Revise the General Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2025.
House Bill 1046 is a fiscal-year 2025 supplemental appropriations measure that revises South Dakota’s General Appropriations Act. It makes targeted changes across a wide range of state agencies and institutions, adjusting operating expenses, personal services, and full-time equivalent positions for departments including finance and management, human resources, information and telecommunications, revenue, agriculture, tourism, social services, labor and regulation, transportation, education, public safety, the Board of Regents, the military, veterans’ affairs, corrections, human services, the attorney general, the secretary of state, and the state treasurer.
The bill also adds two new transfer provisions: $5 million from the general fund to the IT Modernization Fund and $22,830,936 from the general fund to the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund. It allows unspent fiscal year 2025 appropriations to carry over into fiscal year 2026 and takes effect June 30, 2025. Overall, the bill functions as an across-the-board budget adjustment rather than a policy overhaul, updating spending authority and fund transfers for the remainder of the fiscal year.
HB1046 amends the state’s existing FY2025 appropriations law by increasing or decreasing funding in numerous line items and adjusting some staffing levels. It affects state agencies, higher education institutions, public safety and corrections operations, human services and Medicaid-related programs, and several special funds and federal fund streams. The bill also directs major general fund transfers to the IT Modernization Fund and the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund, which will affect state cash management and the financing of technology and unclaimed property operations.
The available voting history suggests the bill was generally supported, though not unanimously. It received “Do Pass Amended” recommendations and passed the recorded votes by comfortable margins in both chambers, indicating broad agreement that the budget revisions were necessary. The lack of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote pattern suggests the bill was viewed as a routine but important appropriations correction.
The main points of potential contention are the size and direction of the funding changes across agencies, especially the large shifts in social services, higher education, and the state treasurer’s unclaimed property accounts. Some line items were reduced while others increased substantially, which can create concern about program priorities, fund balance usage, and whether transfers from the general fund are the best use of state resources. The bill’s amendments to Medicaid-related and human services appropriations, as well as the sizable transfer to the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund, are the most likely areas where legislators may have differed on fiscal strategy.