Arkansas Senate Bill SB509

Arkansas 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/28/23
• Refer: 3/28/23
• Report Pass: 4/4/23
• Engrossed: 4/5/23
• Refer: 4/5/23
• Report Pass: 4/6/23
• Enrolled: 4/7/23
• Failed: 5/1/23

Caption

To Amend The Law Concerning Stipends For Members Of The Board Of Corrections; And To Amend The Law Concerning Stipends For Members Of State Boards.

Impact

The changes introduced by SB509 are significant in that they reflect a recognition of the roles and duties of members of the Board of Corrections and potentially enhance the attractiveness of board membership by offering more competitive stipends. By adjusting the financial compensation, the bill aims to ensure that qualified individuals are willing to serve on such boards, essential for overseeing correctional policies and practices within the state. The legislative action indicates a broader acknowledgment of the need for adequate compensation in public service roles.

Summary

Senate Bill 509 amends existing laws related to stipends for members of state boards, specifically focusing on the Board of Corrections. This bill looks to revise the current stipends provided to these members, which are seen as compensation for their service on state boards. The amendment impacts two primary areas: it repeals the existing authorization for a stipend of eighty-five dollars ($85) for the Board of Corrections and introduces an increased stipend of one hundred ten dollars ($110) for its members. The intent is to align the compensation more closely with the responsibilities and demands placed on members serving in these capacities.

Contention

There may be points of contention regarding the appropriateness of increasing stipends amidst broader budgetary concerns for state governance. Supporters argue that the enhanced stipends are justified and necessary for encouraging dedicated individuals to serve on the Board of Corrections. However, opponents might raise concerns regarding state expenditures and suggest that these funds could be better utilized in direct services to the community. The debate surrounding compensation for board members often hinges on the balance between attracting competent individuals and the responsible allocation of public funds.