AN ACT FOR THE OFFICE OF THE TREASURER OF STATE - CITY-COUNTY TOURIST MEETING AND ENTERTAINMENT FACILITIES ASSISTANCE APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2026-2027 FISCAL YEAR.
HB1029 is an annual appropriation bill for the Arkansas Office of the Treasurer of State. It provides funding for payments related to city-county tourist meeting and entertainment facilities under the City-County Tourist Meeting and Entertainment Facilities Assistance Law for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027. The bill specifically appropriates $887,908 for facility debt service and operating expenses for publicly owned eligible facilities.
The measure is primarily a budget and spending authorization bill rather than a policy change. It allows the Treasurer to disburse money from the City-County Tourist Facilities Aid Fund, subject to the usual state fiscal controls and procurement/accounting laws. It also includes a legislative intent section tying expenditures to the agency’s budget materials and official legislative records, and an emergency clause making the act effective July 1, 2026.
HB1029 affects state appropriations law by authorizing a specific one-year expenditure from the City-County Tourist Facilities Aid Fund for tourism-related public facilities. It does not create new substantive rights or duties, but it does direct state funds to support debt service and operating costs for eligible city-county tourist meeting and entertainment facilities. As enacted, it becomes part of the annual budget framework governing the Treasurer’s administration of these assistance payments.
The available record suggests the bill was routine and noncontroversial. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes indicating debate, opposition, or amendments, and the bill advanced to become Act 36. Its passage appears consistent with a standard Joint Budget Committee appropriation measure needed to keep an existing assistance program funded for the next fiscal year.
No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided materials. Because the bill is a narrow appropriation for tourism facility assistance, any disagreement would likely have centered on the amount appropriated, the use of state funds for local entertainment and meeting facilities, or the broader merits of subsidizing facility debt service and operating expenses. However, the record provided does not show any expressed objections or competing viewpoints.