WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 487

allowing credit union members to pay members of the board of directors for their services as a board member.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by John Hunt and 4 co-sponsors

The bill requires every appropriation in the Current Operations Act to name a sponsoring General Assembly member in the text for the appropriation to be legally valid.

Signed by the Governor on 06/19/2026; Chapter 188; Effective 08/18/2026
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 487

SB 487 — "Require Legislative Sponsors/Appropriations" (summary)

Status: Passed 1st Reading (introduced Feb 19, 2025)
Primary statute amended: G.S. 143C‑1‑2 (North Carolina)
Primary sponsor (introduced version): Sen. Everitt

Main purpose

Require that every appropriation enacted in the Current Operations Appropriations Act have a named legislative sponsor in the statute text, and make an appropriation legally valid only if a member of the General Assembly sponsors it and the sponsor’s name appears in the appropriation language. The change is intended to increase transparency and legislative accountability for line‑item appropriations.

Key provisions

  • Adds a new subsection (a1) to G.S. 143C‑1‑2 titled “Legislative Sponsor Requirement.”
  • Establishes two prerequisites for the legal validity of an appropriation in the Current Operations Appropriations Act:
    1. The appropriation must be sponsored by a member of the General Assembly.
    2. The name of that sponsoring legislator must be stated in the text of the appropriation.
  • No other substantive changes to appropriation amounts or budgeting process are made in the text of the introduced bill.
  • Effective date: “This act is effective when it becomes law” (i.e., upon enactment).

Who would be affected

  • General Assembly: changes drafting/placement conventions for appropriations and requires legislative sponsorship information be added to bill text.
  • Executive branch/state agencies: appropriations made in the Current Operations Appropriations Act could be subject to challenge if they lack the required sponsor designation; agencies relying on appropriations may need to track sponsor attribution to confirm legal validity.
  • Legislative staff, bill drafters, and counsel: will need to adapt internal procedures to ensure sponsor names are included in appropriation language.
  • Potentially the public and advocacy groups: increased transparency regarding which legislators sponsor specific appropriations.

Procedural/timeline aspects and implementation considerations

  • The bill amends an existing General Statute (G.S. 143C‑1‑2); it would be implemented through the legislative drafting process and inclusion of sponsor names in enacted appropriation text.
  • If enacted, appropriations enacted without a sponsor name (or without a legislator sponsor) could be deemed legally invalid — raising transition issues for appropriations already enacted or drafted.
  • Administrative impacts are primarily procedural (no direct appropriation or fiscal note included in the introduced text); the principal effects concern legislative drafting, legal review, and potential litigation risk over improperly‑worded appropriations.

Potential issues to monitor

  • How “sponsored by a member of the General Assembly” is defined in practice (e.g., primary sponsor only, co‑sponsors, committee sponsorship).
  • Whether inadvertent drafting errors (omission of sponsor name) could invalidate enacted appropriation language and create fiscal disruption for agencies.
  • Interaction with existing legislative drafting practices and uniform bill formatting rules.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.