State Capitol Building; creating the State Capitol Arch Memorial Statue Revolving Fund.
Summary
SB 162 creates the State Capitol Arch Memorial Statue Revolving Fund in the State Treasury for the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES). The fund is designated as a continuing revolving fund, meaning it is not subject to fiscal year limitations, and it may receive private donations, gifts, grants, or other private funding. Those monies are appropriated to OMES for the specific purpose of installing and maintaining veteran memorial statues around the State Capitol Arch.
The bill also sets out the basic budget and expenditure framework for the fund. Money credited to the fund may be budgeted and spent by OMES for the stated memorial purposes, and expenditures must follow the normal state warrant and claims process through the State Treasurer and OMES director approval. In effect, the measure creates a dedicated financial mechanism to support a Capitol memorial project without relying on general revenue appropriations.
Impact
The bill adds a new section to Title 73 of the Oklahoma Statutes and establishes a new special revolving fund within state government. It gives OMES authority to accept and spend private-sector money for veteran memorial statues at the State Capitol Arch, while keeping those funds separate from the state’s general operating budget. The measure affects state fiscal administration, OMES budgeting and procurement/expenditure procedures, and any private donors or organizations contributing to the memorial project.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable support, with strong passage in both chambers and only limited opposition. Senate and House votes show broad bipartisan approval overall, suggesting the concept of honoring veterans through Capitol memorial statues and creating a dedicated funding source was well received. The House did amend the bill before final passage, indicating some members wanted to refine its language or procedure, but the measure still advanced comfortably.
Contention
The main points of contention appear to have been procedural rather than substantive. The House initially passed the bill as amended by committee substitute and later voted to strike the enacting clause, which suggests some legislative maneuvering or disagreement over the bill’s form or timing. The recorded no votes in both chambers indicate a small minority had reservations, but the available record does not show any detailed debate or specific objections about the veteran memorial purpose, the use of private funding, or OMES’s role.