AN ACT FOR THE OZARKA COLLEGE APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2026-2027 FISCAL YEAR.
HB1069 is an annual appropriation bill for Ozarka College for the 2026-2027 fiscal year. It authorizes funding for personal services and operating expenses, including regular salaries, extra help, matching funds, operating expenses, capital outlay, debt service, and promotional items. The bill also sets maximum numbers of employees and salary caps for a wide range of administrative, academic, auxiliary, and support positions at the college.
The measure provides two main appropriations: $4,644,419 from the Ozarka College Fund for state operations and $15,501,000 from cash funds. It also authorizes up to 100 temporary or part-time employees and establishes a total maximum employee count of 220. The bill includes standard fiscal controls requiring compliance with state procurement, accounting, budgetary, salary, and higher education expenditure laws, and it contains an emergency clause making it effective July 1, 2026.
HB1069 affects state law by creating a specific appropriation and staffing authority for Ozarka College for fiscal year 2026-2027. It does not broadly amend substantive education law, but it legally authorizes the college to spend designated state and cash funds for salaries, operations, capital improvements, and related expenses, while limiting expenditures to the amounts and purposes stated in the act. The bill also reinforces compliance with Arkansas fiscal control statutes and higher education spending restrictions.
The available record shows no committee transcripts, recorded votes, or other debate, so there is no documented opposition or support in the provided materials. The bill’s progression to Act 57 suggests it moved through the legislative process as a routine budget measure. Overall, the sentiment appears neutral and administrative, consistent with a standard appropriations bill for a state college.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided context. Because there are no transcripts or votes, there is no evidence of disagreement over the funding levels, staffing caps, salary ranges, or use of cash funds. Any potential concerns would likely relate to budget size, staffing authority, or allocation of cash-fund resources, but none are identified in the record supplied.