AN ACT relating to exempting the Commonwealth of Kentucky from the observance of daylight saving time.
Summary
HB308 would exempt Kentucky from observing Daylight Saving Time and require the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions to remain on standard time year-round. The bill cites federal law that allows states to opt out of the time change and directs Kentucky to observe standard time at all times, rather than advancing clocks in the spring and returning them in the fall.
The measure is scheduled to take effect on October 31, 2025. If enacted, it would change how state and local governments in Kentucky set official time and would effectively end seasonal clock changes within the state, subject to the federal framework referenced in the bill.
Impact
HB308 would add a new section to KRS Chapter 2 and create a state-level exemption from Daylight Saving Time for Kentucky. It would require the Commonwealth and all political subdivisions to observe standard time year-round, affecting state and local government operations and any laws or practices tied to official timekeeping. The bill does not amend federal law, but it relies on federal statutes that permit states to remain on standard time.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill’s straightforward purpose and lack of recorded debate, the measure appears to be a policy proposal focused on timekeeping rather than a broader partisan issue. The available record does not show whether the bill was controversial or broadly supported.
Contention
The main point of contention likely concerns whether Kentucky should permanently remain on standard time instead of participating in Daylight Saving Time, a policy that can affect daily schedules, commerce, transportation, and coordination with neighboring states. Potential supporters may favor eliminating the biannual clock change, while opponents may prefer retaining Daylight Saving Time for perceived economic or lifestyle benefits. No specific objections or named stakeholders appear in the provided transcripts or vote history.