A BILL for an Act to provide an appropriation to the parks and recreation department for a ski resort infrastructure grant; and to declare an emergency.
HB 1523 would appropriate $500,000 from North Dakota’s strategic investment and improvements fund to the Parks and Recreation Department for a one-time ski resort infrastructure grant during the 2025-2027 biennium. The grant could be used for building and infrastructure repairs caused by snow and rain damage, deferred maintenance, and equipment purchases at a ski resort in the state.
The bill requires a dollar-for-dollar match from nonstate sources before state funds may be spent, meaning the grant would only be available if the recipient secures equivalent private or other outside funding. It also declares the measure an emergency, which would make it effective immediately if enacted.
If enacted, HB 1523 would create a new, one-time state grant program within the Parks and Recreation Department and direct use of the strategic investment and improvements fund for a specific recreational facility purpose. It would not broadly amend regulatory law, but it would affect state appropriations practice, the use of special funds, and the financing of ski resort capital repairs and equipment purchases. The bill would primarily affect the recipient ski resort and any nonstate entities expected to provide matching funds.
Based on the available record, the bill appears to have had limited documented debate, with no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided. Its introduction by a bipartisan group of House and Senate members suggests some cross-party support for the targeted recreation investment, but the bill ultimately failed on February 5, 2025. The absence of recorded discussion makes it difficult to identify a broader consensus or organized opposition from the available materials.
The main likely point of contention is the use of state money for a single ski resort rather than for broader statewide recreation or infrastructure needs. Critics could question whether a private or semi-private recreational facility should receive a targeted appropriation from a state investment fund, while supporters would likely emphasize tourism, local economic benefits, and the matching-funds requirement as a safeguard. The emergency designation and one-time funding structure may also have been relevant to concerns about urgency and precedent for future earmarks.