IBJNews

Budget-writing Indiana lawmakers hear from agencies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana's budget picture is slowly taking shape, but the big questions about tax collections, tax cuts and how much will be spent on education remain to be seen.

Members of the State Budget Committee spent a second day Wednesday hearing from the State Budget Agency about how state department heads crafted their biennial budget requests and from the department chiefs themselves on what they would need over the next two years.

Lawmakers expect to get an updated tax collection forecast next month and another in April, shortly before they wrap up their legislative session, that should tell them how much money they have to work with. Legislators will also wait to see what priorities Gov.-elect Mike Pence spends on in his first budget, including a proposal to cut the state's personal income tax.

This week's meetings gave lawmakers an opportunity to talk with state agency leaders, but the hard questions are likely to come later, after the legislative session begins and once an actual budget has been submitted for consideration. Members of the budget committee also pointed out that the agencies make up very little of the state's overall spending picture.

"The general services of state government are a small portion of the state budget. The lion's share is still K-12, higher education, Medicaid and the social services," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Tim Brown, Crawfordsville Republican, said Wednesday. "I think it's just a starting a point, so we'll go forward and see how April and December look."

Gov. Mitch Daniels spent the last week touting the $111 each taxpayer would receive via his automatic tax refund and has talked broadly about the state's fiscal footing as he prepares to leave office. The state has roughly $2 billion in cash reserves and an estimated $500 million surplus heading into 2013.

But legislative leaders have urged caution, including Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma and Senate Appropriations Chairman Luke Kenley, a Noblesville Republican.

The State Budget Agency ordered most other departments to work up "baseline" proposals that amounted to roughly 3 percent less than what lawmakers afforded them last year. In many cases, the agency heads offered a broadly positive picture with a handful of requests for increased spending.

Department of Corrections leaders pointed out a striking drop-off in the number of prisoners it was housing, even as it asked for $27 million more in spending. Daniels and some lawmakers had tried to reduce prison crowding through legislation, but were unsuccessful.

"Obviously legislation did not go through, but we saw a massive change in behavior, there's no other explanation for what you see here," Budget Director Adam Horst said. "The biggest driver of the DOC budget is how many heads they are housing. Period."

Andrew Pritchard, DOC chief financial officer, later noted that the state is locked into a handful of contracts that automatically increase based on changes in the consumer price index.

Rep. Sheila Klinker, Lafayett Democrat, pressed him on where they could save money.

"Have we thought about going back to our prisoners serving the food, cooking it, working it, paying them a little bit?" Klinker asked. "You're not going to get an increase, we're surely not going to pay them that much more to work there."

Pritchard pointed out that the balance of work between prisoners and contractors has not changed and that much of the cost is based on increased food prices.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT