Requires communications between the Senate Committee on Finance, the House Committee on Appropriations, and the division of administration relative to the preparation of the executive budget. (gov sig) (OR SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Impact
The implementation of SB 340 is expected to improve the legislative input in the budget development process. By requiring consultations, the bill aims to bridge the gap between the roles of the governor's office and the legislative chambers, fostering an environment where suggestions from lawmakers can influence budgetary decisions. This is particularly significant given the complexities involved in budget creation, as it seeks to ensure that various stakeholder needs are acknowledged and addressed in the final budget proposal. This move could lead to more informed and effective budgeting that reflects the needs of both state governance and the populace.
Summary
Senate Bill 340, introduced by Senator Donahue during the 2018 Regular Session, focuses on enhancing the communication and consultation process between the state’s executive branch and legislative committees, specifically the Senate Committee on Finance and the House Committee on Appropriations. The bill mandates that the governor and the commissioner of administration consult with these legislative committees during the preparation of the executive budget. This requirement aims to ensure that the legislative perspective is considered during the budget formulation process, thereby promoting transparency and collaboration between the legislative and executive branches of government.
Sentiment
Overall sentiment regarding SB 340 appears to be supportive among legislators who value increased communication and collaboration in budgeting processes. The dialogue suggests that this bill is viewed as a positive step toward enhancing legislative oversight of budgetary matters. However, potential opposition may arise from concerns about how the additional consultations could slow down the budget process or create conflicts between the executive and legislative priorities. Nonetheless, the sentiment indicates a general agreement on the necessity of cooperation in state governance.
Contention
While the bill seeks to strengthen the involvement of the legislature in budgeting matters, there may be contention surrounding the implications of such consultations on executive autonomy. Critics could argue that mandatory consultations might restrict the governor's flexibility in budget decisions, potentially leading to delays in implementing critical budgetary measures. The balance between effective collaboration and executive authority is a central point of discussion, with advocates highlighting the benefits of legislative input while critics caution against overreach that might hinder timely fiscal management.
Provides for communication between the Senate Committee on Finance, the House Committee on Appropriations and the division of administration relative to the preparation of the executive budget. (gov sig) (OR SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Provides for the requirement that proposed agency rules with a fiscal impact of more than $100,000 be submitted to the Senate Finance and House Appropriations committees for review. (gov sig)
Provides for the requirement of the division of administration to produce a non-discretionary adjusted standstill budget. (7/1/17) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX See Note)
Provides relative to actions of Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget relative to the forty-five day close period. (gov sig) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX See Note)
Requires approval of the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget before certain salary increases to unclassified employees in the executive branch are effective in the last ninety days of an administration. (7/1/16) (EN SEE FISC NOTE GF EX See Note)