AN ACT to provide an appropriation for defraying the expenses of the office of administrative hearings; and to authorize a line of credit.
SB 2017 appropriates special funds to the North Dakota Office of Administrative Hearings for the 2025-2027 biennium. It provides a total appropriation of $3,155,750 and authorizes 5.00 full-time equivalent positions, with funding allocated primarily to salaries and wages, a new and vacant FTE pool, and operating expenses. The bill is an agency budget measure rather than a policy overhaul, and it is intended to cover the office’s ongoing administrative and adjudicatory operations.
The bill also places a limitation on the new and vacant FTE pool, prohibiting direct spending from that line item while allowing the agency to request transfers to salaries and wages through the Office of Management and Budget under the guidelines in House Bill 1015. In addition, SB 2017 authorizes the Office of Administrative Hearings to borrow up to $150,000 from the Bank of North Dakota through a line of credit to manage cashflow needs during the biennium, with repayment to come from the administrative hearings fund and interest capped at the rate charged to other North Dakota governmental entities.
SB 2017 amends state spending authority for the Office of Administrative Hearings by setting its biennial special-funds budget and staffing level for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. It also creates a short-term financing mechanism by allowing the agency to access a Bank of North Dakota line of credit, which affects how the office manages cash flow but does not change the substantive law governing administrative hearings. The bill primarily impacts the agency itself, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Bank of North Dakota, while indirectly affecting parties who appear before the office by supporting its operational capacity.
The bill appears to have been noncontroversial and broadly supported. It passed the Senate unanimously, 46-0 with one absent, and passed the House with strong support, 86-3 with five absent. The lack of committee transcripts or recorded debate suggests there was little public disagreement or that the measure was treated as a routine appropriations bill.
No specific points of contention are documented in the available materials. The only potentially notable issues are the restriction on direct spending from the new and vacant FTE pool and the authorization of a line of credit, but the overwhelming vote margins indicate these provisions did not generate significant opposition. Any concerns would likely have centered on budget administration, staffing flexibility, or short-term borrowing authority rather than the agency’s core mission.