had a lot to digest.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: There was a lot to digest,
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: and there was also conflicting information.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: So I
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: just need to better understand why. Okay, that's fine.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So that would be three twenty one, three '23, and 325.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Sorry, I didn't do that to us.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: No, it's all right. Have time. And then what about the secure residential? Mean, you could agree with that. Yeah, that is okay. Okay, so line 60
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: At you can check budget time, however, I think birth committees can dig into that line, just to better understand the total cost. Okay.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So that's fine, you go do your checking up, what do talk about, and we'll talk about DCF tomorrow. And then we're back to Dale. David, is that you again?
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Am I on the other side of the page here?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: +1, 62.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Line 60 6061 and 62.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: 61 62, Gail Grants. I see the number here.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Oh, that's the collective bargaining.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Yep. That is what it is? The American Society of
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Somebody Action.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Is that what it was? American Federation.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: It's gonna
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: be county municipal employees. So that's line 62. That's 62.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Line 61
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: is federal fund reconciliation.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: Does anybody see a note with that?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: This one's in AHS net neutral.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes. It just it's they're taking it out of federal funds are being reduced and general fund is being increased. West River Building it was the sheriff's office. It's a secured this is secured.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It says net new cost of 79,804 across all those.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: $130,000 that's what that is? Says federal fund reconciliation for $130,000 Yeah.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: And the notes on Adam's sheet are that it's an AHS net neutral. We'll figure out where the other net is.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay. So let's hold that open until we know a little bit more.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: And we closed threetwenty seven.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes, we closed 03/27. We've kept open on that top. We've kept open line 59, line 61. And now we're getting into DOC. We're talking 61 open. 62 we close. We close 60 and 62. And then Trevor has his turn.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Okay, the first one is, it's really a swap for general fund, a global commitment based on the time study that was done that made more services eligible for Global Commitment. That's essentially net neutral. That should be fine.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: What's up? March and March, ahead of the
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: are Are there
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: no general funds? Oh, there are no general funds, that's why.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, this is just general. So let's go back. So we're doing, wait a second, I've
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: lost We're at 330 about a 63, number 60 Yeah,
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: want to point it on his sheet too.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It's the very top one on the individual spreadsheet.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Oh yes.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Where it shows the panel. Yeah. When you look across the on the correctional service, there's a couple of items on the correctional service.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes, the split. But you can see
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: the 2.5 on the middle.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Okay.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So that, oh, that was the funding source, so that's a good thing, it's getting some general fund, so I'm assuming everybody's okay with that.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Trevor, what's the random Molag times?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: I don't really know. Believe you know what it is. I do not.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Not being an expert in accounting, but it's a way for the agencies and departments to do a, like, what is an individual working on all day? They look at it for a period of time, and then that snapshot, they apply it to what they do over the year as a statistic.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: It's like when we fill out and count people who are experiencing homelessness at a point in time.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: But they're able to use that time period of what were those employees doing in that time period to extrapolate what they'll do for the rest of the year. And it's sort of an approved methodology to say like Statistical. Statistical thing. Yep. So that you don't have to track every specific minute, three sixty five days a year. Can't remember how many minutes there are in here. Should remember that red song.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: There's a song
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: in front of Okay,
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: and the next one, is this the air conditioning?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Yeah, related to facilities. Yeah, that's good.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: You can walk out of that, okay.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Sheriff's transports, just an increase in cost there.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: So
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: you The Southern Estate, it was one of those items that apparently was under some different agreement, and all of a sudden they had a bill for it because the agreement expired, so they had budget. So that's what that is. So that's an unexpected expense. Yeah. They have to pay. Everybody
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: seems
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: to be okay with that?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Hotel costs for employees, just money set aside for those employees, usually correctional officers, that have put in shifts and have to come back for another shift, and so they have money set aside for them to stay at a local hotel if that's deemed necessary.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: They're having a lot of overtime
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Well, many people are sick of their cars.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Right, this is related to mandatory overtime. It's just incredible under capacity.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Yeah, so it gives that it provides some money and some flexibility for people to make that decision.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Are you okay with that? Looks like so. Okay.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: 3.17, which is the well paved invoices, I'm going to keep this open, the reason for that is that we had, there's 3.17 of an invoice from FY twenty five that was carried over and paid in FY26. When I went and spoke to DOC and said, well, okay, I know other departments and agencies have problems with the new vendor payment system, so that's understandable. I don't know if that's particularly useful. But when I look at the carry forward numbers from the finance and management, I already see $900,000 net life being carried forward from FY 'twenty five to FY 'twenty six. Oh. So it seems to me that if in fact they did pay it in FY '25, there should be some, at least 3,100,000.0 should be pulled over. Right. My, it's only 900,000. So when I talked to DOC, they said, well, apparently part of it, in part, they had to pay more for the PAY Act. In other words, the PAY Act covered their expenses. And they also put a couple of invoices in there. I said, well, will you send me the detail of that so I could I understand you probably need to do all of this, but I need to understand it. I have yet to receive it, and that was part of why it was up for correction.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, good.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Because we were trying to answer some questions. I had to tell them I hadn't received it yet, but they're working. Okay,
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: and this is a good
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: use of, that's why we get the carry forward report, so we can see what is actually happening.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: I'm gonna keep it The open until I can figure it 4.55 below that, it's just the WellPath contract amendment. It's really two parts. One is the change in the census the correctional facilities. It's gone from about twelve fifty to about fourteen fifty, and so it apparently triggered a renegotiation, And so that's part of it, that's the 3,300,000. And the 1,200,000 is an expansion of the substance use disorder program that's also under WellPath. Apparently they were using it for a smaller population, and they've been required to expand it for a large population within the correctional facilities. So that's the 1,200,000.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Did you ever find out who negotiates these contracts?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: DOC does negotiating. They lead the negotiation, but they ask for it from the central office.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: This just seems really expensive to me. Isn't what it is.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: These are
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: things that are probably in that contract, that have been triggered. When you look at the average cost per individual in corrections, it's gone down as a function of increasing the contract. It's gone from like 2,600 per person to 2,400 and change per person, per cost per person.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, well that's Total cost is cost. Yeah, yeah. Okay, that's interesting to know. So their premium health tax credits didn't affect them
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: at all.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: People pay that a month. All right so are we good with accepting the new contract that's 4,500,000.0 and we'll hold the other one open thank you for giving me this batch Trevor And then the next batch is grey. And then we're into one time, Emily, is that right? Yep. This is still general fund.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Are some, I Yeah. Believe there are some one times that are non general funds.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: One time is on page seven of Adam's spreadsheet if you want to go along. So this is, first one is the office fit up. That is for the new lease space for Richard's office.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Was from a lease. It's a split up.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Right, and so that can't be capital money, think it just has to be cash. Is that right? Okay, Emma's nodding her head, so Well,
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: probably wasn't set up for the
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: health care But they're so, know, they're probably trying to minimize how much they use the capital bill for things like this when they can use other
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: The good explanation is that lifetime of those bonds, it's twenty year bonds, and this fit up might not last long. Right, exactly.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Where do we use our desk chairs? Alright, these are all additional costs, but there we are. Alright, so we're good on that one? We're not
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: happy with some of those.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: This is department. Is it when you're this is yours too?
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: No, it went from the Office of Racial Equality.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Racial Equity to
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Racial Equity to the Department of Health.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That's right, we did this last year.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Yeah, and it's an unequal school that we would be to help department to continue activities related to health disparities and health equity. So
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: we're finishing up what we started. All right. Everybody all right with that one time? Okay, and then the next one is,
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: children
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: and families, Yep. For a 150,000. Is that okay, Dave? Yes. Okay.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: And then there's some larger EVA IT chain projects to do with Health Connect. Yes. I'm not familiar with what's being done, but I certainly understand Health Connect and probably a lot more work they have to do.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It says Health Connect software must migrate to a cloud based platform by the 2027 to remain compliant with the security and connectivity requirements of the federal data services hub. Okay. It ensures the support of real time Medicaid eligibility. So that sounds like something we have to do. Yes.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Okay. The next
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: one we're waiting for Emily or Adam or somebody to give us the actual
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: I have an updated number. You do.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is it 51 or something? Something like that. 5 something. Yeah, for the bridal order of three, so that's good. And last year it was around $11,000,000 because we put it in the budget adjustment.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It's at 5.3.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So it's going down. Something.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: My notes is 5.3.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It's whatever Adam told me that day, and I told you all what it was.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: I see.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: But he might have
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: It's 5.3. That's my note as well.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah. 5.3. Only down to 5.3. But I'm sure you have something official from Adam. Yes.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: It's going down by 2.6. So
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: that's nice, especially when we had a downgrade of 8,000,000 to have a little bit that's
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: So it's 5.3?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, but Emily will update it for official. Okay. Then we did the other ones,
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: and while we're on a roll, let's just keep going down for the blue section. These are transfers to the general fund, this one, the criminal history record spec fund is what Tom was talking about. The fees are not keeping up with the expenses of doing the criminal checks and I have a listing of how the fund has declined and declined and declined over years and it is in the hole or will be in the hole and needs 1.06 to get up to zero. So, it's the question again, feeds are not enough to support the services, and either you go to waste needs and ask to raise the fees, or we decide not to have a fund and try to do that, it's a whole discussion that Robin just gave us before. But on the books, it has this great big hole and it needs 1.06 in order to come up to zero.
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: So what other income there that makes it 1.06 short, like is it supposed to be three point zero?
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Are fees that come in for doing criminal background checks, and there aren't enough of those fees coming in to cover the cost of doing it. I ask them if
[Thomas Stevens (Member)]: Is that an annual, is that an insufficiency or is
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: No, that something that's it's been accumulating, and there have been in savings before. There was another 109,000 was put in an FY '25 and now they're, just Now it's a million? And now it's a million. But it wasn't enough to bring it up to
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: zero. I wonder what would, so funds, special funds can run into deficit.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Right, and I mean, I remember working before, we just let it sit there at the deficit.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: We sometimes don't.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Just acknowledge that it's had a deficit. Right. And there were a couple of times where we went to ways and means and said, we can figure out some way of doing this. Remember there was one brief, split the fees between public service board and public utility commission. One was always a deficit because the fee income wasn't even supported.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And 70% went one place and 30% went to And the
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: so, ways and means brokered between the two and they fixed it so it would be more even. But this has only one source of speech coming in and it's not sufficient. And I asked if they could reduce the personnel that are involved in it, they said no, that would even decrease the responsiveness. We have complaints about responsiveness in terms of getting those record checks back and they need well trained people to do it, this old Joe Schmo up the street, you
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: can't ask another coworker to pitch in and help out, they need some special training in order to do this. So we could leave it at a deficit, but I feel it and so I guess I'm not ready to close it yet. I just want to think about this now that we have more information and I also would be interested to see what is in the FY '27 budget, which we can take a look at.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: We haven't had a fee
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: bill for quite a long time, right?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Ten years.
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: But then, Ways and Means could look at who are the payers of this, are the fees being charged really low for it, at least, and how much for it?
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: They could, they commented to me that because I asked if they had ever looked at the fees and they said, oh yes, they accepted the fees. Wait, the deans of something? And criminal justice, they have reviewed what other states do and they say our fees are in line with what other states do. So, it's not as if you could double the fees. I mean, you could double the fees. I guess getting back
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: to should we even have, maybe this is not, this is a place where you shouldn't even have a special fund and they should just be part of a regular budget. Which is why I'd be interested to see what is in
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: the FY27 budget. They put any money in? Or
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: you know if it's
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, they're probably counting on this 1.06 to bring it up to zero And then they're going to operate next year, on how many fees come in and how many expenses go out. They'll be in the hole
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: or not. Is why this may be a candidate where we just get rid of the special fund and throw everything in
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: a general fund, because otherwise we're just creating work for ourselves. Right, I think we need a conversation with JFO or somebody in terms of the theory of having special funds, why you do it.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So James, will you make a list of things we want to do a deeper dive on in April? And this is one of them. Thank you.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Pleased to be home by April.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, maybe April 30, but not April fool's day.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Yeah I'm just wondering these are people who are probably getting jobs.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: A lot of them are job applicants I'm sure or I don't know if it's their system over the years. Oh I think that's the case yes.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Know I mean you have a child care you have everyone from the teacher to the local church you have to come with it because you can see the kids.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Yeah if you're going to volunteer at school but there
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: are other places you could get this done that's the problem there's competition right because retail competition to do this not the state one
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: because the total number of them is down that's what we don't think of
[Tiffany Bluemle (Ranking Member)]: Well, you think of
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: them up, but you don't have that, you have a feet problem because it seems you're not
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Not keeping up with the time, so that's part of it. But there are other options to go to get background information. And it may be less expensive for the people who are doing that.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: That's maybe a good question, to find out how many people are interested.
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Where do you get
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: it from?
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: Many people are retiring?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, that would be an April conversation. But I would like to find out what's in the budget for FY '27 before we totally commit to just doing this.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Okay.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And then the other conversation I did want to have is the one right below it to the pilot special fund. The agency of transportation, it's AOT, we talked about the fact that they used some pilot money to do something. Sorry, I've really been very helpful. It's the
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: end of the day, I
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: can tell. A municipal pilot? Yes, for municipal pilot. And the deal that commissioner of finance and management said was you can have this $279,000 from the pilot, which is for municipal stuff, so pilot makes sense, but you have to pay it back. We have a transportation fund that's in deficit and we're taking $10,000,000 out of purchase and use to go over the transportation fund. So I think it seems a little silly to ask AOT to pay it back, but it's being used for a legitimate pilot thing. So I'm wondering what you all think about that. Well Chris and
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: I had a little conversation about that too, we're both wondering at the time, I heard Adam came in to kind of share that with I feel like you need to ask Adam again, explain that better, why we're doing that given where we're going here in the next nine months of the year.
[Martha "Marty" Feltus (Vice Chair)]: Why is it going to transportation, for what use?
[Wayne Laroche (Member)]: Transportation is paying it back, right?
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, that's the question. It was used for enough to cover due to municipalities reimbursement requests for municipalities It
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: the receipts to cover the cost of what their transportation was paying for.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: And last, in the pilot, if I may, the pilot fund has a pretty significant balance in it right now. It's built up over time. As a way to balance the budget last year, the budget included using $1,000,000 or $1,150,000 of the pilot special fund by the agency of transportation to do some of its municipal projects. So it was a one off thing to have transportation utilize that fund balance in FY twenty six for this purpose. Then I think when they figured rather than use the transportation fund, it relieved some pressure off the transportation fund.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So it's in this year's budget. But if the cost came higher.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: The cost came in higher, right? And I think in any other year, they would be using transportation.
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: They would
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: have figured it out within the transportation fund. But just for 2026, they had pilot authorizations. So to finish out the projects.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That makes even less sense to me that they should pay it back, because if they'd asked for the full amount the first time, we would have given it to them, probably, because it's pilot. So this is one case where I'm inclined to not make them pay it back. Do you want to do one more check, John?
[Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Yeah, emailed Adam about it and wrote back and said it was, What's this coming out of this? Is this really going to be a year, so like next year's budget? He says, No, it's this year's budget year, but I'll see him tomorrow morning.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, and just, I mean, he knows that we're thinking of not doing it. So I don't know if he was just having a day and then he said, no, you have to pay it back, or another day he might not have, you know, who knows? It's not very much money. If they're already deficit, it just seems like a little unnecessary. But if you want to stay true to the purposes, they're not having to pay back the other 1,150,000.00. So that's what I mean, we're kind of saying, well, it's okay here, but not okay here. But it's an allowable use of the pilot fund.
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: In this fiscal year.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: In this fiscal year. Yeah. All right. So John will find that out. Thank you. Is that all we have, Emily? I think so. We typically look at the language, but we have all that, so that's good. Good job, everybody. We're getting close.
[David Yacovone (Member)]: We find $15,000,000 somewhere in my book for, we have our hands, financial relief tonight. To see you on the bed.
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: The Ebony's coming back with Andrew Stein tomorrow at eleven, and what are we talking about the childcare transfer money?
[Emily (Fiscal Analyst, Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yeah, the year end closeout. Okay, so
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: I don't think we need to do markup at nine a. M. Tomorrow because I don't think you're going to have answers to the things right now. So why don't we do we have anything else besides we're just screening committee Martha so I think everything else that we're waiting for on yeah
[Eileen "Lynn" Dickinson (Member)]: so only other things that comes to Senator Welch was that
[Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Oh, that's right. Oh, okay. Well, it's just coming. Okay. Okay. So why don't we, all of you who have things to do to check out, check out your things and we'll check-in at 10:00. That seem all right? And we'll go live and see where we are and see what we need to do from him. And then we'll have an updated spreadsheet for us, Emily and James. So, that's how