Louisiana House Bill HB99

Louisiana 2017 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/23/17
• Refer: 3/23/17
• Refer: 4/10/17
• Report Pass: 5/18/17

Caption

Provides for fees in certain civil matters (EG INCREASE LF RV See Note)

Impact

The passage of HB 99 would directly affect the compensation structure for constables and marshals, potentially enhancing their operational capabilities through better equipment funded by the fee increases. The creation of an equipment fund aims not only to improve the efficiency of law enforcement duties but also to ensure transparency and accountability, as the fund would be subject to annual audits. This could lead to better public confidence in the financial management of funds related to civil matters.

Summary

House Bill 99 seeks to amend existing legislation regarding the fees charged by constables and marshals in civil matters in Louisiana. Specifically, the bill proposes an increase in the percentage of fees collected for executing orders of seizure and sale, as well as for executing writs, raising the percentage from 6% to 10%. Additionally, the bill sets a minimum fee of $12.50 for each execution. Significant to the bill is the stipulation that 40% of the additional funds generated by these fee increases will be allocated to a dedicated equipment fund aimed at purchasing or updating necessary equipment for constables and marshals.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment regarding HB 99 appears to be divided among legislators. Supporters argue that the increased fees are justified given the rising costs associated with enforcement duties and the necessity for updated equipment. However, there are concerns raised by opponents about whether such fee increases could pose an undue burden on individuals involved in civil matters, especially those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. The sentiment indicates a recognition of the importance of funding for law enforcement but highlights the need to balance this with considerations for the public's financial capabilities.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding the bill include the specific implications of increasing fees on individuals seeking services through constables and marshals. Critics of the bill may highlight the potential for such fee increases to act as a barrier to access for those in need of civil enforcement services. The requirement for funds to be audited and made public is a positive aspect, meant to ensure that the additional revenue is effectively used. Nonetheless, debates continue over whether the benefits gained from these changes will outweigh their costs to the public.