The Idaho Spending Index serves to provide a fiscally conservative perspective on state budgeting while providing an unbiased measurement of how Idaho lawmakers apply these values to their voting behavior on appropriations bills. Each bill is analyzed within the context of the metrics below. They receive one (+1) point for each metric that is satisfied by freedom-focused policymaking and lose one (-1) point for each instance in which the inverse is true. The sum of these points composes the score for the bill.
Rating: (-3)
Bill Description: House Bill 450 is an enhancement of $18,984,900 and 0.00 new full-time positions for the Department of Fish and Game for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $163,310,500 and 550.00 full-time positions to the agency.
Does this budget incur any wasteful spending among discretionary funds, including new line items? Conversely, does this budget contain any provisions that serve to reduce spending where possible (i.e. base reductions, debt reconciliation, etc.)?
There are a couple of wasteful items in this budget request. First up is $550,000 for phase 2 of a website overhaul. The Legislature already appropriated $750,000 last fiscal year to start the project, which is astonishingly expensive for such a project. To make matters worse, this appropriation would put the project over initial projections. Originally, the agency claimed the project could be completed for $1.1 million, but it has since updated the projection to $1.3 million.
In keeping with the technology theme, this budget also contains wasteful spending of $280,000 for Region 7 office renovations — specifically, to add audio-visual equipment to some meeting spaces. This is unnecessary since substantially more affordable options are available. For one thing, most laptops and computers have inexpensive audio-visual capabilities suitable for meetings.
Both of these projects are a waste of taxpayer dollars.
(-1)
Is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending, if any, inappropriate for the changes in circumstances, scope of the agency, or current economic environment? Conversely, is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending appropriate given any change in circumstances or economic pressures?
This legislation funds ongoing spending for the Department of Fish and Game at over $146 million, growing from the base by over 27% in the last three years. This rate is faster than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth.
Because of the accelerated growth in this budget the last three years, a truly fiscally responsible enhancement budget for FY2026 would reverse the growth with a negative appropriation — a reduction to the base budget.
(-1)
Does this budget perpetuate or expand state dependence on federal dollars, thereby violating principles of federalism? Conversely, does this budget actively reduce the amount of federal dollars used to balance this budget?
House Bill 450 brings total federal spending in the Department of Fish and Game to $70,042,100. This constitutes 43% of the department’s total budget, showing it depends on federal spending to support its programs and operations.
(-1)
Does this budget contain hidden fund transfers or supplemental expenditures that work to enact new policy or are not valid emergency expenditures? Conversely, are fund transfers only made to stabilization funds or are supplemental requests only made in the interest of resolving valid fiscal emergencies?
This budget contains one supplemental request of $800,000 to reseed a wildlife area destroyed by the Valley Fire in 2024. This request is funded by a settlement agreement with Idaho Power. The request is within the agency’s scope and constitutes an emergency expenditure. Therefore, it is a proper use of a supplemental request.
(0)
