HB1178
To Amend The Law Concerning The Contracting Of A Municipal Attorney; To Amend The Law Concerning Sums Collected By District Courts; And To Amend The Law Concerning Cost Sharing For District Court Expenses.
AI-Generated Summary
This bill proposes amendments to several Arkansas Code sections related to municipal ordinance violations and district court finances. It clarifies the process for collecting and distributing sums of money handled by district courts. The bill allows cities of the second class and incorporated towns to contract with attorneys for legal representation if they choose not to establish a city attorney's office. A significant focus is on reclassifying how fines, penalties, forfeitures, fees, and costs collected by district courts are accounted for and disbursed. It aims to ensure that cities and incorporated towns that do not operate their own district courts but have law enforcement officers receive their appropriate share of collected funds. The bill also revises cost-sharing agreements for district court expenses, making written agreements mandatory for towns and cities contributing to operational costs. The legislative intent is to provide a mechanism for these municipalities to receive appropriate distributions for remediation.
Potential Impact Analysis
Who Might Benefit?
The primary beneficiaries of this bill are cities of the second class and incorporated towns in Arkansas. Specifically, those that do not operate their own district courts but have municipal law enforcement or code enforcement officers stand to benefit from clearer and potentially increased distributions of sums collected by district courts for ordinance violations. These entities may also benefit from the provision allowing them to contract with attorneys for legal representation, offering flexibility in managing their legal needs. Additionally, the district courts themselves and the political subdivisions contributing to their expenses could benefit from a more defined and equitable cost-sharing and disbursement process.
Who Might Suffer?
The entities most directly and negatively impacted by this bill could be counties and potentially larger cities that currently receive a larger share of district court revenues under existing distribution models. The reclassification of accounting records and the emphasis on ensuring distributions to smaller municipalities might lead to a reduction in funds available to county treasuries or other political subdivisions. Furthermore, district courts that are funded solely by the county might see shifts in their revenue streams or disbursement obligations based on the new accounting and distribution rules. The bill's provisions could also indirectly affect the financial planning and budgeting of these entities if their anticipated revenue from district court collections is altered.