Oklahoma 2022 Regular Session

Oklahoma Senate Bill SJR34

Introduced
2/7/22  
Refer
2/8/22  
Report Pass
2/8/22  
Refer
2/8/22  
Report Pass
3/2/22  
Engrossed
3/22/22  

Caption

Constitutional amendment; vote of the people; increasing limit of Constitutional Reserve Fund.

Impact

If approved, SJR34 will modify how state budget allocations are managed, particularly in relation to the Constitutional Reserve Fund. The increased cap will allow for greater retention of surplus funds which could be used during periods of shortfall or economic distress. Lawmakers believe that this adjustment will enable the state to maintain services and operations more effectively during challenging financial times. It could also have implications for future budgeting processes, potentially increasing fiscal discipline and accountability.

Summary

SJR34 proposes an amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution that seeks to increase the limit on the amount that can be deposited into the Constitutional Reserve Fund. Currently capped at 15% of the General Revenue Fund certified from the preceding fiscal year, this proposal aims to raise the cap to 25%. The changes are designed to enhance the state's financial buffer, allowing for better management of state resources and fiscal stability during economic fluctuations. The amendment is contingent upon the approval of a complementary bill, SJR35, which creates a Taxpayer Allocation Program Fund for providing income tax credits to taxpayers.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SJR34 appears to be mixed at best. Supporters argue that increasing the reserve fund limit is a prudent measure that strengthens Oklahoma's financial position, particularly in uncertain economic conditions. Conversely, some critics voice concerns that such changes could reduce available funding for immediate public needs by diverting surplus into reserves instead of direct budgetary appropriations. The debate showcases a fundamental tension between fiscal prudence and immediate public service priorities.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential impacts of raising the reserve fund cap. Critics argue that while the intention is to enhance budgetary stability, it may inadvertently limit flexibility in addressing urgent community needs. The requirement for the amendment's enactment to hinge upon the approval of SJR35 also raises questions about the coupling of these measures, leading to concerns that failure of one could render the other ineffective. This has sparked a broader discussion on the balance between long-term fiscal planning and short-term funding demands.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

LA HB546

(Constitutional Amendment) Provides relative to the budget process

CA ACA9

Budget bill: passage requirements.

NJ SCR70

Proposes constitutional amendment to establish a 2 percent cap on annual appropriations increases for certain State government spending.

NJ SCR23

Proposes constitutional amendment to establish a 2 percent cap on annual appropriations increases for certain State government spending.

LA HB487

(Constitutional Amendment) Provides relative to deficit avoidance procedures (EN SEE FISC NOTE SG EX See Note)

LA HB435

(Constitutional Amendment) Provides relative to the budget process (RR SEE FISC NOTE GF RV See Note)

MS SC529

Constitution; amend to define appropriation bill subject to Governor's partial veto power.

LA HB587

(Constitutional Amendment) Eliminates certain constitutional dedications and funding mandates (OR +$31,000,000 GF RV See Note)