Michigan Senate Bill SB1047

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 10/23/24
• Refer: 10/23/24
• Report Pass: 12/5/24
• Refer: 12/5/24
• Engrossed: 12/5/24

Caption

State management: funds; cap on the disaster and contingency fund; remove. Amends sec. 18 of 1976 PA 390 (MCL 30.418).

Impact

The proposed changes are expected to enhance Michigan's preparedness for disasters by ensuring that sufficient resources are consistently allocated to the emergency management system. This could potentially streamline operations during crises by making funds readily available for necessary expenses such as overtime and travel costs incurred by state employees during disaster-related activities. Additionally, it clearly outlines provisions for the use of federal reimbursement funds, ensuring clarity in the state's financial management following federally declared disasters.

Summary

Senate Bill 1047 aims to amend the existing Emergency Management Act of Michigan by modifying provisions related to the disaster and emergency contingency fund. The bill seeks to establish a designated fund that shall be administered by the state's emergency management director, with a required annual appropriation ranging between $2,500,000 and $10,000,000. Notably, unspent funds at the fiscal year's end will not revert to the general fund but instead will carry over, ensuring sustained availability for future expenditures related to disaster management.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB1047 appears to be largely supportive, particularly among those prioritizing robust disaster preparedness and response. Stakeholders in the emergency management community view the bill as a positive step toward ensuring that vital resources are allocated promptly, without the delays associated with typical budgetary processes. However, concerns may arise from budget management advocates who may be apprehensive about the implications of maintaining a large balance in the contingency fund without comprehensive oversight.

Contention

Despite overall support, there could be notable points of contention regarding the scale of funding and the impact on the state's budget. Discussions may focus on the balance between ensuring sufficient emergency resources and the challenge of managing a sizable fund within the broader context of state financial priorities. Some legislators might question how this fund interacts with other emergency management initiatives and whether it distorts budget allocation across other critical services and programs.