Relating to the financial administration of the Department of Land Conservation and Development; and declaring an emergency.
SB 5528 is the Department of Land Conservation and Development’s (DLCD) biennial budget measure for the 2025-2027 biennium. It appropriates General Fund dollars to support the agency’s planning program and grant programs, and it also sets spending limits for the department from other state-collected revenues and from federal funds. The bill is framed as an appropriations and expenditure-limitation measure rather than a policy bill, meaning its main purpose is to authorize and cap DLCD’s operating resources for the coming biennium.
The bill provides $33,423,606 from the General Fund for the planning program and $11,002,894 for grant programs. It also establishes maximum expenditure authority of $2,720,817 from fees and other non-federal revenues for the planning program, $10,171,127 for grant programs from those same sources, and $9,641,022 from federal funds. The act takes effect July 1, 2025, and includes an emergency clause, signaling that the Legislature intended the funding authority to be available at the start of the biennium without delay.
SB 5528 directly affects the financial administration of the Department of Land Conservation and Development by setting the agency’s budget and spending authority for the 2025-2027 biennium. It does not amend land-use policy statutes or create new regulatory requirements; instead, it authorizes appropriations and establishes expenditure limits that govern how DLCD may use General Fund, fee-based, miscellaneous, and federal revenues. The measure therefore impacts the department, its planning functions, and any grant recipients or local-government partners supported through DLCD grant programs.
The bill appears to have broad legislative support, consistent with a routine budget measure for a state agency. It passed the Senate committee 17-4, the Senate floor 21-8, and the House floor 38-11, indicating more support than opposition overall. The available record does not include committee testimony or detailed debate, so the discussion context suggests the measure was treated primarily as a fiscal administration bill rather than a controversial policy proposal.
The main points of contention likely centered on the size and allocation of the appropriations and the level of expenditure authority granted to DLCD, especially for planning and grant programs. The recorded no votes in both chambers suggest some legislators may have objected to the overall budget level, the agency’s role in land-use planning, or the use of General Fund dollars for these purposes. However, no transcript excerpts are available, so specific objections from particular members or stakeholder groups are not documented in the provided materials.