HJR31 is a memorial resolution honoring Daryl Wayne Brown, Sr., a longtime Alabama State Trooper and Tuscaloosa-area public servant. The resolution recites his personal history, career, family, faith, and death near the Grant Creek bridge, and expresses legislative appreciation for his service and community impact.
The measure asks the Alabama Department of Transportation, in coordination with local officials, to consider designating the Interstate 20/59 bridge spanning Grant Creek in Tuscaloosa County as the Daryl Wayne Brown, Sr. Memorial Bridge. It also calls for the erection of appropriate signs or markers recognizing the designation, subject to applicable requirements and laws. As a joint resolution, it does not create a new regulatory program or alter substantive rights; instead, it serves as an official legislative request and commemoration tied to state transportation signage and memorial naming practices.
Impact
If carried out, the resolution would affect the naming and signage of a specific state highway bridge in Tuscaloosa County, directing attention to the Alabama Department of Transportation and local governing officials. It does not amend the Alabama Code or impose duties on private parties, but it may trigger administrative steps for memorial bridge designation and installation of markers consistent with transportation rules and any applicable naming policies.
Sentiment
The sentiment around the bill is strongly positive and commemorative. The resolution is framed as an honor to a respected trooper, husband, father, grandfather, and community member, and the available context shows no recorded opposition, committee controversy, or negative vote history. The bill’s enacted status is consistent with a broadly supportive, ceremonial measure.
Contention
There is little apparent contention in the available record. The only practical issue implied by the text is that the bridge designation is not automatic; the Department of Transportation is merely encouraged to coordinate with local officials and proceed only if consistent with applicable requirements and laws. Any potential discussion would likely center on the appropriateness of the memorial location, signage, or compliance with transportation naming procedures, but no specific objections are documented.