Senate Bill 771 proposes a constitutional amendment to create a narrow exception to North Carolina’s prohibition on exclusive emoluments or privileges. Under the amendment, the state constitution would allow a form of disaster relief for the restoration of privately owned built structures when they are directly damaged by a natural cause that has been declared a major disaster by the federal government. The bill frames this exception as a carve-out from the state’s emoluments clause, which otherwise bars special benefits not tied to public service.
If approved by the General Assembly and then by voters, the amendment would be placed on the March 3, 2026 statewide primary ballot. The ballot question would ask voters whether they support allowing disaster relief in the form of real property restoration that would otherwise be prohibited by the emoluments clause for major natural disasters. The measure would take effect only if a majority of voters approve it, after certification by the State Board of Elections and enrollment by the Secretary of State.
Impact
The bill would amend Article I, Section 32 of the North Carolina Constitution to add a specific exception for restoration of privately owned built structures damaged by federally declared major natural disasters. This would create constitutional authority for the state to provide certain disaster-relief benefits to businesses or property owners that might otherwise be challenged as prohibited exclusive emoluments or privileges. The practical effect would be to reduce constitutional barriers to state disaster assistance tied to rebuilding or restoring damaged real property.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from formal discussion. Based on the text, the measure appears designed to address a practical disaster-recovery issue rather than a broad policy change, suggesting a targeted and likely pragmatic intent. The absence of recorded opposition or support in the available context means no clear consensus can be inferred beyond the bill’s straightforward framing as a constitutional clarification for disaster relief.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the constitutional principle behind the emoluments clause versus the need to provide targeted disaster aid. Supporters would likely argue that the exception is limited and necessary to help restore damaged property after major natural disasters, while opponents may worry that creating any exception could open the door to special treatment or preferential benefits for certain private property owners or businesses. Another possible issue is the scope of the exception, including what qualifies as a “built structure,” what counts as restoration, and how broadly federal disaster declarations would be used to trigger relief.
Disaster or emergency response and recovery costs, authority to spend funds from the state disaster relief fund, and uses of the state disaster relief fund.
AN ACT to amend and reenact sections 37-17.1-22, 37-17.1-23, and 37-17.1-27 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to disaster or emergency response and recovery costs, authority to spend funds from the state disaster relief fund, and uses of the state disaster relief fund.