Louisiana House Bill HB544

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/16/10
• Refer: 4/20/10
• Report Pass: 5/13/10
• Engrossed: 5/25/10
• Refer: 5/26/10
• Report Pass: 6/7/10
• Enrolled: 6/14/10
• Chaptered: 6/22/10
• Passed: 6/22/10

Caption

Increases the amount of per diem paid to the members of the governing board of the Tangipahoa Water District (EN +$14,400 LF EX See Note)

Impact

The passage of HB 544 is expected to have a fiscal impact as the total increase in per diem payments will amount to approximately $14,400 annually. This change directly affects the budget and funding needs of the Tangipahoa Water District, potentially requiring adjustments or reallocations in other areas of district spending. The legislative adjustments reflect an acknowledgment of the important role played by board members in overseeing water management in the region.

Summary

House Bill 544 aims to amend the regulations related to the Tangipahoa Water District in Louisiana by increasing the per diem compensation for members of its governing board. This bill adjusts the per diem payment from the existing rate of one hundred dollars to one hundred fifty dollars per regular or special meeting. The intent behind this increase is to provide these board members with better compensation for their service, which supporters argue is necessary given the responsibilities associated with managing a water district.

Sentiment

Discussion around HB 544 appears to indicate a supportive sentiment towards the bill, particularly among those who view the increase in per diem as a necessary step in enhancing governance and encouraging community involvement. However, there may be lingering concerns about the allocation of funds, especially regarding whether this increase is justifiable given the district's existing financial obligations and service costs.

Contention

While there isn't significant contention evident in the discussions surrounding HB 544, concerns about municipal budgeting and governance principles could arise. Opponents may argue about the appropriateness of increasing compensation amid budgetary constraints or advocate for more robust oversight to ensure transparency in how funds are allocated. Ultimately, the balance between fair compensation for public service and fiscal responsibility remains a core discussion point.