Alabama Space Authority, renamed Alabama Aerospace Authority; membership increased; duties and powers increased
SB228 renames the Alabama Space Authority as the Alabama Aerospace Authority, effective October 1, 2026, and updates the Code of Alabama accordingly so that all existing references, rights, duties, property, contracts, and other instruments continue under the new name. The bill also expands the authority’s membership by adding the Finance Director and the Secretary of Workforce as ex officio members, and by adding the CEO of the U.S. Space and Rocket Center Commission as a nonvoting ex officio member.
The bill broadens and clarifies the authority’s mission and powers. It directs the authority to promote aerospace education and training, space exploration, space tourism, and spaceport development; encourage public-private partnerships and private investment; propose business initiatives, tax credits, and incubator programs; study the feasibility of a federally licensed spaceport in Alabama; and coordinate with tourism and space-related agencies. It also authorizes the authority to acquire and lease property, enter contracts, accept gifts and grants, adopt bylaws and policies subject to ADECA approval, and submit bylaw changes to the Legislative Council for review.
SB228 amends Sections 41-23-170, 41-23-171, 41-23-173, and 41-23-174 of the Code of Alabama 1975. Its legal effect is to rename the existing space authority, preserve continuity of all existing legal references and assets, expand the board composition, and strengthen the authority’s statutory mandate and operational powers. The bill affects state economic development and aerospace policy, as well as the roles of ADECA, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Transportation, the Finance Director, the Secretary of Workforce, and the U.S. Space and Rocket Center Commission.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed both chambers unanimously in recorded votes, with no recorded dissent in the available voting history. The absence of committee transcript discussion also suggests limited public controversy or debate in the materials provided.
No major points of contention are reflected in the available record. The only potentially notable policy choices are the rebranding from “space” to “aerospace,” the addition of state fiscal and workforce officials to the authority, and the expanded emphasis on tax credits, public-private partnerships, and spaceport development. However, the unanimous votes indicate these changes were generally accepted rather than disputed.