When the legislative regular session commenced, the budget was balanced
using $230 million in “one-time” money, which are nonrecurring dollars
available for a particular purpose that may come from a number of sources, but
mostly from a “funds sweep.” With around 300 constitutional and statutory dedications,
almost 70 percent of revenues from state-collected sources are funneled to
specific purposes, not all of which are appropriated now or, in some cases, will
be even in the distant future. For just about all of these, as long as a
positive balance remains after subtracting budgeted funds to be spent for the
actual purpose of the fund (if there is one for the state; some are essentially
agency accounts for public or quasi-public entity), the state may scoop money
out of them and supplement the general fund with this.
In the course of the session, however, a later
revenue forecast, on which the budget legally must be based, plus some
smaller adjustments eventually pushed another $220 million of deficit into the
budget. This created a political problem, because of a House of Representative
rule that reads with a decline in year-over-year general fund spending (as in
this case), the use of one-time money may be only be up to the amount of the
increase in general fund receipts, which was then $377.5 million, unless
authorized by a two-thirds vote. Not only did the new amount of $450 million as
gap exceed the previous cutoff point if only one-time funds were used with no
cuts, the point itself dropped by the forecasted lower amount of $210.5 million,
meaning just $167 million could be used without the supermajority.