[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6363458,"mediaKeyId","2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8","parentId",2166124,"title","Committee discusses storage‑shed requests, branch center maintenance and Northern Crops Institute operating needs","audioSeconds",2148,"startMs",1362000,"endMs",3510000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8&start=1362&end=3510","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8/thumbnail_1362000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6363458/North-Dakota/Committee-discusses-storageshed-requests-branch-center-maintenance-and-Northern-Crops-Institute-operating-needs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363458-eae3be83c763093c0e71558ece765b5c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155487&Signature=hc3Q8d7Oz93paS8D5gjZyaHqnuoZAYgilM1hw7SwT8exB7cNpFlm7t6NR1IEYKCdCebcBEsh4WFQkzgsRUzszluf7IJjjo5v8QiZgv1Qls1yOfX6giGjtFrJsKsuMEBxscnXGXmChL3lv4OBF5ndVCfGp352-UtSz7nEBR9jD660OIECgA7B-8q59-goGkacBYfg0bz9B6MZ1P72m~wl~y1xJRm9ntfrnBoGlpbJqhqhAuHcuMtBDbLOBsdPmuIWTxo~zIMHSrmiVB1UKdQwPdz0whn8aeGTYXGbCYsRs3SgxlmuvPf6wrqLyx6VzyhBU31Xe~WLsuSCmoqJrLzM~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate Appropriations - Government Operations Division, ND","date","2025-01-29T00:00:00Z","article","Appropriators reviewed branch research center capital needs and a one‑time equipment and utility request for the Northern Crops Institute (NCI).

Several senators said storage sheds remain outstanding from earlier sessions and urged finishing remaining projects. Senator Sickler and others discussed construction type and cost: staff and Dr. Lardy said most recent sheds were steel‑framed for durability but that a lower‑cost hoop‑style fabric structure has been used at Dickinson as an economical option. Committee members noted construction cost increases: earlier sheds built for roughly $300,000 now have estimated costs nearer $500,000.

The committee discussed which branch centers remain: Central Grasslands, Dickinson and Carrington were identified as outstanding projects. Dr. Lardy said the agency could supply a prioritized ranking on short notice; members debated whether to fund one shed now as progress versus waiting for more funds.

On the Northern Crops Institute, staff noted a request for an additional $150,000 for utility costs and a one‑time equipment request described in the budget book as a “protein extraction and air classification system” to expand testing and processing capability. Dr. Lardy recommended the committee contact David (NCI contact) for specifics and offered to arrange his return for further testimony. Committee members noted bond payments on some projects have been paid off, which reduces future base bond costs for the centers.

No motions or votes were taken; staff were asked to return prioritized lists and to arrange follow‑up appearances from NCI and other technical witnesses.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Appropriations - Government Operations Division III Jan 29, 2025\t","oneSentenceSummary","Members debated finishing storage‑shed projects at branch research centers, discussed construction approaches and costs, and reviewed a Northern Crops Institute request for additional utility funding and specialized equipment; no funding decisions were adopted in committee.","taxTitle","Appropriations - Government Operations Division, Senate, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28900,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6363459,"Extension service priorities: biofuels/carbon specialist and operating funds highlighted in Armstrong budget",318,2684000,3002000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8&start=2684&end=3002","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8/thumbnail_2684000.jpg","/articles/6363459/North-Dakota/Extension-service-priorities-biofuelscarbon-specialist-and-operating-funds-highlighted-in-Armstrong-budget","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363459-5c461d210f1652d6d9fba6f511be208b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155487&Signature=f9DCDdnuml6JLKfC6Qh4wN25O8MCefSmCdElM7~Ft1Br6PezbD-8tmS47QPaT3-LREiB9tw5e~Uh6vHg4Mc8MhKazFL9zm4k-FNm7BTLQXVOMITw9~M2ybldIAw1LpBd0oXSFoPXQd~dO8cEKFn~fBlXH5Qw6UNX2Xrxkdkm8ZlEWEtPB-pvAGTLggx4e6Oc9puR8AhvYHnieiO46dzWtpOoxk4s8NwpYu90ybt2AliuFk0oHWAC6NDIfnKSbODx10js1vin7W7H-e2j6gnP-lurhalzdSCCQwEhJ1BDok5RrMENqcI59rFUBoyE0On02KtAPkB1Ck-kiOF2~eDSXg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The committee reviewed the extension service budget and the SBARE extension priorities. Dr. Lardy and staff noted that Armstrong’s recommendation included salary dollars associated with the number‑one priority (biofuels and carbon) and provided additional operating authority.

Dr. Lardy said the Armstrong budget “adds 1 FTE in the Armstrong budget as $290,000 for the number 1 initiative,” but staff clarified the recommended budget provided the salary dollars without authorizing an added FTE count in the personnel authorization column; agencies with one‑line budgets retain flexibility to adjust authorized counts when salary dollars are available.

Staff also reported that the Armstrong recommendation included $150,000 in special funds for additional operating support for extension. Stephanie described those special funds as agency special‑fund revenue the agency may use, and noted that the amount is intended to increase the agency’s spending authority for operating costs.

Committee members asked whether the $150,000 related to the State Soil Conservation Committee requests; staff answered the $150,000 in the executive recommendation was for extension and not a separate allocation for soil conservation. No vote was taken; staff will reflect these amounts on long sheets and in amendment language.","Committee members reviewed the extension service priorities; the Armstrong recommendation included salary dollars for a biofuels/carbon specialist and $150,000 in special fund authority for additional operating support, but did not explicitly authorize a new FTE count.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6363464,"Committee hears explanation of new 'new and vacant FTE' pool and how agencies will access funds",497,2148000,2645000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8&start=2148&end=2645","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8/thumbnail_2148000.jpg","/articles/6363464/North-Dakota/Committee-hears-explanation-of-new-new-and-vacant-FTE-pool-and-how-agencies-will-access-funds","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363464-70333a74ab32e548f7665b798fa547ca/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155487&Signature=LP74tZhN1YnFdbRkd2nEG-Q0dRjdLliXQKFNwsfCuUAXvgk8GVw4RT5RDXee1LYHrmSKTKCLSi0mH7CMg4BGqmeEHwhPmbWCE1wga7DgHyxxcZVNP-EX5ejK3-ck-LhZ8Q1D7Qb-SjaxQrdJllkvz-3yOodDs-h8ftYZCJigdSt2u~OdLs-PwE5A4NtXKXI~EEY1zN~y3NvuNLd~iHSOIqnT8odmAHjJ9yHTNeIORjhhY1o3k9i7frnalXbs~6cBs7XXyE0oM3lRKrIDr-P7L8YZM4kjSgU0boEL~SRotGTp4EBH4mgXHaBtgsvnfvr4PbGe3aQQplYKsu0UZW8dsA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Appropriations staff explained that the Armstrong budget approach keeps vacancy and new‑FTE dollars visible in each agency's bill by adding a separate “new and vacant FTE funding pool” line item rather than transferring the money to OMB as in a prior biennium.

Grant and Stephanie, committee staff, explained the calculation is a percent applied to agency salary totals and is tiered by agency size; it does not reflect each agency’s actual reported vacancies. Stephanie said the method is “being done in a similar fashion to last time” and that “they're not actually looking at vacant FTE and the vacant FTE report and identifying vacancies. They're just applying a percent based on the size of the agency.”

Committee members pressed on practical consequences. Staff said the dollars will appear in the agencies' budgets but agencies must request a transfer from OMB to move funds from the new line item into salary lines for hiring; language specifying that process will be included in OMB’s budget bill. Senator Sickler and others questioned whether agencies could reallocate line‑item dollars internally; staff replied that some one‑line agency budgets historically have flexibility to reassign salary and operating funds within the appropriation.

No formal action was taken; the committee directed staff to provide a comparison long sheet and to include statement of purpose information in amendment language so legislators can see the amounts in the bill.","Staff described a change that leaves vacancy savings visible in each agency's budget as a separate 'new and vacant FTE' line item while requiring OMB transfer approval to spend those dollars; committee members questioned how the percent is calculated and how staffing changes will be reported.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6363469,"Committee discusses Main Research Center budget and Langdon seed‑plant funding",310,684000,994000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8&start=684&end=994","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2166124-15a47f7e1c5078ae7ab8075a1051dca8/thumbnail_684000.jpg","/articles/6363469/North-Dakota/Committee-discusses-Main-Research-Center-budget-and-Langdon-seedplant-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363469-7d231ba42c7b9c9859fdf214f301b74e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771155487&Signature=e5MScojT6qybOUrZNwwQ4NVB~c6xJGcTv5SlYtO7LjfBjDPpZhHchWyIIGRymVdwP5uCTeOurvjqdG3YkHPiDK-R4dTzB9zF7yPDVQTNECpOKGRwxAgCPCCTC5WMyQypysVwm1tNAd-NC8kHdYkhX0dz~QAiLU1V~kFZsHKXB5GsdlylecWUW2waPkRVCbOp~Ls5RQ1lF0S8ley9NcZ8QkAfLtYwkOsab6ElYnttD-QX1IR1BAJiIG0AbrneGkbtIdG7fNARB9W8Jip-tGzN6PP79Qda826z2d0LicY6KddX8luV4Bm78QjCn-t~sVwoGFKO-NxjLGPDIxDfPwDCmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Chairman Wanzick convened the Appropriations - Government Operations Division to review Senate Bill 2020 items for the State Board of Agricultural Research and Extension, focusing first on the Main Research Center budget and a proposed seed‑plant project at Langdon.

Committee members examined long sheets comparing the Burgum and Armstrong budget recommendations and probed specific line items for salaries, health insurance and bond payments. Dr. Lardy, speaking for the agency, summarized the long‑sheet layout, explaining it “starts out with the 25‑27 biennium base level appropriation” and then lists adjustments including salary and health insurance increases, decision packages for equipment and a request for two FTEs.

The Langdon seed‑plant request was discussed at length. Dr. Lardy said he had spoken with Randy Melhoff, the Langdon director, and that “Langdon has the capacity to use about $600,000 in special funds” from private philanthropy or local accounts to support the project. Senator Dwyer said past models for similar plants had combined state and local funding and cautioned state funds could be large: “that means that we would have to put in $2,000,000 of state funds and I'm not sure that we are gonna be able to do that.”

Committee members and staff noted Armstrong’s recommendation removed some project requests that had appeared in the Burgum proposal while increasing deferred maintenance funding. Grant and Stephanie (staff members) described technical budget mechanics: Armstrong left some dollars in place but removed authorized FTE counts, creating flexibility for agencies to add positions if they have the salary dollars. Staff explained that a vacancy/new‑FTE pool will be added as a separate line item in each one‑line agency budget so the money remains visible to the agency but requires OMB approval to transfer into payroll.

No formal motion or vote was taken on the Langdon request during the meeting. Members discussed next steps, including gathering additional financial details and a possible phased approach that would pair state funds with local fundraising. Dr. Lardy indicated the agency could return a prioritized list for storage‑shed requests and other capital needs on short notice.","Lawmakers and agency staff reviewed differences between gubernatorial budget recommendations for the Main Research Center, discussed a possible phased approach for a Langdon seed‑plant upgrade and noted $600,000 in locally available funds; no formal appropriation decision was made.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee discusses storage‑shed requests, branch center maintenance and Northern Crops Institute operating needs

Extension service priorities: biofuels/carbon specialist and operating funds highlighted in Armstrong budget

Committee hears explanation of new 'new and vacant FTE' pool and how agencies will access funds

Committee discusses Main Research Center budget and Langdon seed‑plant funding