The Appropriations - Education and Environment Division approved an amendment to its draft bill to remove a contested information-technology appropriation and move several one-time education expenditures out of the General Fund and into strategic investment accounts.

Committee Chair Sorevak brought the amendment to clean up the bill’s presentation, saying an apparent $5.1 million appropriation for CTS no longer needs to appear in the division’s section because it is being covered in the IT budget. The committee also agreed to reclassify four one-time spending items originally listed in the General Fund into strategic investment accounts so the bill presents recurring and one-time spending more accurately.

Why it matters: shifting one-time expenditures out of the General Fund changes how the budget’s recurring obligations appear and can affect how lawmakers and the public read the overall fiscal picture. Moving those lines to strategic investment accounts preserves the projects without inflating the state’s ongoing operating commitments.

What the amendment does: The committee agreed to (1) remove the CTS IT appropriation that had been included in the division’s section, and (2) move four specified one-time education-related items out of the General Fund and into strategic investment funding. Those four items, as described on the record, are: the UND and Minot building projects (identified on the record as $63,772,000) moved to strategic investment funding; a $12,000,000 one-time line described for UND (identified in the transcript as for a space program) moved to CIF/strategic funding; a $12,000,000 one-time line for NDSU’s New Horizon moved to CIF/strategic funding; and a $12,000,000 one-time Workforce Innovation grant fund line moved to the strategic investment fund. The transcript uses both the acronyms "SIF" and "CIF" in reference to those strategic accounts; the committee speaker identified them generally as strategic investment funding.

On the CTS line, the sponsor said earlier iterations of the bill showed an amount described in the meeting as roughly $5,100,000 (and in one exchange a larger, unclear figure was read aloud). The sponsor reported that IT staff later indicated that the CTS allocation is being covered in the central IT budget and therefore should be removed from this division’s bill section.

Procedure and vote: A motion to further amend the bill was made and seconded; the transcript does not name the member who moved or seconded the motion. A roll-call or recorded voice vote was taken in committee, with Chairman Sorevak, Senator Connolly, Senator Thomas, Senator Shively and Senator Meyer each recorded as "Aye." No opposing votes or abstentions were recorded on the transcript. The chair closed the meeting and adjourned the division.

What was not decided or clarified on the record: The transcript does not specify who moved or seconded the amendment by name, and the CTS dollar figure is described inconsistently on the record (see clarifying details). The committee discussion as recorded focused on reallocating lines for presentation and did not include further substantive debate about program design, programmatic conditions, or external approvals that might be required to use strategic investment funds.

The division indicated the sponsor plans to present a "clean bill" to the full committee following these technical adjustments.