Louisiana Senate Bill SB565

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/10
• Refer: 3/29/10
• Report Pass: 5/17/10
• Engrossed: 5/20/10
• Refer: 5/24/10
• Report Pass: 6/14/10

Caption

Provides relative to the purposes of certain collections in the city of Shreveport. (7/1/10) (RE1 NO IMPACT SD EX See Note)

Impact

The bill aims to enhance the allocation processes for funds generated within Shreveport, particularly those associated with tourism and cultural events. By updating the entities that receive allocations, the bill aims to promote more effective use of resources in support of local cultural institutions and events. The annual appropriation by the legislature gives room for flexibility in funding, potentially leading to increased support for initiatives that uplift the city's cultural scene, such as theaters and museums.

Summary

Senate Bill 565, introduced by Senator Jackson, focuses on the management and allocation of certain tax revenues generated in the city of Shreveport. The bill amends existing laws regarding the Shreveport Riverfront and Convention Center and Independence Stadium Fund, specifying how funds derived from state taxes on hotel and motel room rentals are to be handled and allocated. The new provisions ensure that these funds are to be exclusively used for specified purposes defined in the law, thereby providing clarity on the management of municipal resources.

Sentiment

General sentiment towards SB 565 appears to be supportive, particularly from stakeholders in the arts and culture sectors who may benefit from the increase in funding and clearer delineation of allocated resources. However, discussions indicate a need for transparent reporting and accountability in the use of these funds to ensure community trust and prevent mismanagement.

Contention

One notable point of contention during discussions around SB 565 may revolve around how funds are appropriated and whether they will adequately meet the diverse needs of Shreveport's cultural landscape. While some stakeholders advocate for more directed funding towards specific organizations, others may argue for a more discretionary approach to allow broader community input on how funds are ultimately utilized.