Alabama House Bill HB291

Alabama 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/11/23
• Refer: 4/11/23
• Report Pass: 4/19/23

Caption

Relating to use of industrial access roads and bridges; to amend Section 23-6-9, Code of Alabama 1975, to exclude certain industrial access roads constructed by certain public corporations from the public highway and street system of the state; and to make nonsubstantive, technical revisions to update the existing code language to current style.

Impact

The legislative changes proposed in HB291 could significantly impact how industrial access roads are constructed and integrated into the state's transportation system. By explicitly stating that these roads are excluded from the public highway framework, the bill allows for more flexibility in security measures and management by private entities. This could lead to enhanced security around industrial sites, as it permits those facilities to implement reasonable security controls without being classified as a public roadway. Furthermore, the financial aspect is addressed, as the bill outlines provisions for using bonds for construction, which could streamline funding processes for infrastructure projects closely linked to industrial development.

Summary

House Bill 291 aims to amend existing legislation concerning the construction and classification of industrial access roads and bridges in the state of Alabama. This bill specifies that industrial access roads created by public corporations will not be deemed part of the public highway and street system. The intention behind this legislation is to facilitate the development and use of infrastructure that supports industrial facilities, thereby promoting economic growth and operational efficiency for such entities. This framework is set to provide clarity on the use and management of these access routes.

Contention

Although the bill primarily seeks to clarify legal definitions and operational procedures for industrial access roads, it may raise concerns regarding public access and the rights associated with road use. Opponents could argue that excluding these roads from public oversight diminishes the accountability that comes with public road designation, possibly leading to access issues for neighboring communities or the general public. Furthermore, the definition of what constitutes 'reasonable security controls' might prompt discussions on the accessibility of these previously public roads, giving rise to potential debates about public versus private interests in state-developed infrastructure.