HB28 is an appropriations bill for the Mississippi Real Estate Commission for Fiscal Year 2026. It authorizes $1,807,664 from the Real Estate License Fund to cover the commission’s operating expenses for the year beginning July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2026. Of that amount, $1,136,884 is designated for personal services, including salaries, wages, and fringe benefits, supporting 16 permanent positions and no time-limited positions.
The bill is primarily a budget and spending-control measure rather than a policy change. It sets limits on how personal services funds may be used, requires compliance with the state’s Variable Compensation Plan, restricts transfers between budget categories, and directs the agency to maintain detailed accounting and personnel records. It also includes standard appropriations language governing vacancy funding, salary actions, escalations, procurement preferences for the Mississippi Industries for the Blind, and compliance with state spending and federal contractor-reporting rules.
Impact
HB28 affects state law by appropriating special funds from the Real Estate License Fund to finance the Mississippi Real Estate Commission’s FY 2026 operations and by imposing statutory conditions on how those funds may be spent. It does not create a new regulatory program, but it does control agency staffing, payroll administration, procurement preferences, and fiscal reporting requirements under existing Mississippi budget and personnel statutes. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the House 90-6 and the Senate 35-4, indicating strong bipartisan approval for funding the commission’s operations. No committee transcript was provided, and the voting margins suggest the measure was viewed as a routine appropriations bill rather than a disputed policy proposal.
Contention
There is no recorded committee debate in the provided materials, and the bill’s content is largely standard appropriations language. Any potential points of contention would likely be limited to the size of the appropriation, staffing levels, and the usual restrictions on salary actions, vacancy funding, and agency spending flexibility. The inclusion of procurement preferences for the Mississippi Industries for the Blind and the requirement to stay within appropriated personal-services limits are standard but could be areas of administrative concern rather than major political disagreement.