SB295 is a local act affecting Montgomery County that revises the compensation for the county’s judge of probate. The bill amends Section 45-51-84 of the Code of Alabama 1975 to set a new annual salary of $153,725 for the individual serving as judge of probate on June 1, 2025, beginning October 1, 2026, in lieu of any other salary. The existing statutory language establishing the earlier base salary and annual percentage-based increases remains in the section, but the bill adds a specific salary provision for the current officeholder.
The bill is narrowly focused on one county office and does not broadly alter statewide probate law or county compensation systems beyond this Montgomery County-specific salary adjustment. It changes the compensation structure for the judge of probate by replacing the prior general compensation framework, as applied to the identified officeholder, with a fixed annual salary amount starting in fiscal year 2026-2027. The act becomes effective June 1, 2026.
Impact
SB295 amends a local provision in the Alabama Code governing Montgomery County to increase and fix the salary of the judge of probate for the officeholder serving on June 1, 2025. Its practical effect is to raise county payroll obligations for that office and to supersede the prior compensation method for that specific position beginning October 1, 2026. The bill affects Montgomery County government finances and the compensation of the probate judge, but it does not create a new statewide program or alter duties of the office.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been noncontroversial and broadly supported. It passed the Senate 30-0 and the House 51-0, indicating unanimous approval in both chambers. No committee transcripts were provided, and the voting record suggests little to no opposition during consideration.
Contention
There is no recorded substantive contention in the available materials. The only likely point of interest is the increase and restructuring of compensation for a single county officeholder, which could raise questions in general about public salary levels or local fiscal impact. However, the unanimous votes and absence of committee debate indicate that no member or stakeholder opposition is reflected in the provided record.