Committee debates pausing judge bill annualization as budget squeeze grows

During figure-setting the Joint Budget Committee spent extensive time on the judge bill that would add judges and related staff in 2627, considering whether the committee can delay or pause the second-year appropriations to save money.

Miss Bickel told the committee the branch expects 10 new judges and accompanying staff to come online in 2627. Multiple lawmakers said it would be more sensible to align judge-bill action with figure-setting rather than having bills introduced on the first day of session. "It seems like it would make more sense, actually, for us to be deciding on the judge's bill while we're doing figure setting," one member said.

Legal services advised that the statutory and procedural mechanics are complicated: to change effective dates or the required schedule may require running a bill and securing a two-thirds vote in both chambers. Miss Bickel said legal services believed a bill would be required to change the judges’ effective dates.

Some committee members proposed administrative work-arounds — midyear reporting or delaying the start of staff appropriations — while others urged the committee to proceed cautiously because of separation-of-powers concerns. The staff agreed to consult further with legal services and the Judicial Branch and return with clearer options.

What happens next: Staff will research whether the committee can achieve savings by modifying appropriation timing or if formal legislation is required; committee members signaled they will raise the topic with leadership.