97% of their adjusted 2013 appropriation? What the hell does that mean?

I think the question is about the meaning of "adjusted". There's always a "plan", and an "actual", but "adjusted" may have some flexibility. If you look at warrants in SB2 towns, there is a budget and a "default" budget. The legislature and the Towns have struggled for years over the details of the definition of "default" and the result is considerable variation around tghe state.

@Chris that is the question; what exactly doe she mean by adjusted? Does she mean adjusted to double what the last congress had in place or does she mean 3% less than the last congress or what?

Well, it could mean what they actually spent versus what was allocated, which could be more or less. Maybe no conspiracies at all.
If I recall the conversations before the election, at least half of us where thoroughly convinced and in the throes of conniption fits that "comrade" Maggie was going to spend us into oblivion.
Sounds like, in reality, she is pretty reasonable, and -3% is a reduction if my math skills are current.
Take that in hand with James Pindalls report today that this session - in stark contrast to the last - seems to be more focused on getting meaningful work done instead of advancing one-sided lop-sided ideological agendas, and it kind of makes you think...
Hey, maybe things are turning out pretty all-right after all.

The message that I get from the election is that the New Hampshire citizens value their personal freedoms, and the freedom of their neighbors. A radical social agenda was rejected in favor of a moderate. A lot of the clown behavior from the last two years did end up in the papers, and I think many voters were aware of how out of control that legislature was.

There was a vote. Maggie won. Regardless of your political affiliation, what is the right wing gripe about reducing our budget by 3%? You righties should be dancing in the streets that you have a Democrat further reducing our budget. Personally, I want to see our social safety net analyzed, see what we are doing right, and see what we could be doing better. I have the sickening feeling that the millions of dollars lopped off from the last budget left many people out in the cold.

Ok, an "adjusted appropriation" is the actual money spent NOT what they were budgeted for the fiscal year in question.

(very first definition from the link below)
https://ecb.ohio.gov/Help/Online/glossary.htm

So she is asking all departments to spend 3% less than they spent last year.

Given that we are on a biennial budget that is half through the FY2013 and not yet complete as it ends on July 11th of the coming year. (please correct me if I am figuring this out wrong) It would seem that Maggie is actually saying propose to spend 3% less than whatever you end up spending from July 11 2012 to July 11 2013.

If this is correct, which it may not be I'll admit and encourage someone to help me understand, I am highly skeptical that the spending for the remainder of this current fiscal year is not over the top creating the "fake cut" that I am under the impression is actually happening. Basically spend a ton now and get it on the books while we are in control then we can "cut" it slightly to make it look good for the press.........

Someone please help me understand that I am reading this wrong.

Take 3% off a fat pig and you still have a fat pig.

Confusing terms aside, I am betting the budget will be a significant increase from the prior budget. No "draconian cuts" here...