Arkansas House Bill HB1713

Arkansas 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/27/23
• Refer: 3/27/23
• Report Pass: 3/29/23
• Engrossed: 3/30/23
• Refer: 3/31/23
• Report Pass: 4/5/23
• Enrolled: 4/7/23
• Chaptered: 4/13/23
• Passed: 4/13/23

Caption

To Amend The Self-insured Fidelity Bond Program.

Impact

If enacted, HB1713 would significantly alter existing statutes that govern fidelity bonds for public officials by allowing the self-insured fidelity bond coverage to replace the need for traditional statutory fidelity bonds. This change could streamline operations for participating governmental entities, enabling them to manage risks more effectively. The program would be administered by the Governmental Bonding Board, which would oversee the collection of premiums and disbursement of funds for claims arising from fraudulent actions.

Summary

House Bill 1713 is a legislative proposal that amends the Self-Insured Fidelity Bond Program in Arkansas. The bill seeks to provide a structured program for fidelity bonding across various governmental entities, including state, county, and municipal officials. Its primary aim is to facilitate coverage for actual direct financial losses incurred due to fraudulent acts committed by officials or employees of government entities. By establishing clearer parameters for the self-insured program, the bill intends to improve financial accountability within local governments.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB1713 appears to be supportive among its proponents, who argue that such amendments enhance financial responsibility and provide necessary protections against dishonesty in government operations. The unanimous vote (32 yeas, 0 nays) during its most recent review indicates a strong bipartisan support for this legislation. However, some criticisms may arise concerning the effectiveness of self-insured programs in fully covering potential fraud-related losses compared to traditional bonds.

Contention

Debate around HB1713 might focus on the adequacy of the bond amounts and the responsibility of the Governmental Bonding Board in ensuring that sufficient resources are available to address claims. Opponents could argue that relying solely on a self-insured bond program may not provide adequate coverage for all potential fraudulent acts, raising concerns about how the bill ensures protection against severe financial misconduct in a governmental context. As the bill progresses, thorough review will be necessary to balance efficiency with accountability.