A concurrent resolution affirming the 69th Legislative Assembly's commitment to ensuring state-funded essential services remain fully funded and operational regardless of changes in federal funding allocations.
HCR 3023 is a concurrent resolution expressing the North Dakota Legislative Assembly’s commitment to keeping state-funded essential services fully funded and operational even if federal funding changes or is disrupted. The resolution identifies core services such as K-12 education, law enforcement, public health, infrastructure, agricultural programs, and economic development as priorities that should remain stable for residents across the state.
The resolution also directs the Governor and state agencies to evaluate the financial risks created by federal funding uncertainty and to identify ways to reduce disruptions to vital programs. In addition, it urges the state to work with federal partners to restore funding that affects North Dakota residents and to continue collaboration with tribal nations to support shared governance, essential services, and economic stability in impacted communities.
Because HCR 3023 is a concurrent resolution, it does not change statutory law or create enforceable legal requirements. Its practical effect is to state legislative policy and encourage executive agencies to plan for federal funding uncertainty, maintain continuity of services, and coordinate with federal and tribal partners. The resolution is aimed at state operations, budget planning, and intergovernmental advocacy rather than amending specific code sections or appropriating funds.
The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution is supportive of government continuity, fiscal resilience, and protection of essential public services. Its framing suggests broad concern about the consequences of federal funding disruptions for both urban and rural communities, including farmers, ranchers, and tribal nations. The bill ultimately failed, indicating that despite its affirmative policy message, it did not secure enough support to advance.
The main point of contention appears to have been the resolution’s response to federal funding uncertainty and the extent to which the state should publicly commit to insulating essential services from those disruptions. While the text emphasizes stability and collaboration, the failure of the measure suggests disagreement may have existed over its policy significance, its messaging toward federal partners, or whether it was necessary as a formal legislative statement. No committee transcript or recorded vote details are available to identify specific opponents or arguments.