House Bill 312 appropriates $80 million in nonrecurring General Fund dollars for fiscal year 2025-2026 to the Office of State Budget and Management, which would then provide a directed grant to Madison County. The grant is specifically intended to relocate the Madison County Courthouse out of the floodplain after it was severely damaged by Hurricane Helene. The bill is narrowly focused on a single capital project tied to disaster recovery and flood mitigation.
The measure does not broadly rewrite state law, but it does create a one-time state appropriation and directs how those funds are to be used. If enacted, it would authorize state budget spending for a county courthouse relocation project and effectively support local infrastructure resilience by moving a public building away from flood risk. The act would take effect July 1, 2025.
HB312 would add a one-time $80 million appropriation from the General Fund and direct the Office of State Budget and Management to issue a grant to Madison County for courthouse relocation. Its practical effect would be to fund a local capital project, support post-hurricane recovery, and reduce future flood exposure for a key county government facility. The bill would not amend substantive regulatory law, but it would affect state budgeting and the use of appropriated funds for local infrastructure.
The available context suggests generally supportive or at least noncontroversial treatment of the bill, with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. The bill’s purpose is straightforward and tied to disaster recovery after Hurricane Helene, which typically draws sympathy for affected communities and public facilities. Because there are no transcripts or vote tallies, there is no evidence here of organized opposition or divided sentiment.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided committee materials or voting history. Potential areas of concern, if raised, would likely involve the size of the appropriation, whether a single county courthouse should receive a directed grant of this magnitude, and whether state funds should be used for relocation rather than repair or other recovery needs. However, the record provided does not show any stated objections or competing positions.