WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1276

Parks, Natural Areas Preservation - As enacted, requires a county or municipal government that receives a grant from the local parks land acquisition fund for a project located within a county designated as distressed or at-risk by the Appalachian Regional Commission at the time of the grant application to match the grant with an amount of money equal to 25 percent of the project, instead of requiring a match with an amount of money equal to the grant. - Amends TCA Section 67-4-409.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026)

Reduces matching fund requirement for parks grants in distressed Appalachian counties from 100% to 25%, easing acquisition and preservation costs for economically struggling regions.

Comp. became Pub. Ch. 336
#naturalareaspreservation #parks
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1276

Legislative bill overview

SB 1276 reduces the local matching fund requirement for parks and natural areas projects in economically distressed Appalachian counties from 100% to 25% of the grant amount. This applies only to grants from the local parks land acquisition fund for counties designated as distressed or at-risk by the Appalachian Regional Commission at the time of application.

Why is this important

The 75% reduction in matching requirements makes it significantly easier for economically struggling counties to fund parks and conservation projects, potentially increasing access to green spaces and natural area preservation in lower-income regions. This targeted approach aims to address resource disparities between wealthy and distressed communities in park development and environmental conservation.

Potential points of contention

  • Fiscal impact on state budget: Reducing matching requirements effectively increases state funding burden per project, with costs potentially absorbed by the state parks fund or general treasury
  • Geographic fairness concerns: Non-Appalachian distressed counties outside the ARC designation may argue they face similar economic challenges but don't receive the same relief
  • Adequacy of local investment: Some may argue that 25% matching is insufficient to ensure local government commitment and long-term maintenance of acquired properties

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

Sign in to ask a question.