Municipalities; imposition of new or increased taxes or fees, ordinance required
SB148 would amend Alabama law governing municipal action on taxes and license fees. Under current law, cities and towns may levy a new tax or license fee, or raise an existing one, by ordinance or resolution if otherwise authorized. This bill would require that any new tax or fee, or any increase in an existing tax or fee, be adopted only by ordinance, not by resolution.
The bill also adds procedural safeguards before a municipality may vote on such an ordinance. After introduction, the council would have to hold a public hearing, with at least 30 days’ notice. The notice must describe the proposed ordinance, state the amount of any new or increased tax or fee, identify the hearing date, time, and place, and explain how to obtain a copy of the proposal. The notice must be published in a newspaper of general circulation or in the manner used for ordinance publication, and also posted on the municipality’s website, if one exists, and on the Secretary of State’s open meetings website. After the hearing, the council may consider the ordinance at a regular meeting.
SB148 would narrow municipal discretion by requiring a formal ordinance process for new or increased local taxes and license fees, replacing the option to use a resolution. It would also impose statewide notice, publication, and public-hearing requirements for these revenue measures, affecting municipal councils, clerks, local taxpayers, and businesses subject to local taxes or licensing fees. The bill would amend Section 11-45-2 of the Code of Alabama 1975 and would take effect October 1, 2026.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no direct evidence of debate or support/opposition from the legislative process. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears aimed at increasing transparency and public participation in local tax decisions, which may appeal to those favoring notice and accountability. The bill’s current status as indefinitely postponed suggests it did not advance, but the record provided does not explain why.
The main point of contention is likely the added procedural burden on municipalities seeking to raise revenue, including the mandatory ordinance form, 30-day notice period, public hearing, and multi-platform publication requirements. Municipal officials may view these requirements as limiting flexibility and slowing urgent fiscal action, while supporters would likely argue that taxpayers and businesses deserve advance notice and an opportunity to comment before local taxes or fees increase. No specific objections or proponents are identified in the provided materials.