►
From YouTube: Recording Smart Decisions With Federal Aid
Description
Recording Smart Decisions With Federal Aid
A
Okay,
let's,
let's
get
going,
I
have
1201
so
hello,
everyone-
and
I
want
to
welcome
you
to
our
session
today.
Smart
decisions
with
federal
aid
and
my
name
is
mandy
rafal
and
I'm
the
director
of
ncsl's
fiscal
program,
and
it's
so
good
to
see
all
of
you.
I
was
so
excited
when
I
saw
the
list
of
attendees
just
thinking
back,
it's
hard
to
believe
how
crazy
this
past
year's
been.
A
So
we
hope
to
launch
that
database
in
a
couple
of
weeks-
and
you
know
we're
particularly
interested
in
learning
more
about
your
spending
plans
during
our
program
today,
so
early
lacani
laconi
from
hugh's
going
to
be
facilitating
the
discussion,
but
before
I
turn
it
over
to
her,
I
just
have
a
couple
of
notes.
One
today's
session
will
be
recorded
and
it'll
be
available
on
our
website
early
next
week
and
two
this
is
meant
to
be
interactive,
so
feel
free
to
ask
questions.
A
B
Thanks
mandy
good
afternoon,
my
name
is
early
leconi
and
I
am
a
senior
associate
with
the
pew
charitable
trust's
state
fiscal
health
portfolio.
Pew
is
a
non-partisan
non-profit
fact.
Tank
and
our
research
helps
advance
data-driven,
best
practices
to
build
fiscally
well-managed
states,
and
we
offer
customized
technical
assistance
on
a
range
of
state
budget
issues.
B
Before
we
get
started
with
the
questions,
I
would
like
to
ask
each
of
you
to
provide
a
short
overview
of
the
current
arpa-related
conversations
taking
place
in
your
state.
The
decisions
that
have
been
made
and
what
is
still
remain
remaining
we'll
start
with
john.
Can
you
tell
us
what
is
happening
in
utah.
C
Well,
I
can
tell
you
what
I
perceived
to
be
happening
in
utah
how's,
that
very
much
in
flux.
Well,
we
we
have
a
very
short
legislative
general
session
and
our
general
session
wrapped
up
two
days
after
the
arpa
bill
passed
congress,
and
so
we
had
already
balanced
our
budget
and
the
second.
You
know
second
time,
I'm
sure,
like
all
of
you,
we've
had
four
special
sessions
in
the
prior
12
months
and
have
been
going
round
and
round
to
make
things
balanced.
C
We
had
just
balanced
our
fiscal
year,
21
22
budget,
and
then
we
got
this
infusion
of
1.6
billion
dollars
for
the
state
fiscal
relief.
So
we
did
have
a
special
session
in
in
may
and
that
special
session
was
focused
on
first
of
all,
accepting
the
federal
grant
in
our
state.
There's
a
law
that
says
if
the
federal
government
or
a
state
agency
applies
for
a
grant
over
10
million
dollars
that
the
entire
legislature
has
to
approve
it.
C
So
we
met
to
approve
that
grant
and
then
we
allocated
about
a
third
of
it
and
the
way
that
we
went
about
allocating
that
third,
is
I'm
going
to
show
you
some
of
the
things
that
they
thought
about.
First
of
all,
they
established
a
set
of
criteria
for
determining
how
to
spend
the
money,
and
hopefully
you
all
can
see
that
now.
C
Okay,
great,
so
this
is
this:
these
10
criteria,
what
they
use
to
determine
the
boss,
is
used
to
determine
how
to
spend
the
money,
and
you
can
see
they're,
pretty
common,
I'm
sure
to
all
of
you,
but
has
to
address.
A
long-term
need
has
to
have
a
sizable
payoff,
provide
net
citizens,
provide
a
benefit
to
everyone
in
the
state,
doesn't
create
inflation
or
inflationary
pressure.
More
importantly,
considers
the
full
cost
of
ownership
aligns
with
the
core
functions
of
state
government
inspires.
C
Innovation
represents
something
that
might
not
be
funded
otherwise
and,
of
course,
meets
the
federal
guidelines
and
then
leverages
non-state
resources
by
partnering,
with
the
with
other
levels
of
government.
So
first
thing
they
did.
Our
guys
did.
Is
they
set
this
these
criteria
and
started
collecting
ideas
about
what
might
meet
all
of
these,
and
I
actually
scored
the
the
proposals
based
on
these
ten
criteria
like
did
it
meet
this
or
didn't
it?
C
Meet
this
and
and
then
started
going
down
from
the
top
and
picking
off
the
ones
that
met
most
of
these
criteria
became
very
clear,
very
quickly
that
we
just
didn't
have
enough
information,
and
we
still
don't
have
enough
information
to
do
the
entire
1.65
billion.
So
next
thing
that
they
did
was
they
divided.
A
C
C
C
They
did
not
appropriate
all
the
money
in
these
eight
buckets,
but
they
basically
said
we
are
going
to
spend
this
money
on
public
health,
on
water
infrastructure,
on
revenue,
replacement
and
unemployment,
solvency
on
housing
and
homeless,
networking
broadband
emergency
preparedness,
impacted
economies,
access
to
justice
and
education
remediation,
and
then
they
chose
from
these
buckets
projects
that
either
had
a
long
lead
time.
So
this
you
know
might
be
something
like
a
water
project
projects
that
we
knew
that
we
could
do
immediately
right.
C
The
guidance
was
clear
enough
that
we
knew
that
we
could
do
them
or
projects
that
had
to
be
done
before
the
end
of
our
current
fiscal
year.
Had
you
know,
appropriations
that
had
to
be
made
before
the
end
of
our
current
fiscal
year
and
those
are
the
items
that
went
into
the
appropriations
act
for
the
special
session.
C
E
So
we
put,
I
think,
jonathan
had
judiciary
as
a
bucket,
but
we
put
it
under
the
economy
with
workforce
and
communities.
A
higher
ed
was
another
one
that
got
a
lot
of
support,
funding
the
critical
occupations
stabilizing
the
deficits
that
they
have
and
dealing
with
their
room
and
board
issues
for
businesses.
There
are
technology
grants
better
places,
which
is
a
funding
for
communities
to
create
communities,
places
and
new
worker
incentives
to
get
people
to
move
to
vermont
that
one.
E
You
know
it's
not
interesting,
that's
the
one
that
gets
the
headlines
when
you're
out
there
looking
at
things,
it's
not
the
biggest
one
by
any
means,
but
it
seems
to
get
people's
attention.
Housing.
We've
got
the
whole
issue
with
the
homeless.
We
put
them
all
in
motels
during
the
pandemic
and
we're
trying
to
navigate
getting.
How
do
we
move
forward
in
rental,
housing,
improvements
for
broadband,
we're
very
rural
state
and
it's
a
huge
problem
for
our
population
and
for
economic
development
in
in
parts
of
the
state
that
don't
have
any
broadband?
E
So
that's
it.
Everybody
is
uniformly
pushing
for
that.
The
climate
action
category
is
really
about
weatherization
and
dealing
with
renewable
energy
concepts
and
then
the
clean
water
is
your
typical,
clean
water,
waste
water
treatment,
storm
water
retrofit
things
like
that,
and
you
know
it's
one
of
the
things
that
we've
struggled
with
is
that
some
of
these
are
very
clearly
fit
like
broadband
and
clean
water
fit
clearly
under
arpa
guidelines.
E
Some
of
the
other
initiatives
that
we're
interested
in
looking
at
like
housing
and
the
climate
change
may
be
more
of
a
reach.
So
we
tried
to
create
broad
categories
to
have
some
flexibility
to
address
those
when
whatever
the
guidance
and,
however
limiting
it
is
try
to
still
address
those
categories,
and
we
may
also
be
moving
money
around,
we
may
put
more
arpa
in
broadband
and
other
state
funds
in
climate
change.
If
that's
how
the
guidance
works
out.
E
One
other
interesting
note
is
that
for
those
of
you
that
don't
know
there
is
a
small
state
minimum
and
we
qualified
for
it,
which
means
in
wyoming
it's
got
even
more
per
capita
than
we
did,
but
when
you're
a
small
state
it
was
a
it
made.
It
was
a
very
generous
opportunity
for
us,
so
it
gave
us
probably
more
funds
than
most
typical
states
had
to
work
with
on
those.
So
that
was
sort
of
my
overview
of
vermont's
approach
to
arpa.
D
D
D
Both
both
the
house
and
senate
had
cleared
their
funding
bills
and
the
governor
and
the
executive,
the
governor
and
the
legislature
were
beginning
negotiations
on
what
we
call
the
global
targets
targets
for
all
the
major
spending
areas.
So
when
the
guidance
landed
very
immediately
folks
were
were
asking
us,
what
does
it
mean?
D
What
can
we
spend
the
money
on
and
we
had
to
pivot
very
very
quickly,
because
we
roughly
had
two
weeks
till
the
conclusion
of
the
legislative
session
and
folks
were
beginning
to
think
we
should
really
incorporate
and
not
put
our
heads
in
the
sand
to
try
to
figure
out
what
what
the
right
response
was.
So
in
the
end,
minnesota's
announced
response
and
we
do
have
a
an
announced
response,
but
not
enacted
bills,
we're
about
to
go
into
a
special
session.
D
To
conclude,
all
the
funding
bills
is:
is
it's
really
just
a
collection
of
big
buckets?
Minnesota
got
2.833
billion
out
of
the
state
fiscal
recovery
money
and
of
that
amount
it.
It
is
embarking
on
revenue
replacement
in
fiscal
year
22
and
23..
We
buy
we
budget
biannually
so
we'll
we'll
take
550
million
of
that
in
the
first
biennium
that
we
can
and
use
that
as
revenue
replacement,
there's
an
additional
550
million.
That's
that
will
be
used
in
fiscal
24
for
revenue
replacement.
B
Great,
thank
you.
Thank
you
all
for
providing
that
context
ahead
of
our
conversation
and
a
note
for
the
audience.
As
mandy
mentioned,
you
are
welcome
to
chime
in
on
any
of
the
questions
that
I
ask
of
the
panelists
or
to
ask
any
questions
of
your
own
and
to
do
so
simply
put
the
question
in
the
chat
box
or
unmute
yourself
to
speak.
There
will
also
be
a
time
for
q
a
at
the
end
of
this
session.
B
So
for
our
first
question,
when
it
comes
to
appropriating
arpa
money,
how
is
your
state
distinguishing
between
projects
that
will
be
a
one-time
expense
and
projects
that
will
need
additional
investments
in
the
years
to
come?
Eric
we'll
start
with
you.
Can
you
share
how
minnesota
is
thinking
about
this.
D
What
happens
after
that,
because
that
effectively
we're
treating
it
as
as
a
as
a
resource
to
support
overall
budget
stability
and
the
leaders
have
agreed
for
550
million
dollars
in
the
next
two
biennia
each
each
time.
So
what
happens?
After
that?
We
don't.
I
won't
pretend
to
suggest
that
we
have
wrestled
with
that
in
its
entirety,
but
I
believe
that
there's
a
real
real
challenge
for
minnesota
after
the
money
goes
away.
D
D
I
think
that
that
that,
in
the
conversation
in
the
22
session,
I
think
these
will
become
critical
questions.
I
mentioned
the
timing
of
when
the
guidance
came
out.
Had
the
guidance
come
out
before
minnesota
senate
and
the
house
had
completed
their
bills,
then
I
think
we
would
have
been
buying
projects.
I
think
we
would
have
been
buying
a
lot
more
things,
but
because
it
landed
at
a
time
when
the
legislature
had
concluded
its
bills.
D
A
E
You
know
I
would
say:
vermont
has,
this
is
a
struggle.
We
we
talk
about
a
lot
not
just
with
our
funds,
making
sure
we're
using
one-time
funds
for
one-time
projects,
and
it's
it's
been
sort
of
a
universal
discussion
for
many
years,
so
that
part's
not
as
hard,
except
that
we
have
so
much
money
right
now
and
we
expect
our
state
revenues
actually
to
be
get
a
bump
because
of
this
funding.
E
So
it's
really
it's
similar
to
what
eric
saying
it's
like
a
two
to
three
year
phenomenon
and
it's
hard
if
you've
never
lived
through
tight
times,
especially
for
our
new
legislators,
to
anticipate
what
that's
going
to
look
like.
So
it
feels
right
now
you
can
do
almost
anything
you
want
and
we
have
the
money
and
sure
go
ahead
and
the
ones
who've
been
around
for
a
while
are
very
mindful
of
how
this
is
going
to
play
out
in
a
few
years.
E
And
it's
so
it's
helpful
that
those
are
our
leaders,
because
I
think
they're
really
leading
the
charge
on
that.
You
know
one
other
piece
I
wanted
to
bring
up.
Was
all
these
funds
going
to
municipalities
and
schools,
and
I
we
worry
about
that,
also
that
they
may
not
be
keeping
this
one
time
versus
ongoing
construct
in
mind
as
they
develop.
E
You
know,
they're
getting
they're
getting
from
our
perspective,
huge
amounts
of
money
also,
and
it's
it's
not
something
that
they've
managed
before,
and
we
worry
about
what
they're
going
to
make
these
decisions
they're
going
to
make
and
how
it's
going
to
play
out.
Also
in
several
years
down
the
road.
E
Decisions,
you
know
there
is
not
state
oversight.
There
is.
We
did
fund
the
league
of
cities
and
towns
to
help
the
municipalities
plan,
so
we
gave
them
some
money
to
help
them,
provide
some
guidance
and
structure
to
the
municipalities,
the
schools.
There
was
pushback
from
the
agency.
That
said
they
had
it
under
control
and
they.
So
we
will
see
I
but
it's.
You
know
we
have
a
lot
for
a
small
state.
We
have
a
lot
of
school
districts
and
it's
not
simple.
E
C
For
utah
we
we've
been
struggling,
I
mean,
I
think
this
we've
all
been
starting
on
this,
but
for
utah
this
is
not
a
new
issue.
It's
been
around.
You
know
forever,
one
of
the
one
of
the
ways
that
we've
been
addressing
it
for
about
20
years
now.
Is
we
we
budget
in
two
buckets?
We
have
two.
We
have
two
budgets
every
year
we
have
a
one-time
budget
and
we
have
an
ongoing
budget
and
they
interact
with
one
another.
So
you
could
have
ongoing
and
one-time
appropriations
for
the
same
thing.
C
This
was
all
the
result
of
a
programming
glitch,
believe
it
or
not.
So
I'll
tell
you
about
that
someday
over
over
drinks
in
person
at
the
next
conference.
But
how
did
we
get
to
this
approach
of
budgeting?
It
was
a
programming
error.
Anyway,
we
take
one-time
revenue
and
we
put
it
in
one
pot
and
we
appropriate
that
as
one
time
explicitly
and
then
we
do
ongoing
and
another
pot
inappropriate.
C
That
is
ongoing
explicitly
and
you
can't
use
one
time
to
pay
for
ongoing,
but
you
can
do
the
other
way,
and
so
what
we're
doing
with
the
arpa
money
is,
you
saw
on
our
guiding
principles.
It
didn't
say
you
can't
engage,
engage
in
an
ongoing
cost.
That
says
that
you
have
to
consider
the
full
cost
of
ownership
and
what
that
means
is.
If
you
do
buy
something,
that's
one
time
in
nature.
C
Like
a
piece
of
infrastructure,
you
have
to
have
a
plan
for
funding
the
ongoing
o
m
and
programming
and
whatever
else
is
associated
with
it.
If
that
ongoing
plan
is
we're
going
to
use
state
tax
dollars
to
do
that,
then
we
forward
fund
the
ongoing
cost.
So
we
would
appropriate
the
one-time
cost
from
arpa.
We
would
appropriate
the
ongoing
cost
from
general
fund
and
then
back
out
that
ongoing
cost
one
time
so
that
it
shows
up
in
the
budget
automatically
when
the
arpa
money
goes
away.
E
That's
fine
yeah,
it
is
it's
really
providing
an
opportunity
to
think
about
transforming
in
in
huge
fundamental
ways.
Things
like
broadband,
we've
been
struggling
with
broadband
for
years
and
and
how
to
provide
access,
and
it's
never
been
successful,
and
this
it's
it's
provided
that
opportunity
and,
and
presumably
the
infrastructure
build
may
provide.
Add
to
that.
The
other
interesting
thing
to
me
is
that
it
is
these
funds
are
so
enormous
that
some
projects
in
the
past
that
are
proposals
would
have
received.
E
A
lot
of
attention
are
not
getting
sort
of
the
scrutiny
and
attention
that
they
might
have
in
the
past,
because
people
are
so
focused
on
these
big
visions.
So
it's
it
has
it.
I
just
have
found
that
interesting
and
I
guess
maybe
in
some
ways
it's
good,
because
it
is
transforming
things,
and
people
are
thinking
very
big
picture,
and
you
know
dealing
frankly
dealing
with
the
homeless
is
a
huge
issue
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
move
forward
with
that.
There's
actually
an
opportunity
to
really
think
about
that.
C
Yeah,
I
think
it.
I
think
it
changes
that
when
you
get
this
much
money
for
at
one
time,
it
really
changes
how
people
think
I
mean
we
still
get
a
lot
of
cats
and
dogs
in
the
requests,
but
the
the
what
people
keep
talking
about
we're
having
a
drought
in
the
western
united
states
right
now-
and
everybody
keeps
talking
about
what,
if
leaders
150
years
ago,
hadn't
thought
about
building
building
all
those
reservoirs
up
in
the
mountains.
Where
would
we
be
today?
C
We
want
to
do
what
they
did
150
years
ago.
We've
got
this
opportunity
to
make
a
really
meaningful
generational
difference.
Let's
stop
thinking
about
the
next
budget
cycle
cycle
in
the
next
election
cycle
and
start
thinking
about
50
to
100
years
from
now,
and
how
we
can
invest
that
to
benefit
those
people.
B
And
building
off
of
that,
john,
actually,
I
have
the
perfect
question
from
paul
headley
in
idaho.
He
said
the
us
treasury
is
taking
comments
on
their
interim
guidance,
and
one
question
is
whether
treasury
should
consider
expanding
eligible
water
infrastructure
projects
to
include
dams
and
reservoir
projects
and
are
any
western
states
considering
submitting
comments
advocating
for
expanding
the
use
for
dams
or
reservoirs.
C
Well,
we
definitely
are,
in
fact,
in
one
of
the
the
bucket
on
on
water
that
I
showed
before
is
280
million
dollars
and
about
a
third
of
that
is
for
dams
and
damn
safety,
and
we
don't
know
if
we're
gonna
be
able
to
use
it
for
that.
But
we
set
it
aside
anyway,
and
you
know
we
used
to
have
we
used
to
have
somebody
mentioned
powerful
senators
earlier
we
used
to
have
power
powerful
senators
before
january
6th.
C
D
So
I
think
I'll
offer
this
in
minnesota,
as,
as
I
mentioned
already
many
of
these
decisions,
and
these
conversations
will
happen
in
the
22
legislative
session.
But
one
thing
that
did
happen
this
year
as
a
direct
result
of
not
just
not
just
the
art
money,
not
just
the
money
at
the
end
of
the
in
december.
D
Not
just
cares
is
a
white
hot
attention
on
how
minnesota
appropriates
federal
funds
right
now
under
current
law,
the
governor
has
a
what
we
call
a
statutory
appropriation
authority,
so
any
money
that
comes
from
washington
is
automatic.
Most
of
it
I
should
say,
is
appropriated
and
and
then
is
reviewed,
but
not
stopped
by
a
small
collection
of
legislators
called
the
legislative
advisory
commission
and
there's
two
or
three
different
ways
that
they
can
review
federal
funds.
But
in
all
cases
the
money
is
already
appropriated
and
goes
out.
The
door
minnesota.
D
The
governor
did
agree
that,
although
the
1.2
that
I
keep
talking
about
is
could
be
could
be
authorized
and
spent
using
gubernatorial
authority
and
the
statutory
appropriation
alone,
he
has
agreed
to
allow
that
money
to
be
negotiated
in
the
22
session.
So
that
may
be
the
seeds
of
some
some
form
of
change,
of
how
how
minnesota
allocates
federal
funds
and
how
it
appropriates
that
money
in
the
future.
So,
as
I
said,
it's
been
a
white-hot
attention,
particularly
in
the
senate,
but
also
to
some
degree
in
the
house
as
well.
B
Thank
you,
and
we
you
all
have
touched
on
this,
but
arpa
funding
offers
states
a
rare
opportunity
to
make
ambitious
investments
in
their
economies,
and
many
state
leaders
are
hoping
to
use
the
dollars
in
ways
that
will
achieve
meaningful
gains
for
state
businesses
and
workers.
While
responding
to
the
economic
disruptions
caused
by
coven
19..
C
Sure
so
lots
of
different
ideas,
one
of
the
the
things
that
I
think
is
the
most
interesting
idea
is
we
created
a
an
explicit
local
government
matching
program
where
we
said:
okay,
we're
gonna
set
aside
this.
This
was
50
million
to
start
out
with,
but
we're
gonna,
we
appropriate
50
million
dollars
and
local
governments
through
your
league
of
cities
and
towns
and
your
association
of
counties
we're
going
to
have
you
propose
projects
that
help
the
economy
and
but
you
have
to
match.
C
You
have
to
bring
your
open
money
to
the
table
to
do
it,
and
you
know
we
will
augment
that
with
state
arpa
money
and
then
we'll
work
in
partnership.
For
that.
So
that's
one
way
to
do
it.
The
the
difficulty
is,
it's
so
hard
under
this
guidance
to
determine
what
is
what
is
what
businesses
are
impacted
economically,
I
mean.
C
Obviously,
we
know
tourism
and
hospitality
right,
but
then
trying
to
measure
the
others
that
we
know,
some
of
which
we
know
were
impacted,
but
some
of
which
were
not
is
really
difficult
at
a
statewide
level,
and
so
we're
hoping
this
local
approach
will
help
us
suss
out.
It's
really
more
geographic
than
it
is
business
sector
for
us
right.
C
It's
certain
parts
of
the
state
did
really
well,
you
know,
but
certain
parts
did
not
do
well
at
all,
and
that
was
because
of
their
taxation
system,
or
it
was
because
of
the
industry
for
businesses
that
they
have
in
their
area.
So
hoping
this,
the
sort
of
local
government
partnering
approach
will
help
will
help
determine
that.
D
For
this,
there's
certainly
like
like
what
jonathan
was
talking
about.
No
shortage
of
ideas.
Minnesota
has
spent
a
fair
bit
of
time
talking
about
how
to
how
to
bring
the
economy
back
and
not
just
similar
to
utah.
Good
portions
of
the
state
have
done
very,
very
well
during
this
period,
while
others
have
not
had
had
the
economic
success
that
we
would
hope
and
that's
and
the
guidance
is
pretty
clear
at
least
to
to
to
the
the
eyes
of
the
folks
in
the
minnesota
senate,
then
that
it
is
a
two-fold
test.
D
F
D
D
It's
a
more
much
more
targeted
approach,
and
so
senators
certainly
in
minnesota,
are
beginning
to
think
through
that
piece
of
the
guidance.
How
do
they
tightly
target?
And
it's
and
I
think
in
in
minnesota,
the
senate
wants
to
make
those
decisions
as
opposed
to
giving
it
to
the
executive
branch
and
have
them
make
those
decisions.
D
So
it's
a
lot
more
speculative
in
terms
of
hands
up
speculative
because
we
won't
be
making
these
decisions
for
a
year
yet,
but
also,
there
seems
to
be
an
interest
in
trying
to
make
those
decisions
within
the
legislative
context,
rather
than
moving
and
being
much
more
targeted,
rather
than
just
giving
the
authority
to
the
executive
branch.
Time
will
tell.
E
You
know
it's
interesting,
I
don't
think
I
mentioned,
but
vermont
did
something
very
similar
in
the
sense
that
we
allocated
that
portion
but
are
really
planning
to
spend
the
rest
moving
to
the
future,
and
the
legislature
very
very
clearly
wants
to
participate
in
that
and
the
this.
The
definition
of
what
is
economic
development
is
different.
E
I
mean
different
eyes
different
eyes,
see
it
differently,
but
I
think
there's
uniform
interest
around
broadband,
and
I
know
I've
mentioned
it
before,
but
vermont
is
being
very
rural
and
also
we
had
a
lot
of
people
move
to
vermont
during
covet
work
remotely
and
they,
if
you're
working
remotely,
you
can't
work
where
you
don't
have
broadband.
So
it's
it's
actually
a
huge
piece
of
our
our
economic
development.
E
I
think,
I
believe,
is
moving
forward
with
this
broadband
and
trying
to
make
it
accessible
because
areas
that
don't
have
it
obviously
don't
have
the
people
moving
in
who
can
be
working
and
providing
the
economic
drivers
in
those
communities.
So
there's
clearly
many
other
things,
but
I
would
say
that
broadbent,
it
seems
for
us
in
particular,
has
been
a
huge
conundrum,
and
this
is
an
opportunity
to
hopefully
get
it
right
and
move
forward
with
it.
D
I
feel
like
I've
glanced
over
katherine.
You
caused
me
to
to
to
remember
this
minnesota,
also
glommed
onto
the
broadband
language
right
away.
We,
we
have
had
state
appropriations
for
broadband
for
for
many
many
years,
and
this
was
the
language
in
the
bill
itself.
Bolstered
that
conversation
within
the
legislature,
far
sooner
than
the
guidance
came
out,
folks
were
standing
in
line
ready
to
appropriate
money
for
broadband.
C
That
was
one
of
our
first
things.
It
was
a
huge
broadband
initiative
for
public
education.
Statewide
I
mean
this
was
from
state
karazhak
money,
coronado
advice,
relief,
fund
money,
but
we
did
we.
One
of
the
buckets
I
mentioned
was
networking
and
broadband,
so
we're
trying
to
actually
expand
that
definition
again
working
with
treasury
beyond
just
broadband.
C
What
fiber
optics
along
freeways
you
know
letting
getting
getting
broadband
to
communities,
we've
sort
of
neglected
state
government,
and
that
became
very
clear
in
in
during
the
stay-at-home
orders.
Good
example
of
that
is,
hopefully
I'm
getting
this
this
right,
but
our
state,
our
education
system,
public
education
system
in
utah,
has
a
single
network.
They
all
use.
It
has
two
200
gigabit,
no,
two,
two
400
gigabit
connections
to
the
internet,
state
government.
E
So
that's
a
critical
piece
of
actually
with
crf.
Also
we,
you
could
put
it
towards
where
you
you
it
worked,
and
then
that
would
freed
up
that
money
to
use
on
things
that
maybe
weren't
applicable
to
the
specific
federal
funds.
But
you
had
those
funds
available
for
other
places
and
in
fact
we
have
a
lot
of
flexibility
with
our
current
arpa
appropriations
that
were
just
passed.
E
C
So
that
would
be
the
first.
I
think
for
first
lesson,
our
and
then
the
second
is
goes
back
to
your
very
first
question,
which
is
making
sure
that
we
consider
full
cost
of
ownership
and
and
don't
buy
something
that
we
then
later
wind
up
realizing.
Oh,
you
have
to
actually
change
the
oil
on
this
new
car.
So
so
that's
the
second
takeaway.
I
think.
D
I
think
minnesota's
story
is
very
similar
to
what
both
catherine
and
jonathan
have
talked
about
in.
In
the
era
environment,
we
learned
very
carefully
how
to
how
to
maximize
the
dollars,
and
if
you
can,
this
was
also
very
clear
with
with
the
crf
money,
particularly
once
the
fema
reimbursements
became
a
much
more
robust,
and
you
could
use
that
money
to
reimburse
for
to
meet
this.
The
state
match
for
for
federal
money
coming
from
fema.
So
we
have
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
legislative
language,
creating
if
statements.
D
E
Well
early,
I
I
I
do
have
a
question.
This
is
catherine
again
and
I'm
curious.
You
know
you
asked
me
about
what
we're
doing
to
help
our
local
school
districts
and
municipalities
manage
their
money
to
spend
it
on
to
spend
one
time
money
on
one
time,
expenses
and
I'm
wondering
if
any
other
state
has
has
any
suggestions
or
any
how
they've
set
it.
B
E
C
Doesn't
really
get
to
your
question
exactly
catherine,
but
the
only
one
thing
that
I
can
think
of
that
we're
doing.
As
I
mentioned
that
matching
program,
those
proposals
have
to
have
a
plan
for
addressing
the
long-term
costs,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
it's
they're
not
going
to
come
back
to
us.
You
know
five
years
from
now
and
say
just
kidding,
but
at
least
they're
thinking
about
it
and
it's
part
of
their
part
of
their
submission.
C
C
C
B
F
D
D
C
Yeah
we
we
have
not
kirk
hi.
By
the
way
we
have
not,
we
have
not
appropriated
any
money
from
revenue
replacement
yet
and
but
you
saw
our
buckets
and
our
buckets
included
infrastructure
up
there,
then
water
and
and
broadband.
Of
course,
we
can't
do
that
with
straight-up
arbor
money,
so
that
assumes
revenue
replacement
and
our
buckets
included
access
to
justice,
which,
maybe
you
could
say,
that's
allowed
directly
under
the
guidance
but
it'll
be
easier
with
with
revenue
replacement.
So
we
haven't
really.
C
We
haven't
appropriated
that
money
yet,
but
we're
anticipating
it.
You
know
coming
up
in
january,
we
just
got
to
figure
out.
You
know
hoping
that
that
treasury
answers
some
of
these
nebulous
questions
about.
How
do
you
treat
things
like
the
timing,
income,
tax
time
and
delay?
How
do
you
treat
things
like
federal
funds
that
came
for
kovid
in
your
calculation?
C
D
With
the
question
these
things
ambiguous
to
me
about
whether,
if
you
do
revenue
replacement,
you
can
just
bring
the
money
into
your
general
fund
and
basically
be
counted
as
a
resource.
Or
do
you
have
to
offset
an
existing
appropriation
which
is
sort
of
implied
in
the
guidance
to
me
at
least
we're
having
to
write
another
one
of
those?
D
If
statement
appropriations
to
do
this,
obviously,
if
we
could
bring
it
in
as
a
as
a
bookable
expense,
we'd
love
to
be
able
to
just
or
not
a
bookable
expense,
but
a
book
about
revenue
just
bring
it
in
count
it
as
a
revenue
as
if
it
were
tax
revenue.
Something
tells
me
that
the
we're
probably
not
going
to
be
allowed
to
do
that
for
a
whole
host
of
reasons
which
we
could
all
examine.
Have
you
thought
about
that?
Do
you
have
an
opinion
on
it.
C
D
I've
been
sort
of
thinking
up
to
this
point.
Well
for
a
long
time
that
it
we
would
be
doing
something
akin
to
what
we
did
during
the
the
era
days
where
we
took
an
expense.
In
our
case
it
was
k-12,
reduced
it
and
replaced
it
with
federal
spending
for
the
same
purpose
and-
and
you
can
do
revenue
replacement
exactly
that
way
and
that's
what
I've
been
assuming
we're,
probably
going
to
ultimately
have
to
do.
But
obviously,
if
we
could
book
it
as
a
revenue,
it'd
be
a
lot
nicer.
C
I
was
kind
of
thinking
of
this
as
it's
two
separate
streams,
and
we
did
do
some
of
this
next
thing.
I'm
going
to
talk
about
in
our
special
session,
which
is
we
have
appropriated
so
I
mentioned.
Maybe
I
didn't
mention.
We
had
a
pretty
good
year.
I
think
a
lot
of
states.
We
all
went
and
adjusted
budgets
and
then
revenues
bounced
back
greater
than
we
thought
they
would.
That
gave
us
a
surplus.
C
We
appropriated
that
state
surplus
for
eligible
arpa
expenses
before
we
knew
they
were
eligible,
arpa
expenses
right
like
we,
we
were
trying
to
do
the
same
things
that
arpa
is
trying
to
do,
but
before
arpa
existed,
and
so
we
did
in
our
special
session
swap
all
that
out.
We
went
and
took
took
back
the
general
fund
and
put
in
arpa.
Of
course
it
has
to
happen
after
march,
something
that
I
don't
know
what
day.
C
Third,
maybe
march
3rd,
like
the
spending
has
to
happen
after
march
3rd,
but
but
I
was
thinking
that
as
sort
of
a
separate
bucket
to
them.
Just
this
plain
up,
calculation
on
the
counter,
factual
versus
actual
collections,
which
I
would
assume
I
was
assuming-
would
be
bookable
revenue,
but
that's
a
really
great
another.
B
C
B
Guidance,
I
have
another
question
from
ruthann
jones
in
delaware
for
states
applying
arpa
funds
to
infrastructure
and
capital
projects.
How
are
you
making
sure
timelines
stay
within
arpa
expenditure,
time
frame
and
making
sure
project
budgets
remain
feasible
in
light
of
high
material
costs
and
shortages
of
contractors
available.
D
I
won't
say
we
know
how
we're
making
sure
of
it,
but
I
worry
about
this
when
we
were
considering
bills
earlier
in
the
session
before
we
knew
fully
what
was
going
to
be
eligible
and
not
I
kept
saying
to
our
transportation
folks,
which
is
where
the
senate
wanted
to
spend
its
money
on
infrastructure
related
projects
make
sure
it's
shovel
ready
and
ready
to
go.
And
can
you
divide
the
package
into
a?
D
E
Yes,
it
would
be
spent
by
december,
and
you
know
it
was.
It
was
an
interesting
process
and
it
works.
It's
that's
working
for
us
because
it
is
you,
you
do
need
to
be
concerned
about
all
that
and
then
you
need
to
have
a
plan.
If
you
don't
spend
it.
Where
are
you
going
to
spend
it?
So
you
don't
have
to
return
it
if
you'd
like
to
use
it.
C
Yeah,
I
think
that's
the
key.
What
katherine
just
said
is:
first,
what
you're
gonna
do
is
you're
gonna
build
a
contingency
into
the
project
budget
right,
and
I
hope
that
you
can
exercise
that
contingency
to
either
get
you
done
on
time
or
to
cover
any
costs
overruns
and
the
question.
The
hard
part
is
what,
if
you
get
to
october
of
2024
and
you're,
not
going
to
make
your
deadlines,
then
what
do
you
just
lose
that
money
or
is
there?
Do
you
have
a
plan
for
how
to
allocate
that
quickly.
D
D
B
C
We
have
we're
not
having
necessarily
interim
discussions
about
the
money
that
it
is
yet
to
be
appropriated.
We
are
so
we
do
have
a
number
of
reporting
hoops
that
I
just
have
to
jump
through
to
spend
the
money
that
we've
already
appropriated.
So
you
know
bring
back
to
us
reports
on
how
you
can
use
this
or
that
grant
program.
C
B
E
C
Well,
I
don't
know
what
will
drive
decisions
in
other
states,
but
what
drew
up
the
decision
in
our
state
was
that
employers
were
facing
a
troubling
of
unemployment
insurance
rates
and
the
lawmakers
just
thought.
That's
a
double
whammy
when
they're
trying
to
recover-
and
so
let's
just
shore
up
the
trust
fund
by
putting
in
arpa
money
and
at
least
minimize
the
increase,
there
will
still
be
an
increase
in
in
the
premiums,
but
it
won't
be
three
times
what
it
was.
D
F
B
D
I'm
curious,
let
me
ask
this
question:
do
folks
feel
it's
just
simply
too
early,
I
mean
I
feel
like
there's
a
lot
of
uncertainty
out
there.
I'd
be
interested
in
not
just
from
the
three
of
us,
but
anyone
else
jumping
in
and
giving
us
your
thoughts.
I
mean
there's
the
three
of
us
sitting
here,
sort
of
nominally
being
the
panel
but
I'd
love
to
hear
from
others
and
maybe
address
the
question.
Do
you
feel
like
it's
too
early
to
answer
some
of
these
questions.
D
F
Hi
this
is
this
is
paul
in
idaho,
hi,
paul,
hi
and
yeah.
We
mirrored
a
lot
of
what
what
we've
heard
we
did.
We
did
what
we
could
do
and
we
identified
about
two
and
a
half
billion
that
was
going
to
need
to
come
through
the
state
appropriation
process
at
some
point
and
of
that
2.5
billion
the
legislature
appropriated
about
780
million.
So
we
did
what
we
could
do
and
the
rest
of
it
is
much
more
of
a
wait
and
see
since
that
time
the
u.s
treasury
guidance
came
in
we're.
F
D
B
B
C
C
The
more
people
come
to
the
table
and
so
we're
trying
to
act
quickly,
but
at
the
same
time
didn't
have
enough
guidance
to
know
if
these
things
would
qualify,
and
so
that's
why
we
wound
up
doing
you
know
what,
like
I
said
earlier,
what
we
knew
we
could
do
now
and
then
trying
at
least
to
carve
things
off
in
the
buckets
for
later,
so
that
we
could.
You
know
we
could
keep
the
focus
on
these
meaningful,
impactful
big
projects,
as
opposed
to
everybody's.
You
know,
regionally
significant
economic
development
project.
B
C
A
A
Lastly,
I
just
want
to
let
you
know
about
a
couple
of
fiscal
briefings
that
we
have
coming
up
this
coming
wednesday
at
2,
00,
p.m,
eastern
time
we'll
be
discussing
state
pension
systems
and
we
will
wrap
up
our
spring
budget.
Our
spring
fiscal
briefing
series
with
a
budget
and
tax
update
on
june
16th,
also
at
2
pm
eastern
time,
and
so
I
hope
that
we
will
see
you
all
then,
and
it
won't
be
too
long
before
we
see
you
all
in
person.