Appropriations: supplemental; appropriations for multiple departments and branches for fiscal year 2024-2025; provide for. Creates appropriation act.
Summary
SB 876 is a supplemental appropriations bill for Michigan’s fiscal year ending September 30, 2025. It provides a total gross appropriation of $400 in state general fund/general purpose dollars, divided evenly among four areas: the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Treasury, the Judiciary, and the Legislature, each receiving $100. The bill is framed as an adjustment to existing appropriations rather than a standalone policy measure.
The bill also states that the appropriations are subject to the Management and Budget Act and confirms the total state spending from state sources under the bill is $400, with no payments to local units of government. In practical terms, it would amend state spending authority for the named branches and departments for the 2024-2025 fiscal year, but it does not create new programs or change substantive regulatory law beyond authorizing the listed funds.
Because the available record includes no committee transcripts or recorded votes, there is little direct evidence of debate or partisan sentiment specific to this bill. Based on the text alone, it appears to be a routine budget measure with a narrow fiscal scope and no policy riders or controversial program changes.
There are no identified points of contention in the provided materials. The bill’s structure suggests the main issue is simply the allocation of a small supplemental amount across four state entities, rather than disagreement over policy direction, eligibility rules, or regulatory authority.
Impact
SB 876 would amend Michigan’s fiscal year 2024-2025 appropriations by authorizing $400 in additional state general fund spending, split evenly among the Department of Natural Resources, Department of Treasury, the Judiciary, and the Legislature. It does not appear to alter substantive statutes governing those entities, but it does change spending authority under the state budget framework and remains subject to the Management and Budget Act.
Sentiment
The available materials suggest a neutral, routine appropriations measure with no recorded debate, votes, or committee testimony indicating support or opposition. The bill appears administrative in nature and limited in scope, which typically produces little public controversy absent a larger budget dispute.
Contention
No specific points of contention are evident in the provided text or legislative history. The only potentially notable issue is the distribution of the supplemental funds across four branches and departments, but there is no record here of objections, amendments, or disagreement over the amounts or recipients.