AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 12; Title 13; Title 66 and Title 67, relative to local government.
The adoption of HB 335 is significant as it establishes a clear framework for the payment of utility district board members, which could lead to standardization across similar districts within Tennessee. By allowing for per diem compensation for meetings, the bill acknowledges the service of board members while maintaining a limit to avoid excessive expenditure. This could incentivize skilled individuals to serve on these boards, which are crucial for local utility management and governance.
House Bill 335 introduces amendments to various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically regarding utility district boards of commissioners in counties with populations between 158,100 and 158,200 according to the most recent federal census. The bill stipulates that members of such boards will serve without compensation but may receive per diem payments for up to twelve meetings per year, capped at $500 per meeting. This legislative change aims to define the compensation structure for these board members distinctly.
The sentiment surrounding HB 335 appears largely neutral, as it addresses a specific administrative issue regarding compensation without significant controversy based on the limited discussions available. Stakeholders in local governance may appreciate the clarity the bill provides, although those advocating for further compensation may view it as too restrictive. Overall, there does not seem to be strong opposition or passionate advocacy for this bill, indicating a consensus on its necessity to clarify existing statutes.
One notable point of contention is the balancing act between encouraging public service on utility boards and managing public funds responsibly. While the bill seeks to ensure that board members are not overcompensated, there may be differing opinions on the adequacy of the proposed per diem payments. Discussions could emerge surrounding whether this model adequately reflects the responsibilities and time commitments required from board members, especially considering the crucial role they play in local governance and utilities management.