To assure accurate comparisons with the governor's recommendations versus the prior year's appropriation, MDN consistently has used for the prior year figure the actual appropriations approved by legislature without adjusting based on any gubernatorial line-item vetoes, withholdings or spending restrictions.).

The reason is to assure our tables compare "apples to apples", not "apples to oranges." What the legislature passes always is subject after the governor signs the bill to withholdings, now called "restrictions" by the administration.

In fact, in some years, governors signed bloated budgets when it was obvious there would need to be subsequent withholdings of spending authority.

For major building construction and improvement projects, the capital improvements budgets include figures for the number of years a project is expected to require.

Thus, a large portion of the capital improvements budget involves funds that are not expected to be spent in the next fiscal year. Instead, for future years, there are "reappropriation" bills to reappropriate the unspent funds for capitol improvement projects. Those reappropriation figures also are not included in the budget tables.

The problem with supplemental appropriations is that they are for the remaining months of the current fiscal year. There are no supplemental appropriations for the full fiscal year upon which the legislature is working.

The table does include a separate line for the billions of dollars in federal COVID-19 economic recovery funds the state expects to get. That money ultimately would be appropriated to various agency programs. Instead, that extra federal money shows up in the all-funds table.

The National Guard is a new department. Previously, appropriations to the National Guard was included in the Public Safety Department. So, to see the actual change for the Public Safety Department between the two fiscal years, add the National Guard funding to the FY 2023 figure for the Public Safety Department.

However, FY2024 is an exemption because the governor recommended and the House approved a nearly $1 million appropriation of General Revenue to finance Interestate highway improvements and expansion.

But the FY2023 budget and the proposed FY2024 budget contain billions of dollars from these federal funds making budget comparisons with earlier years extremely misleading.

In some cases, these federal funds have been used to fund costs normally covered by General Revenue. Much of the money gets tranferred to various state funds, obscuring how this federal largess is being used.

It is not deliberate deception. There is a deadline for the state to allocate those funds. Essentialy, the federal government's approach simpy does not recognize the budgeting processes and deadlines of the states.

The likely reason the $4.8 billion in General Revenue and bonds for expanding Interstate 70 to three lanes in both directions between St. Louis and Kansas City. That is a far higher amount than could be spent in a single year for such a huge project.