AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - PROMOTION BOARDS APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2026-2027 FISCAL YEAR.
HB1017 is an annual appropriation act for the Arkansas Department of Agriculture’s promotion boards for fiscal year 2026-2027. It provides operating, research, development, promotion, and consumer-activity funding for the Arkansas Beef Council, Catfish Promotion Board, Corn and Grain Sorghum Promotion Board, Rice Research and Promotion Board, Soybean Promotion Board, and Wheat Promotion Board. The bill also includes a separate cash-fund appropriation for rice research and development.
The measure sets specific spending limits for each board and fund, with the largest allocations going to rice and soybean research and development. It also contains a special language provision allowing the Chief Fiscal Officer, after consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to waive certain service-charge deductions from specified agricultural special revenues for the one-year period covered by the act. The bill takes effect July 1, 2026, and includes standard compliance, legislative intent, and emergency-clause language typical of appropriation legislation.
HB1017 does not create new regulatory programs or amend substantive agricultural law; instead, it authorizes the expenditure of state and cash funds for existing agricultural promotion boards and research activities. Its legal effect is to establish the maximum amounts that may be spent from the named funds during the 2026-2027 fiscal year and to temporarily authorize a waiver of certain fund deductions for designated agricultural revenue collections. It primarily affects the Department of Agriculture, the listed commodity boards, and the state fiscal officers responsible for fund administration and disbursement.
The available record suggests the bill was routine and broadly noncontroversial. It was introduced by the Joint Budget Committee, moved through the budget process, and ultimately became Act 121, with no recorded committee transcript objections or roll-call vote details in the provided materials. The presence of an emergency clause and standard appropriation language indicates it was treated as necessary annual budget legislation rather than a disputed policy measure.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts or votes. The only potentially notable policy feature is the special language permitting waiver of certain service-charge deductions, which could matter to how agricultural special revenues are distributed, but there is no evidence in the record that this provision drew opposition. In the absence of recorded debate, the bill appears to have been accepted as a standard funding measure for commodity promotion and research boards.