A BILL for an Act to provide an appropriation to the state historical society for improvements at Whitestone Hill state historic site.
Summary
HB 1264 would appropriate $75,000 from the state general fund to the North Dakota State Historical Society for a one-time capital improvement at Whitestone Hill State Historic Site. The money is specifically designated for constructing a bridge at the site during the 2025-2027 biennium. The bill is a narrow, single-purpose appropriation measure rather than a broad policy change.
Whitestone Hill State Historic Site is a state-managed historic location, and the bill would direct state funds to improve access or infrastructure there. If enacted, it would authorize the Historical Society to use the appropriation for the bridge project, with the funding limited to this one-time item and available only for the stated biennium.
Impact
The bill would amend state spending by creating a new one-time general fund appropriation of $75,000 to the State Historical Society for a specific capital project at Whitestone Hill State Historic Site. It would not change regulatory law or create a continuing program, but it would add a targeted expenditure to the state budget and authorize the Historical Society to carry out the bridge construction project.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had little legislative support and ultimately failed on House second reading by a vote of 1-88. With no committee transcript available, there is no recorded debate to suggest broad enthusiasm or organized support in the available materials. The overwhelming negative vote indicates the chamber was largely unsupportive of advancing the appropriation.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to have been whether the state should spend general fund dollars on a small, site-specific capital project at a historic site. Because the bill was defeated decisively, opposition likely centered on spending priorities, the use of one-time general fund money, or the perceived need for the bridge project. No individual arguments are recorded in the provided transcripts, so the specific objections and supporters cannot be identified from the available record.