Louisiana House Bill HB196

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/10
• Refer: 3/29/10

Caption

Amends provisions regarding the compensation and restrictions of the members of the Board of Parole (OR DECREASE GF EX See Note)

Impact

By altering the compensation structure, HB 196 seeks to reduce the financial burden on the state associated with full-time salaries for board members, while still recognizing their contributions through a per diem payment of $75 for attending meetings. This legislative change could have implications for how positions within the board are filled and how individuals perceive the financial viability of serving on such a board. Additionally, it removes existing restrictions that prohibited board members from engaging in other business activities or holding public office, potentially opening the door for participation from individuals who may have professional commitments outside of their role on the board.

Summary

House Bill 196 aims to amend the laws concerning the compensation of members of the Board of Parole in Louisiana. Specifically, it proposes that board members be compensated on a per diem basis rather than receiving a traditional salary. This shift is intended to align with the belief that the role of board members, while significant, does not require a full-time salary structure and allows for greater flexibility in serving on the board.

Sentiment

The discussion surrounding HB 196 reflects a general sentiment favoring a more flexible approach to public service roles, particularly in terms of compensation. Proponents of the bill may argue that the changes could encourage more qualified individuals to consider board positions without the constraint of full-time commitments. Conversely, critics might express concern that allowing members to engage in other professions could lead to conflicts of interest or distract from their responsibilities on the board.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the implications of reducing the compensation from a structured salary to a per diem format, which may affect the caliber of candidates willing to serve on the board. Some stakeholders might worry that this could limit the board's effectiveness due to a lack of dedicated focus from its members. Furthermore, by eliminating previous prohibitions on outside work, there's a potential debate about maintaining the integrity and primary focus of the Board of Parole amidst possible conflicts with members' other professional engagements.