State management: funds; cap and distribution of funds in the disaster and contingency fund; modify, and create new fund. Amends title & secs. 18 & 19 of 1976 PA 390 (MCL 30.418 & 30.419) & adds sec. 18a.
The bill is set to enhance Michigan's resilience to both natural and man-made disasters through a structured funding approach. By creating a state hazard mitigation fund, the legislation aims to complement existing disaster response measures with a focus on preventing future risks. The state treasurer will oversee the management and investment of this fund, allowing for accumulated interest and assets that can be utilized over the years to bolster emergency preparedness initiatives. The unspent funds will be carried forward, promoting long-term planning and investment in disaster mitigation strategies.
Senate Bill No. 109 seeks to amend the Emergency Management Act of 1976 by modifying existing sections and adding new provisions to improve the state's disaster management capabilities. The bill introduces a new disaster and emergency contingency fund, increasing the funding limit from $10 million to $25 million. This fund will be administered by a designated director and shall be used for various disaster-related expenditures, including employee expenses and necessary travel during emergencies. Time-sensitive mechanisms are established for fund allocation during declared disasters, ensuring prompt financial support for state and local agencies involved in disaster response and recovery efforts.
While there is significant support for enhancing disaster preparedness and response, the bill has raised concerns regarding the distribution of funds and the involvement of local governments. Critics argue that funding criteria may favor larger municipalities, potentially leaving smaller communities without adequate resources to handle emergencies effectively. Additionally, the requirement for local governments to submit comprehensive emergency management plans may be seen as burdensome and resource-intensive, particularly for less-equipped jurisdictions. Hence, the debate around the balance between state control and local autonomy in disaster management will likely be an ongoing issue as the bill progresses.