Alabama House Bill HB313

Alabama 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/8/22
• Refer: 2/8/22
• Engrossed: 3/3/22
• Refer: 3/3/22
• Enrolled: 3/9/22
• Chaptered: 3/10/22
• Passed: 3/10/22

Caption

Chiropractic Examiners, Board of, authorized to acquire, convey, and hold real property, Sec. 34-24-143 am'd.

Impact

The impact of HB 313 on state laws centers primarily around modifications to existing statutes that govern the operations of the Board of Chiropractic Examiners. The bill amends Section 34-24-143 to grant the Board new powers that may enhance its functionality and responsiveness to the needs of both practitioners and the public. This can lead to an improved regulatory environment, potentially streamlining processes related to property management and oversight.

Summary

House Bill 313 is focused on empowering the Board of Chiropractic Examiners by allowing it to acquire, convey, and hold real property. This legislative move aims to enhance the operational capabilities of the Board, ensuring it has the authority necessary to manage its assets effectively. By providing this authority, the bill seeks to facilitate better management of facilities and resources that support the Board's regulatory functions.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 313 appears to be generally positive, particularly among stakeholders within the chiropractic profession who view the bill as a necessary update to empower their regulatory body. Supporters believe that expanding the Board's authority will help them better serve the state's chiropractic community and ensure that the Board can operate effectively with the resources it needs. However, there is a lack of substantive debate or opposition documented in the discussions, suggesting a consensus on the bill’s merits.

Contention

Notably, there do not appear to be any significant points of contention regarding HB 313. The motivations behind the bill's introduction and support seem to align with enhancing the capabilities of the Board rather than shifting existing powers or creating new regulatory burdens. This absence of controversy suggests that the bill is largely seen as a technical adjustment rather than a politically charged measure.