Louisiana Senate Bill SB31

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/11
• Refer: 4/25/11
• Report Pass: 5/10/11
• Engrossed: 5/17/11
• Refer: 5/18/11
• Report Pass: 6/15/11
• Enrolled: 6/20/11
• Chaptered: 6/29/11
• Passed: 6/29/11

Caption

Increases authorized court costs for municipal ordinance violations in the mayor's court in the town of New Llano. (8/15/11) (EN +$40,000 LF RV See Note)

Impact

The introduction of SB31 directly impacts municipal finance within New Llano by facilitating an increase in revenue derived from court costs. This additional financial mechanism aims to support the operations and responsibilities of the mayor's court, which often handles local ordinance violations. The change reflects a local government's ability to establish additional fees as a means to enhance its fiscal capacity in addressing local governance needs.

Summary

Senate Bill 31 seeks to increase the authorized court costs for municipal ordinance violations within the mayor's court of the town of New Llano. Specifically, it allows the mayor to impose additional court costs not exceeding twenty dollars for each offence convicted under the local ordinances. This legislative change is intended to enhance the financial resources available to the municipality's court system and help fund local governance activities.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB31 appears to be generally supportive among local governance advocates who see the necessity of additional funding for municipal courts. Proponents argue that this bill is a step towards better resource allocation, ensuring that local courts can function effectively. However, there may be concerns regarding the potential financial burden imposed on defendants by these increased costs, particularly for low-income individuals who could be disproportionately affected.

Contention

While the implementation of SB31 is largely seen as a beneficial move to bolster local court resources, there could be contentions relating to fairness in imposing additional costs on residents. Critics might argue that such increases could lead to complications for those unable to afford them, raising questions about access to justice and the potential for a punitive financial system that could disproportionately impact certain demographics within the community.