April 10, 2026 · Appropriations · 6,382 words · 16 speakers · 226 segments
. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Good morning, everybody. We've got a full house here bright and early. The Senate Committee on Appropriations will come to order. Mr. Catlett, please take the roll.
Senators Gonzalez. Present. Kirkmeyer. Here.
Colker. Here.
Pelton. Present.
Simpson. Present.
Mr. Vice Chair. Let's do this.
Madam Chair. Here. Okay. We have a few bills up today, and we are starting with House Bill 26-1331. And Senator Simpson, would you like to move your bill?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 26, 13, 31.
Okay. That's a great motion. Committee members, do you have questions for the bill sponsors on House Bill 13, 31? No questions.
Senator Kirkmeyer. Sure. Since this is the committee of reference, it might be good if someone told us what the bill, I mean, I can read it, but maybe the public would like to know what the bill does.
Okay. Senator Simpson.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I forgot this was the Committee of Reference. Several of these, yeah. This is a continuation of the suspension of interim committees that we conducted for last year. We continue that suspension of interim committees and added into those committees, the Committee of Water Resources, Water Review Committee and Ag Resources as well as the TLRC.
Okay. This is the Committee of Reference for this bill. Is there anyone here in the room or online who wishes to testify on House Bill 1331? Do we have anybody? No. Okay, seeing nobody. The witness testimony phase is over. And we have moved the bill. Anybody have any amendments? Seeing no amendments. Mr. Katnick, please call the committee.
Senators Gonzalez. Aye.
Kirkmeyer. Aye.
Coker. Aye.
Pelton. Aye.
Simpson. Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair. Aye.
Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes 7 to 0. Mr. Vice Chair, would you like to consider that for the consent calendar?
I would like to consider that for consent calendar.
I knew you would. Are there any objections to putting that on the consent calendar? Seeing none, that would be placed on the consent calendar. Okay, fair. Next up, we will be hearing House Bill 1332. and we have Senator Rodriguez here. Senator Simpson, would you like to move the bill?
Thank you, Madam Chair. And tell us a little bit about it. I move House Bill 26-1332. This is maybe a first attempt. I'm not sure. Certainly I haven't been on Executive Committee long enough to speak of the history, but this is an effort to limit the size of the Legislative Department cash fund to no more than $8 million, and it includes a minimum $12 million transfer this fiscal year, before the end of this fiscal year.
Okay. Senator Rodriguez, anything to add?
Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Chair and Committee. Yeah, I just want to clarify that it transfers over $2 million, $12 million over, and also it transfers $6 million last year. Coming in under budget is just responsible government, so that's what we're trying to do. We're also establishing a limit. The bill establishes an $8 million fund limit beginning in the current fiscal year. Moving forward, the limit will be indexed to general fund appropriations to the branch. This addresses past issues. An $8 million limit is necessary to ensure the fund is sufficient to address unanticipated needs. Any annual versions of unspent appropriations that would cause the fund to exceed this new limit will automatically be transferred back to the general fund. Ask for my vote.
Okay, committee members, questions. Senator Kirkmire.
Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. My first question is, why isn't the President presenting the budget for the Legislative Department?
Okay. Mr. Vice Chair.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And Senator Kierkemaier, great question. You know, this is Senator Rodriguez's last year here, and I really wanted to give him an opportunity to show us what he can do. And I'm really excited about him leading. His leadership is perpetuated over the years, and it has immersed itself into the culture of Colorado and what we stand for. And so I just thought this would be a great opportunity to talk about nothing for a few seconds and acknowledge how amazing Senator Rodriguez, the greatest majority leader of all time, is. And that's the reason.
Okay. No clapping. No clapping, please. Where's the gavel?
uh senator rodriguez did you have a you had your hand up yeah thank you madam chair as the ranking executive committee member in the room it has been my honor to serve with you all and i hope
any of my leadership passes on to you going into that here we go senator kirkmaier were you going to comment no i sorry uh senator colker um i object to the greatest whatever you said before so Objection noted Senator Kirkmeyer All right Now we get to the real questions We see what kind of opportunity this presents for Majority Leader Rodriguez So can you tell me what's expected to be reverted to the cash fund for 2526? I couldn't find that number.
I'm sorry? Can it be reverted this year? Yes. Senator Rodriguez. For 2526, yes. It will be $12,670.
No. No. I appreciate that. First of all, let me just say, I appreciate that there is a transfer of $12 million from the cash fund back to the general fund. But I'm talking about the reversion to the legislative department cash fund. So we appropriate and I, last year I haven't seen, I didn't go through the full budget for the legislative department. But like for example last year we appropriated about $75 million or so to the legislative department to manage the affairs and you know budget for the legislative branch. And every year basically and even for the last five years we've been reverting on average about $5 million into the cash fund. In other words from my perspective it looks like we've been over appropriating because we keep putting for example in fiscal year 24-25 we did 6.3 million, 23-24, we did 5.5, 22-23, 6.2, and, you know, I can keep going, but that's basically what we've been doing. And it feels like we're over-appropriating because we keep putting money into a cash fund that at this year's balance started off at $19.2 million, and hence why we're able to transfer $12 million. So I just want to know, first of all, what is the anticipated reversion to the Legislative Department cash fund for 2526, from 2526.
Senator Rodriguez, you appear to have a phone a friend who's here too if you.
Yeah, I may refer to her in a second.
Thank you for the question, Senator Kirkmeyer. I wasn't going to go there yet. The budget's a projection. It's not a receipt. We build the legislative budget based on what we reasonably believe that will take to operate this institution, support staff, maintain the building, meet obligations throughout the year. Some years we come in under the estimate, and that is exactly what happened here. We've already reverted nearly $18 million from these amounts, which shows this is not pouting the budget. It's about making responsible estimates and returning money when it's not needed.
Senator Kirkmeyer.
Thank you. That was a nice response. I don't know if ChatGBT did that for you or some lobbyists that we both know really well. But...
Probably the same one who did the questions.
No, I developed the questions myself. No, actually, I developed the questions myself. And I think the fact, again, that we've reverted nearly 18 million just in the last three years, and actually it's over 18 million, a little bit, but close to 25 million or, no, 20, what would that be? 18 plus 5, 23 million over the last four years. shows that maybe we're over appropriating. And what we're doing is, is taking money that general fund, putting it in the legislative department, executive branch, to fund what we need. You know, I think there's been some responsible development, you're right, within regard to the legislative branch budget, especially from the joint budget committee side of things because we review that pretty closely. But, and instead of any over appropriations reverting back to the general fund we putting them into a cash fund which is actually all general fund which appears to me over the last few years looks like kind of like a slush fund I mean if we need money for furniture if we need money for other things that are coming out of the legislative department cash fund, which like is audiovisual infrastructure, furniture design, annex furniture, ground floor renovation, member office renovation, capital office moves, the management group that does the capital renovation, computer refresh, ice machine, office supplies, just to name a few things that came out of the 25, 26 expenditures out of this fund, then I think instead of reverting the money, doing reversions into a cash fund, we should be putting the money back into the general fund. Because it appears like, I mean, we should be budgeting for these things. So if we need a budget for them, we should be budgeting for them instead of creating a, what I'm just going to call it looks like to me, like somewhat of a slush fund that you guys slush money around, to things that we should be budgeting for and in all fairness that we do with the judicial branch
and the executive branch uh senator rodriguez thank you madam chair thank you senator for the question and the the comments of a slush fund um i i think you know as we're in the building and you know things are politically driven it's always nice to call something a slush fund because it's always a catchy phrase and something we can use on social media and stuff but you know it's called having a budget and sometimes you're under budget and you're over budget um we're not trying to scroll away and things we did not spend every dollar appropriate an unused amount went back we are done with this budget cycle we will be less than five million left in about eight percent reserve which is far less than the reserve of the state any normal household that's called coming in under budget and government apparently likes to call it a slash fund senator kirkmeyer i agree
you've been coming in under budget in fact you've been coming under budget to the tune of uh several million dollars. As you said yourself, it's been 18 million dollars just in the last couple of years, in the last three years. And hence why we have a total fund balance right now of 19.2 million dollars in the cash fund. That means you have been coming in under budget. And I'm wondering why we don't just flat out budget for the furniture that we need in the building and for the management group and for the ice machine and office supplies. Why aren't we actually just budgeting for those instead of creating a fund that is not essentially all that transparent. I mean, most people didn't even understand that there was a cash fund until in the last couple of years that we were reverting money into instead of returning that money to the general fund. So I just don't understand why we aren't returning that money to the general fund and creating this other cash fund for you to budget for items that you should
be budgeting for in the legislative department budget. Senator Rodriguez. Well, I think some of that you answered your question we try to set a budget and we spend it we have been trying we've been reverting money back and we're giving over 12 million back this year um it's the same reason you have a reserve i would think you guys have a budget the money changes you had a bill come through in january 1st that we had to come back and adjust the budget again um it's just common sense goals we didn't start this fund and we're looking to try to find ways to revert money back because what we tried to do this year was reverting back to 12 million we're trying to put back money Sometimes we overspend and underspend. I couldn't tell you what the price of gas or what furniture was going to be a year from now, from what it is now with the way that things are. So sometimes things happen, and we try to get enough money. Any department or anybody that does it tries to get money they need. That's what you guys are here for, is to go through all year to find out if that money was being used or not used. And you also have to come back in the middle of the year in supplementals and add more money if they underbudgeted. So it's just trying to be a responsible government. And that why we took the executive committee took the steps of giving money back to the to the general fund Senator Simpson Thank you Madam Chair Thank you for the dialogue and the questions
And I'll just highlight. I mean, it's not that it's not scientific. It's making a best estimate. I think about me in this budget is money for my aid for eighteen hundred hours. I routinely have never used the complete eighteen hundred hours, but I think it was appropriate to budget for it. I mean, you multiply that by 100 legislators and a number of other issues. And I absolutely agree we can try to be more detailed in how we budget and try to predict things better, you know, in the future. But the reality is it's still just not that scientific. It's a best guess estimate. And Director Castle can highlight, I don't know what's reverting this year, $3 million or $4 million is probably in the range again this year, but she would have the specific number. Thank you. Can I have your aides hours?
No. Director Castle, did you want to comment on that?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I would just say that Leader Simpson is correct. Our current estimate for the reversions this year is between $3.5 million and $4.5 million. That's, again, an estimate. It's lower than it has been in the last few years because there were significant cuts that were made to the budget for fiscal year 26. So what you're talking about that to some extent has already happened.
Okay. So again, we are the committee of reference for this bill. And is there anyone here in the room or online who wishes to testify on House Bill 26-1332? Seeing no activity, the witness testimony phase is closed. Committee members, any further comments or questions? We have an amendment. Amendment. Oh, yes. Okay. Senator Simpson, would you like to move the amendment?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move amendment L-002 to House Bill 1332. Okay.
Are there objections to L-002? I have a question. Okay. Senator Kirkmeyer.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm wondering why we are transferring an additional $675,000 from the Legislative Department cash fund into the budget essentially for $2627, and why we aren't, again, just budgeting for the salary increases that are occurring within the legislative branch. Senator Simpson.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Senator Kirkmeyer. The bill, as drafted, didn't have guidance from JBC yet on what we were going to do with salaries, So we just left it flat when we constructed it. And then out of JBC budgeting for salaries, we mimicked those salaries in the legislative branch, which produced the $600,000 addition above and beyond what was in the fiscal note when the bill was introduced.
Senator Kirkmeyer.
Okay. So we're not actually talking about the budget right now for the legislative department, but we are talking about a transfer of $675,000 from the cash fund. into essentially to pay for the salary increases, and I appreciate what you're saying. That happened in every department and in both branches, in all three branches, but we're putting it into the 2627 legislative appropriation. When I just heard that we're expecting in 2526 to have anywhere from a 3.5 to $4.5 million that's up to $4.5 million that could revert into the cash fund, which I don't get that, But I assume then it means that in 26, 27, we're not fully budgeting all the funds you're getting or you are. I mean, what's going on? I don't understand why we're taking this out of the cash fund and why it wasn't because what we've been doing in all the other budgets is other departments is adjusting the 26-27 budget and not pulling from cash funds to pay for ongoing general fund expenditures in future budgets related to salaries.
Senator Rodriguez.
I think this was a decision made by Wisconsin. And some of the members of the executive committee when we had a discussion this year, The general rule of, and this is probably the first time I've done this a long time, is we kept this money from the money we were referring to that from the general fund, from the cash funds. I guess we could just transfer it straight away from the world, which we generally wanted to pay for it. Which is something we thought would be nice to involve money, investing, and investing. We had a little bit of access to the amount of reserve of the money.
No. Oh, it did in my brain. No, it doesn't make sense.
Okay. Any further questions or comments? Seeing none, Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee on the adoption of... Amendment. Oh, okay. Are there objections to Amendment L-002? Seeing none, L002 is adopted. And Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee on the adoption of House Bill 1332 as amended by L002. I said as amended. Yeah.
We're going to vote against this, but we need to fix this in the main budget. He moved it at the beginning. Yeah. Yeah. If you want to transfer more money, that's great. He moved the bill and then he moved the amendment.
Senator Simpson, there seems to be some doubt about whether we have a proper motion here. Can you move your bill as amended?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move House Bill 26-1332 as amended.
Thank you. That sounds like an excellent motion. And now, okay, we have some technical problems, so. Okay. Senators Gonzalez.
Aye.
Kirkmeyer.
Aye.
Colkert.
Aye.
Pelton.
Aye.
Simpson.
Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair.
Aye.
Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes unanimously. Mr. Vice Chair, how do you feel about the consent calendar?
I wish we could but I looking in the eyes of an individual What that But yeah so let keep it moving We do have objections to the consent calendar so we not be doing that Next up we have I see
Senator Rodriguez leaving, but we have House Bill 261333 and L001. Senator Simpson, would you like to move your bill
and the amendment?
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I move House Bill 26-13-33 and Amendment L-001.
Committee members, any questions about L-001 or any comments or questions about the bill or L-001?
Senator Kirkmeyer.
Thank you.
Yes, is the 1.8 million approximately a reappropriate funds? Is that from the cash funds?
Aren't you a sponsor?
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Senator Simpson.
In the, if I may explain.
Yes, Senator Kirkmeyer.
Sorry, I didn't have time to go over the full budget, but I'm just looking at the fiscal note. And it says that the bill includes appropriations of $75.8 million approximately. And then there are three bullets. It says $74 million approximately from the general fund, $5,000 from cash funds, and $1.8 million approximately from reappropriated funds. And I'd like to know where the reappropriated funds are coming from.
Okay, I think we're reappropriated funds come from.
Director Castle.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Natalie Castle, Legislative Council staff. There is, there are two places in the budget that have reappropriated funds. Most of it, I think it's about 1.7 million, is in the Office of the State Auditor for contract audits. So these are audits that state departments pay them for, and then they use that to pay third-party contracted auditors. The other $141,000 is in Legislative Council staff at the print shop. It's a contract between the House and the Senate and Legislative Council staff's print shop to print, introduce bills, calendars, and journals. And the reason that we do it this way, it would seem like it would just make sense to appropriate the general fund to legislative council and not have the reappropriated, but there is a provision in the state constitution that says that those documents must be printed by a contracted vendor. And legislative council staff is the vendor of last resort. The last time we went to bid on this, we didn't get any hits, we did bites.
So legislative council staff contracts, the house and the senate has general fund, they
pay us.
the money under the authority of the reappropriated appropriation to pay for copier leases, paper,
et cetera.
Okay.
Senator Kirkmeyer. Great. And then can you tell me what the reduction is from the 26-27 budget request to the 25-26 actual amounts that were appropriated to the legislative department?
Senator, I'm sorry. I gave you a promotion or a demotion, depending on how you look at it. Director Castle. Madam Chair, thank you.
Natalie Castle.
Senator Kirkmeyer, can you repeat the question?
Senator Kirkmeyer.
Thank you.
I'm looking to understand what the appropriation was to the legislative department for 2526, because I want to know what kind of decreases were made.
Okay, yes.
Director Castle.
Thank you.
Thank you Madam Chair The total appropriation for FY26 if you include the amendment L is increasing by million Of that amount, about 60% is an increase for HealthLife Dental. Another 25% is an increase for... Forgive me, I am forgetting the actual numbers here, but I have them right here. Yeah, that's correct. Another 25% is an increase for the step-like increase that is part of L-001 that aligns the legislative appropriations bill with what compensation is doing in the long bill. And then the remainder, most of it, 14%, is adjustments for prior year legislation. That's $285,000. The entirety of that is being eliminated by House Bill 26-13-31. So that once you take into account both House Bill 1333 as amended with LDAT 001 and House Bill 1331, the overall increase in the budget is $1.6 million, which is entirely Health Life Dental and the 1.0% step-like increase.
Senator Kerkmeyer.
Thank you for that. And I just want to point out, because I am thankful that this did occur, The appropriations from FTE and the appropriations in the general fund from 25-26 first of all to 26-27, first of all, no increase in FTE. Good job. We didn't get that in every branch so appreciate that or every department. And in the general fund there was an increase but the increase is a percentage change that equals inflation. So thank you very much because we didn't get that, we didn't do that well in the executive branch or in the judicial branch. And it does make a difference. We've been going through a lot since November trying to get this budget whipped into shape. And so appreciate that. I know when we had discussions with Mr. Harper at the Joint Budget Committee, everyone, and he expressed that everyone was being very conscientious about the budget to make sure that there weren't huge increases given the structural deficit situation that we're in with the budget.
So just wanted to say thank you on that one. Okay. We are the Committee of Reference for this. Is there anyone in the room or online who wishes to testify on House Bill 1333? Seeing none, the witness testimony phase is closed. We have moved the bill and the amendment. Are there any objections to L001? Seeing none, L001 is adopted. and the motion, the question before us now is the adoption of 1333 as amended by L001.
Senator Coker. I did have a question on L001. It said it increased the appropriation by 674,766. Yet in the previous bill, we pulled that appropriation.
And so I'm wondering if L001 was even needed.
Senator Simpson.
Thank you, Madam Chair, Senator Cochran. Yes, the amendment requires us to change the appropriation of the bill by $670,000, and the amendment to the last bill moved it out of the alleged council general cash fund to be appropriated here to cover the cost of the $600,000 step decrees.
Okay. Okay. Any objections to L-001?
C is adopted which I think I already did but why not Belton suspenders
And so now the question before us, the adoption of House Bill 1333 as amended by L-001. Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee.
Senators Gonzalez.
Aye.
Kirkmeyer.
No.
Colker.
Aye.
Pelton.
No.
Simpson.
Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair.
Aye. Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes 5-2, and we won't be putting that on the consent calendar. All right. Next up, we have Senate Bill 26002, and I see our bill sponsors. Committee members, do you have questions for the bill sponsors on Senate Bill 2? Seeing none, Mr. Vice Chair.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 2 to the committee of the Hall of Favor recommendation. And I don't think we have any late-breaking amendments.
Okay. Okay. If there are no questions, the motion before us is the adoption of Senate Bill 002. Okay, Senator Kirkmeyer.
And I'm sorry, I know I asked this of Senator Exum yesterday. Why is this bill coming to appropriations? Was there an amendment done in committee that now there is no appropriations? Is that what it was?
Senator Exum.
Okay.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Senator Kirkmeyer, for the question. Yes, we started out creating a different program, and we decided that wasn't a good idea because of a large physical note. And so the strike below amendment is just going to codify the existing program, the PIP program, which is the percentage of income payment plan in the energy affordable program run through the energy outreach of Colorado. And so that's the reason why it had a physical note in the beginning, but the strike below took the physical note away. Thanks for the question.
Okay, so we have moved the bill. I don't see any further questions. Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee on the adoption of Senate Bill 26002. Senators Gonzalez.
Aye.
Kirk Meyer.
No.
Coker.
Aye.
Pelton.
No.
Simpson.
No.
Mr. Vice Chair.
Aye.
Madam Chair. Yes, that bill passes four to three. Next up, we have Senate Bill 20, and I see we have our bill sponsors.
Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 20 to the Community Hall with a favorable recommendation.
Committee members, any questions for the bill sponsors on Senate Bill 20?
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you. So questions with regard to the gifts, grants, and donations comment in our packet under the fiscal impacts. And what does that mean, and how is it included in the budget?
Senator Bright.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Kerberner, for the question. Gifts, grants, and donations is funding the six-month task force. It does have expiration dates of December of 2026. that gifts that donation has been secured so when it comes through that will fund the task force and if that donation does not come through then the task force won't
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you, Madam. Thank you, Madam Chair. And then I assume the .2 FTE aren't hired until the gifts, grants, and donations funding is in place for the task force?
Senator Bright. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Kirkmeyer. Correct. .2 won't happen unless the gifts, grants, and donations is funded.
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you. Last question then. And can you also explain the addition of 19.5 FTE in 2627?
Senator Bright. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Kerberman for the question. The increase in FTE is a result of bringing child care licensing specialists in-house, which is actually a more affordable solution for the state rather than contracting them out. So there will be some savings achieved by bringing those staff in-house. Essentially, they're the same individuals. They'll be just rehired as state employees at a total less expense. And so thus the negative fiscal impact with this bill.
Thank you.
Okay, any further questions? Seeing none, we have the bill moved and there aren't any amendments. And Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee.
Senators Gonzalez. Aye.
Kirkmeyer. Aye.
Coker. Aye.
Pelton. Aye.
Simpson. Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair. Aye.
Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes unanimously.
Mr. Vice Chair. I recommend consent calendar.
Any objections to placing this on the consent calendar? Seeing none, the bill will be placed on the consent calendar. That's a golden ticket. Okay, next up, we have Senate Bill 141. and Amendment J-001. Senator Simpson, would you like to move your bill?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 26-141 and the J- I don't have the amendment.
Okay.
But J-1 amendment to the bill.
I didn't get a copy. Okay. Committee members, do you have any questions for the bill sponsors about the bill or the...
amendment senator gonzalez thank you is the thank you for bringing for the bill is the fee an opt-in
or an opt-out senator roberts thank you madam chair thank you senator gonzalez it's an opt-out
the same as the keep colorado wild pass do you have senator gonzalez thank you do you have any Any projections on how that fee would shift if it were to be opt-in as opposed to opt-out in terms of collections?
Senator Roberts. Thank you, Madam Chair. No. We have the fiscal note, which uses some historical data from the Keep Colorado Wild Pass to make estimations.
But that is not analysis that is available right now Thank you Senator Kirkmeyer Thank you Madam Chair Can either of the bill sponsors tell me how much is in the state bridge and tunnel enterprise, what their fund balance is?
No.
I don't see anybody nodding affirmatively. If you want that information, we can probably get it.
Yes, I can contact CDOT and get that information for you if you'd like.
Senator Krookmeyer. Thank you, Madam Chair, because I'm wondering why instead of putting in an optional where you have to opt out collusion prevention fee of $5 on the vehicle registration stuff that everybody has to do, why we aren't just funding these things out of either the enterprise, the statewide bridge and tunnel enterprise, why it isn't just being funded. I mean, if we're talking about essentially $2 million in the first year, $4 million in the out year, why it isn't just being funded out of that bridge and tunnel enterprise, that's what that enterprise is meant for, and that enterprise has been in existence prior to 21-260, or why we aren't just funding it out of the Colorado Wildlife Cash Fund instead of a new fee.
Senator Roberts. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Kirkmeyer. The two enterprises you just mentioned already have many projects and work that they do and other programs that they fund. This is a way to bring in additional revenue for this type of construction, this safety infrastructure that saves Coloradans' lives and significant amounts of money because there are fewer insurance claims when people hit fewer animals. it also provides us the opportunity to take advantage of a federal match that any new revenue we generate at a state level can be matched up to four times by the federal government to help finance these projects so we think it's a worthy pursuit to try to create additional revenue the reason why it's going to the bridge and tunnel enterprise is because that's an efficient way to fund these projects and administer these projects by not having to create a brand new enterprise we're building it into existing infrastructure and resources within our Department of Transportation.
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Don't disagree about the part about saving lives. Just having an issue with where the funding is coming from this and why it's not a priority for either the bridge enterprise or the wildlife cash fund. But even more importantly, I think it was two years ago, there was an additional fee put on oil and gas. and according to the forecasts and the trending, that is going to bring in another $31 million or $30 million approximately to the wildlife cash fund. Again, it was from oil and gas. And I thought that money was supposed to be used for things specific to that you're trying to do here with the wildlife crossings. And so was that fund looked at to be funding it instead of putting in a new fee?
Senator Roberts. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Kirkmeyer. We had some discussions with DNR about that. It wasn't specifically called out in that new fee that wildlife crossings were a stated goal of those funds but I don think anything prohibits the department from utilizing some of those funds to make these projects happen This fund that we trying to create with this bill is to create a reliable and consistent source of funding that can be used to plan these projects for many years to come, including accessing new forms of financing through bonding, knowing that they'll have a consistent
source of funding coming forward every year. Okay. Any additional questions? We moved the bill and the J amendment. Are there any objections to J001? Seeing none, J001 is adopted. And now the question before us is the adoption of Senate Bill 26141 as amended by J001. Mr. Catlett, can you poll the committee?
Senators Gonzalez. Aye.
Kirkmeyer. Respectfully, no.
Coker. Aye.
Pelton. No.
Simpson. Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair. Aye.
Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes 5-2. Thank you. Next up, we have Senate Bill 80 as amended by L-006. Senator Simpson, would you like to move your bill and your amendment?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 26080 and Amendment L-006.
Committee members, any questions for the bill sponsors?
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry. That's okay. I'd like to be Mr. Chair. Okay, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Anyways, it's a plural word. But again, wanting to know why this is coming to appropriations when there's no appropriation from the general fund required. So maybe you could just put that on record for us.
Senator Simpson. Let me let President Coleman take a stab.
Senator Coleman. Thank you very much. I can take a stab. I can take a stab. Yeah, no, thank you very much. Only because this is going to be run through a State Department. There's no general fund appropriation, but they are requiring the funding in order for us to implement this, even if it's gifts, grants, and donations, and so it had to come here.
Senator Kirkmeyer. Thanks. And the reason I'm doing this is to make sure that everyone thinks that we remain consistent here and that we have these discussions. So maybe you could expand further on the gifts, grants, and donations and how that's going to be impacted or not impacted. I'm not sure what...
Senator... Senator Simpson. I think I understand the question and if the gifts, grants, and donations are not in place, we don't do the program. And the amendment assures there is no general fund dollars to the program in perpetuity. Thank you.
Okay Are there objections to L006 to Senate Bill 80 Seeing none L is adopted The question before us now is the adoption of Senate Bill 80 as amended by L Mr. Catlett, please poll the committee.
Senators Gonzalez. Aye.
Kirkmeyer. Aye.
Coker. Aye.
Pelton. Aye.
Simpson. Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair. Aye. Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes unanimously. Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. Recommend consent calendar. Are there objections to
the consent calendar? Seeing none, that bill will be added to the consent calendar. Next up we have Senate Bill 137. I was trying to take turns.
Senator Simpson. Thank you Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 26-137. Committee members
any questions about Senate Bill 137? Seeing none the question before us is the adoption of Senate Bill 37. Oh Senate Bill 137 thank you. Mr. Catlett please Please poll the committee.
Senators Gonzales. Aye.
Kirkmeyer. Aye.
Colkert. Aye.
Pelton. Aye.
Simpson. Aye.
Mr. Vice Chair. Aye.
Madam Chair. Aye. That bill passes unanimously. Committee.
Oh, Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. I recommend consent calendar.
Are there any objections to the consent calendar? Seeing none, that bill will be placed on the consent calendar. And that concludes this episode of the Senate Appropriations Committee. As appropriations turn. We will be having appropriations on Tuesday, this week, or next week, from 7 a.m. to 10. Okay. I should say, sir, do you?
And then are we going to do the preparation on Tuesday and Friday? Yes, unless we need to make some adjustments.
Okay. No, that's fine.
I just wanted to get the schedule because Dad will have to feed the cows in the farm instead. So Tuesday at 7?
Somebody's got to feed the cows.
Tuesday. 7 to 10 is what we're expecting.
Senator, just a reminder that bills that we're not the Committee of Reference for, we have to ask if they were unanimous in their Committee of Reference to put them on the Senate's calendar. So Coleman's Senate Bill 80 was not, so I told him, because the Marchment's going to want that not on the consent calendar, so she's going to pull it off. Okay, all right. Just a reminder. Okay, thanks.