Louisiana House Bill HB983

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

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

Caption

Authorizes the division of administration to transfer the management of non-flood assets to other political subdivisions (OR SEE FISC NOTE)

Impact

Under HB 983, political subdivisions will assume responsibility for managing non-flood assets, which can include various facilities or improvements. This responsibility comes with the authority to collect revenues generated from these assets. However, the bill mandates that any revenues after deducting management costs will be directed to the levee district’s credit. This shift in management aims to optimize resource allocation and local governance of public properties, thereby potentially enhancing service delivery to communities.

Summary

House Bill 983, introduced by Representative Richmond, aims to streamline the management of non-flood assets by allowing the state’s division of administration to transfer control of these assets to local political subdivisions. This legislative change intends to improve the efficiency of asset management while ensuring that maintenance responsibilities are clearly defined and sustainable. By transferring the routine maintenance tasks along with the assets, the bill creates a clear structure for local oversight.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around HB 983 appears to lean towards favoring local governance and efficiency in asset management. Supporters argue that giving political subdivisions control over non-flood assets will allow for more responsive and tailored management that meets local needs. There may, however, be concerns regarding the adequacy of oversight and whether local entities will have the necessary expertise to manage these assets effectively. This highlights a tension between local empowerment and state oversight.

Contention

One point of contention in discussions about HB 983 may arise from the limitations imposed on political subdivisions regarding the sale or lease of non-flood assets. The bill explicitly prohibits any transfer of these assets without state authorization. This could lead to debates over local autonomy and governance, particularly regarding how much control local officials should have over the assets within their jurisdictions and the implications of state intervention in local asset management decisions.