HB1261
An Act For The Arkansas Tech University Appropriation For The 2025-2026 Fiscal Year.
AI-Generated Summary
This bill proposes an appropriation for the personal services and operating expenses of Arkansas Tech University for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. It outlines the maximum number of employees and their corresponding maximum annual salary rates for various positions. These positions span administrative, educational, and auxiliary services across the main campus and the Ozark campus. The bill details specific roles such as President, Vice Presidents, Deans, faculty, coaches, and support staff. It establishes salary ranges for roles ranging from high-level administrative positions to entry-level support roles. The intention is to allocate funding for the operational needs and personnel costs of the university for the specified fiscal year. The bill specifies the number of employees authorized for each position and their respective salary caps. It covers both twelve-month and nine-month positions. The document aims to provide a financial framework for Arkansas Tech University's operations.
Potential Impact Analysis
Who Might Benefit?
The primary beneficiaries of this bill, if enacted, would be Arkansas Tech University and its employees. The university itself would receive the appropriated funds to cover its operational costs, including salaries and wages for its staff. Employees of Arkansas Tech University, across all its campuses and departments, would benefit from the established salary structures and the assurance of funding for their positions. This includes administrative staff, faculty, coaches, and various support personnel, who would see their compensation and employment governed by the appropriations set forth in the bill.
Who Might Suffer?
This bill does not appear to negatively impact any specific groups or entities directly based on its content. The bill is an appropriation measure focused on funding an educational institution and its personnel. As such, it primarily allocates resources rather than imposing new regulations or restrictions that would inherently harm particular stakeholders. Any potential negative impact would likely be indirect and related to broader economic conditions or state budget priorities, rather than a direct consequence of the bill's specific provisions.