South Dakota House Bill HB1335

South Dakota 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/22
• Refer: 2/4/22
• Refer: 2/9/22
• Report Pass: 2/10/22
• Report Pass: 2/16/22

Caption

Revise certain provisions regarding the expenditure of moneys allotted to the state by the United States of America.

Impact

The bill impacts existing laws governing the management of federal funds, tightening the process for appropriating such funds to ensure more direct oversight by the Governor's office. This overhaul aims to streamline how federal funds are accepted and utilized within the state's budgetary processes. Notably, the amendments require that any grants or funds over an appropriated amount undergo review and approval from a specialized committee before expenditure, bringing an added layer of oversight and potentially impacting how quickly funds can be put to use.

Summary

House Bill 1335 aims to revise certain provisions regarding the expenditure of moneys allotted to the state by the United States. The bill authorizes the Governor to accept federal appropriations on behalf of the state, establishing the framework for how these funds are to be managed and expended. Specifically, it amends existing legislation to ensure that expenditure of federal funds is administered under the supervision of the Governor and mandates that any funds received from the U.S. must be appropriated following specific guidelines set forth in the state statutes.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 1335 appears mixed, reflecting a focus on transparency and control. Supporters argue that the bill promotes better management of federal resources and accountability in state expenditures. Conversely, critics may view the increased oversight as excessive and potentially hindering the efficiency of fund dispersion, indicating a debate about the balance between government oversight and operational flexibility.

Contention

A notable point of contention within the discussions of HB 1335 lies in its implications for the appropriating body and the increased bureaucracy introduced by requiring a special committee review for federal funds. While proponents see this as a necessary step for accountability, opponents may raise concerns about the potential delays and complications this could bring to funding processes, particularly for urgent state projects that rely on timely federal support. The eventual success of this bill will hinge on the careful navigation of these concerns.