WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1014

exempting certain retirees from the 28-day waiting period for part-time employment.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Heath Howard and 3 co-sponsors

ND appropriates $8.57M total for the Protection and Advocacy Project (2025–27), adds 1 FTE (to 29.5) and a new vacant FTE pool with transfer rules.

Inexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 03/11/2026 HJ 7 P. 38
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1014

Summary — HB 1014

Note on bill numbering: “HB 1014” appears as the identifier for several different measures in different states/sessions. The primary document content you provided corresponds to a North Dakota appropriations bill to fund the Protection and Advocacy Project for the 2025–27 biennium. Other unrelated measures bearing the same bill number (Arkansas — IVF coverage; Maryland — tax/“Fair Share” package; etc.) are referenced in the materials below. This summary focuses on the North Dakota appropriation bill and then briefly flags the other HB 1014 variants to avoid confusion.

North Dakota — Appropriation for Protection and Advocacy Project (Primary focus)

Title
- An Act to provide an appropriation for defraying the expenses of the Protection and Advocacy Project.

Purpose / Intent
- Provide funding to the Protection and Advocacy Project to support its operations during the 2025–27 biennium (July 1, 2025 — June 30, 2027).

Key provisions and dollar amounts
- Protection and advocacy operations (base and adjustments):
- Base level: $7,791,270 (all funds)
- Enhancements: $417,060
- Resulting appropriation for operations: $8,208,330 (all funds)
- New and vacant FTE pool:
- Amount: $361,911 (all funds)
- Note: These funds are not to be spent directly by the Protection and Advocacy Project without an approved transfer request to the Office of Management and Budget.
- Total appropriation (all funds): $8,570,241
- Less other funds (federal/other): $4,747,288
- Total general fund impact: $3,822,953
- Full-time equivalent positions:
- Base FTEs: 28.50
- Net change: +1.00 (new total 29.50 FTE)
- One-time funding (reporting requirement):
- Accrued leave payments: $19,288 (general fund). The bill requires the entity to report one-time funding items to the Appropriations Committees for the next biennium.

Operational and administrative provisions
- The Protection and Advocacy Project may request transfers from the new and vacant FTE pool to its operations line item, subject to guidelines/reporting in a related bill (House Bill No. 1015).
- The bill requires reporting to the Seventieth Legislative Assembly on one-time funding items.

Who is affected
- The Protection and Advocacy Project (state entity that provides advocacy services, typically for people with disabilities or other vulnerable populations).
- State budget: general fund and other (federal) funds for the 2025–27 biennium.
- Staffing: funds support existing and one additional FTE position.

Timing / procedural status (from documents)
- Appropriation covers the biennium beginning July 1, 2025, and ending June 30, 2027.
- The enrollment/legislative documents show House and Senate passage (House vote 80–9; Senate vote 43–3 in enrollment record). The bill text includes enactment and reporting provisions.

Other measures labeled “HB 1014” (brief flags)

  • Arkansas — Health Insurance / IVF coverage

    • Proposal to require the State and Public School Life & Health Insurance Program to cover in‑vitro fertilization (IVF).
    • Actuarial estimate: direct plan cost projected at ~$5–$10 million (CY2026), assuming 0.6% utilization among women of childbearing age; EBD director sets minimum/maximum coverage levels; rules to be in place by Jan 1, 2026.
    • Committee action shown: House Committee on Health & Human Services recommended postponement indefinitely (8/21/2025).

  • Maryland — “Fair Share for Maryland Act of 2025”

    • A comprehensive tax bill (estate tax exclusion reduction, new business transportation fee, surtaxes on pass‑throughs, income tax rate changes, combined worldwide reporting for corporations, etc.). Large projected revenue impacts shown in the fiscal note (hundreds of millions annually when fully phased in).

  • Other states (Hawaii, Illinois) — separate, unrelated bills that also used HB 1014 numbering in their sessions (details in the provided materials are for different topics: county surcharge extension, Wildlife Code technical change, etc.).

If you want, I can:
- Produce a standalone one‑page fact sheet (PDF/print) focused on the North Dakota appropriation bill;
- Produce a comparative table summarizing each state’s HB 1014 instance, with status and fiscal impacts; or
- Drill down into the Arkansas IVF actuarial assumptions and likely plan/design options and cost controls.

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

Sign in to ask a question.