Arkansas House Bill HB1004

Arkansas 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/26
• Refer: 4/8/26
• Failed: 4/29/26

Caption

AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS - DIVISION OF COMMUNITY CORRECTION APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2026-2027 FISCAL YEAR.

Summary

HB1004 is a fiscal-session appropriation bill for the Arkansas Department of Corrections, Division of Community Correction, for the 2026-2027 fiscal year. It provides a specific appropriation of $506,000 for reentry center grants, funded from the Division of Community Correction Fund Account, and authorizes the department to budget, allocate, and spend those funds for that purpose during the stated fiscal year. The bill is largely administrative and budgetary rather than substantive criminal justice reform. It includes standard appropriation provisions, compliance language requiring adherence to state fiscal and procurement laws, legislative intent language tying expenditures to the agency’s budget materials and legislative records, and an emergency clause making the act effective July 1, 2026 so the agency can operate without interruption at the start of the fiscal year.

Impact

HB1004 would not create new criminal penalties or change sentencing law; instead, it would authorize state spending for community correction reentry center grants for one fiscal year. Its practical effect would be to direct $506,000 in state funds to programs intended to support reentry services for individuals returning from correctional supervision, within the existing framework of the Division of Community Correction and state budget controls.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or recorded vote information is available, so there is no documented debate to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s structure and emergency clause suggest it was treated as a routine appropriations measure needed for agency operations, but it ultimately died in House Committee at sine die adjournment, indicating it did not advance to final passage despite its administrative nature.

Contention

Because there are no committee transcripts or votes, no specific policy disputes are documented. Any potential points of contention would likely have centered on the size and use of the $506,000 appropriation, the effectiveness of reentry center grants, or broader budget priorities within corrections spending, but the available record does not show any identified opponents or stated objections.