AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, HERITAGE, AND TOURISM - STATE PARKS AND TOURISM DIVISIONS REAPPROPRIATION.
HB1098 is a reappropriation bill for the Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism, specifically the State Parks and Tourism Divisions. It carries forward the unspent balance of a prior capital improvement appropriation, allowing up to $20 million to remain available beginning July 1, 2026 for the acquisition, management, stewardship, or preservation of state-owned lands, historic sites, buildings, structures, or objects. The bill is framed as a fiscal-session appropriations measure rather than a policy change, and it includes standard language governing how the funds may be used and controlled.
The act also authorizes the department to supplement state treasury funds with grants, donations, federal funds, and unobligated cash income, while prohibiting use of the agency’s general maintenance and operations funds for the specified projects. It requires compliance with state purchasing, accounting, budgetary, and revenue stabilization laws, and it contains an emergency clause making the act effective July 1, 2026 to avoid disruption to agency operations. The bill was enacted and became Act 128.
HB1098 does not create new substantive regulatory authority; instead, it extends the availability of previously appropriated capital improvement funds for the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism. Its main legal effect is to reauthorize spending authority from Act 297 of 2025 for eligible preservation and acquisition projects tied to state parks, tourism assets, and historic resources. It affects the department, the Arkansas Natural and Cultural Resources Grant and Trust Fund, and any projects or recipients relying on these reappropriated balances.
The available record suggests the bill was routine and largely noncontroversial. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes indicating debate, opposition, or amendments, and the measure advanced to enactment as Act 128. As a budget reappropriation measure, it appears to have been treated as a standard fiscal housekeeping bill supporting ongoing agency work.
No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided materials. Because the bill simply reappropriates unused balances for parks, heritage, and tourism capital projects, any potential concerns would likely have centered on the size of the appropriation, the scope of eligible projects, or general fiscal oversight, but none of those issues are documented in the transcript or vote history provided. The absence of recorded debate suggests little visible disagreement.