Michigan Senate Bill SB0871

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/18/26
• Refer: 3/18/26
• Report Pass: 4/21/26
• Refer: 4/21/26

Caption

Appropriations: department of licensing and regulatory affairs; appropriations for fiscal year 2026-2027; provide for. Creates appropriation act.

Summary

Senate Bill 871 is a fiscal-year 2026-2027 appropriations bill for the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA). As written, it makes a gross appropriation of $100 from the state general fund/general purpose to the department for the year ending September 30, 2027. The bill is a standard appropriations measure and does not create new regulatory programs, licensing requirements, or substantive policy changes; instead, it authorizes the expenditure of a very small amount of state funding for the department. The bill also includes general appropriations language stating that total state spending under the bill from state sources is $100.00 and that no funds are to be paid to local units of government. It further provides that the appropriations are subject to the Management and Budget Act, tying the bill to existing state budget administration rules and procedures. In practical terms, the bill affects only the department’s budget authority and the state’s fiscal accounting for the 2026-2027 fiscal year.

Impact

SB 871 would amend state spending authority only for the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs for fiscal year 2026-2027, with a $100 general fund appropriation and no local government distribution. It does not appear to alter licensing, labor, business, or regulatory statutes directly, but it does operate within the framework of the Management and Budget Act and the state constitution’s appropriations requirements. Its legal effect is limited to budget authorization and expenditure control for LARA.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill received generally favorable committee support, as it was reported favorably with a substitute by an 11-5 vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate to indicate broader support or opposition arguments. The narrow vote indicates some disagreement, but the overall direction in committee was positive.

Contention

Because there are no committee transcripts, the specific reasons for the 5 dissenting votes are not documented in the provided materials. The only visible point of contention is the committee split itself, which may reflect disagreement over the substitute, the appropriations level, or broader budget priorities for LARA. However, the bill text is minimal and does not reveal any substantive policy disputes.