HB 2628
In CommitteeHouse
Budget outlook updates
Concerning regularly updating the budget outlook to reflect the most recent revenue forecast.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill formalizes and strengthens the process for producing regular, transparent state budget outlooks that reflect the most recent revenue and caseload forecasts. It requires updates quarterly and annually and clarifies how to distinguish between ongoing (maintenance) and new (policy) budget changes.
- Requires the state budget outlook work group to produce official budget outlooks that reflect the most recent official revenue and caseload forecasts.
- Outlooks must distinguish between maintenance-level expenditures (e.g., continuing current programs and法定 growth) and policy-level changes (e.g., new legislation or pending collective bargaining agreements), and exclude certain unenacted changes.
- Requires quarterly updates to the outlook to reflect the latest revenue forecasts, plus annual updates in January (for the governor’s proposed budget) and November (for actual year-end adjustments).
- Mandates that all state agencies provide immediate access to budget-related information to support accurate outlooks.
- Requires publication of the work group’s methodology online and periodic review (every 5 years) of how well the outlook process predicts future budget impacts.
Who is affected
- State agencies — State agencies must share all relevant budget information with the work group to support accurate outlooks.
- Governor and state legislature — The governor and legislature use these outlooks to guide budget decisions and ensure fiscal responsibility.
- Legislative budget committee staff and members — Committee staff and members receive official budget outlooks to inform budget deliberations and oversight.
- General public — Residents may benefit from more stable and predictable state funding due to improved budget planning.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Quarterly and annual updates to the budget outlook—especially the November year-end adjustment—will improve accuracy in forecasting revenue shortfalls or surpluses, helping local governments anticipate changes in state-shared revenue (e.g., local road funding, public transit grants) and avoid last-minute cuts.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(5), (6)(a)-(c)By requiring clear distinction between maintenance and policy-level expenditures and mandating transparency in assumptions (Sec. 1(2)(a), (2)(d)), the bill improves accountability for Medicaid and other health program funding, helping providers and communities plan for sustainable service delivery—especially critical in rural areas with narrow margins.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (2)(d)Mandating transparency about major budget drivers and assumptions (Sec. 1(2)(b), (2)(c)) will help school districts, colleges, and families understand how enrollment trends and cost drivers (e.g., teacher salaries, special education costs) affect funding—enabling more informed advocacy and resource allocation.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(b), (2)(c)The 5-year review requirement for methodology reliability (Sec. 1(8)) creates a built-in feedback loop to correct forecasting errors—reducing the risk of misallocating funds for emergency services, fire response, or criminal justice programs due to outdated assumptions.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(8)By excluding unenacted legislation (e.g., pending housing subsidies or renter assistance programs) from baseline maintenance projections (Sec. 1(2)(a)), the bill prevents premature optimism in budget planning—helping housing agencies avoid overcommitting before new funding is secured.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
The requirement that agencies provide 'immediate access' to all budget-related information (Sec. 1(7)) may impose administrative burdens on state agencies—including those with limited staff or outdated systems—to rapidly compile and share data, potentially diverting resources from core service delivery.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)By mandating exclusion of court rulings issued within 90 days before the legislative session from maintenance expenditures (Sec. 1(2)(a)), the bill may delay recognition of new legal obligations (e.g., court-ordered corrections in corrections or mental health facilities), risking underfunding of urgent public safety or human services needs until the next budget cycle.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)The exclusion of unapproved collective bargaining agreements from maintenance-level expenditures (Sec. 1(2)(a)) may create uncertainty for public-sector workers and their dependents, especially in sectors like education and transportation, where labor contracts significantly affect staffing and service delivery.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)While the bill formalizes forecasting, it does not require funding adjustments for projected growth in entitlement programs (e.g., special education, college financial aid), potentially leaving schools and universities under-resourced if growth projections outpace legislative action.
EducationRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)The requirement to include impacts of future-effective legislation (Sec. 1(2)(e)) may create confusion if enacted laws are later repealed or modified, potentially leading to misaligned budget planning—especially for housing programs with long implementation timelines (e.g., affordable housing bonds).
HousingRef: Sec. 1(2)(e)
Who Is Most Affected
Local governments (counties, cities, school districts) benefit from more reliable revenue forecasts and earlier warnings of budget shortfalls, improving their ability to plan budgets and avoid emergency cuts to services like road maintenance, public health, and K–12 education.
Public-sector workers (e.g., teachers, nurses, corrections officers) gain greater transparency about funding stability, but face uncertainty around collective bargaining agreements being excluded from maintenance projections—potentially delaying contract implementation and wage adjustments.
Healthcare providers (especially rural clinics and Medicaid providers) benefit from clearer projections of health program funding, enabling better staffing and service planning—but may face pressure if projected growth in entitlement programs isn’t matched by actual funding increases.
Low- and middle-income families benefit indirectly through more stable public services (e.g., schools, transit, housing assistance), but only if the improved forecasting translates into sustained funding—not just better planning.
State agencies gain clearer expectations for budget transparency and data-sharing responsibilities, but must invest staff time and systems to meet the 'immediate access' requirement—potentially straining smaller agencies.