backstageadd ND

2013 IN General Assembly

2013 IN General Assembly

Postby Kingsman » Tue Feb 12, 2013 10:33 am

A thread for news and comments about the 2013 IN General Assembly

While trying to find the status of S312 (forbids school corporations from withholding union dues for teachers), I ran across S291 which “provides that money in a school corporation’s capital projects fund may be used to pay for contracted services such as custodial and maintenance services, snow removal, trash removal, lawn care, and pest control.” This bill is new to me but I imagine that there have been similar bills in the past. Obviously, this bill would be supported by school superintendents and teachers unions. The bill was introduced by Lindel Hume (D) of Princeton. The (D) would seem to be working against this bill.
Kingsman
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby bob_rx2000 » Wed Feb 13, 2013 7:34 am

This bill would effectively turn the capital funds into operating funds, which is a sure path to bankruptcy, IMO.
Bob_Rx2000
"Because, Gentlemen, I don't trust you..." Gunning Bedford, U.S. Constitutional Convention
"First God created the idiot. That was for practice. Then he created the School Board." Mark Twain
User avatar
bob_rx2000
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:27 am
Location: South Bend, in a subdivision scheduled for annexation

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby Kingsman » Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:21 am

One small step for transparent government, as introduced by Sen. Jim Smith, District 45.

A bill I've authored to provide greater oversight for local redevelopment commissions passed the Senate this week.

Redevelopment commissions work to address underdeveloped or underutilized areas in a town, city or county in an effort to increase economic development.

Because they are funded by taxpayer dollars, Senate Bill 325 would require redevelopment commissions to be subject to greater oversight by the local legislative body that originally established the commission. In addition, the bill would require redevelopment commissions to receive approval from the legislative body before carrying out any publicly funded development projects.

This bill increases transparency in local government by giving locally elected officials the authority to hold redevelopment commissions accountable for their use of taxpayer dollars.

Ultimately, it’s a move to protect taxpayers and make sure their hard-earned money is being spent responsibly
Kingsman
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby John Q Public » Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:31 am

bob_rx2000 wrote:This bill would effectively turn the capital funds into operating funds, which is a sure path to bankruptcy, IMO.


I agree Bob. Seems like an odd way to conduct business. CapEx expeditures normally begin at $500 and go up from there. Just a way to get their hands on a different pot of money. :naughty: :naughty:
If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. --- Barack Hussein Obama
User avatar
John Q Public
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:40 pm
Location: Somewhere in a tall building in downtown South Bend

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby bob_rx2000 » Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:29 am

JQP,

Defining capital expenses by dollar amount is equally foolish, of course. An operating expense can easily exceed $500 in this day and age. It is really the outcome of the expense - does it result in the purchase of an asset intended to last for more than one fiscal year?

Now, if we want to say something about closely monitoring operating expenses, I have no problem requiring school board approval of all operating expenses over $5000, or something along those lines...
Bob_Rx2000
"Because, Gentlemen, I don't trust you..." Gunning Bedford, U.S. Constitutional Convention
"First God created the idiot. That was for practice. Then he created the School Board." Mark Twain
User avatar
bob_rx2000
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:27 am
Location: South Bend, in a subdivision scheduled for annexation

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby Kingsman » Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:30 pm

Indiana: House Passes NRA-Backed Hunting Reform



Today, House Bill 1563 passed the Indiana House of Representatives by an overwhelming 95-2 vote. HB1563 will now be transferred to the Senate where it will be referred to the appropriate Senate committee for consideration.

HB 1563, sponsored by state Representative Sean Eberhart (R-57) and fully supported by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, would allow hunters in Indiana to use lawfully-possessed suppressors (also referred to as silencers) on firearms while hunting.

Noise complaints are being used more frequently as an excuse to close shooting ranges, informal shooting areas and hunting lands throughout the country. Increased use of suppressors will help to eliminate many of these complaints and protect hunting and shooting areas well into the future.

While suppressors do not eliminate the sound of a firearm, they do reduce the muzzle report in a manner similar to the way that a muffler reduces exhaust noise from a vehicle. The benefits associated with suppressor use include increased accuracy due to reduced recoil and muzzle blast, protection from hearing damage and reduced noise pollution.

The NRA would like to thank Representative Eberhart and Speaker Brian Bosma (R-88) for ensuring the passage of this pro-hunting reform. Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org for updates on the status of this legislation as it progresses through
Kingsman
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby John Q Public » Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:07 pm

bob_rx2000 wrote:JQP,

Defining capital expenses by dollar amount is equally foolish, of course. An operating expense can easily exceed $500 in this day and age. It is really the outcome of the expense - does it result in the purchase of an asset intended to last for more than one fiscal year?

Now, if we want to say something about closely monitoring operating expenses, I have no problem requiring school board approval of all operating expenses over $5000, or something along those lines...


If we are considering that the CapEx expense is to be depreciated over the life of the purchase it doesn't seem possible to be able to utilize that fund in the manner that they wish. It seems to me they are trying to mix CapEx with OpEx expenses. I think the $500 threshhold I was speaking of varies by company. Any company controller will provide you with a figure. It might be $500, could be $750 or $1000, but what you end up with is the cost being one leg of the criteria to define the CapEx expense. But you have to have some sort of threshhold amount or budgeting would be even more of a nightmare than it already is. Gotta keep the auditors happy...
If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. --- Barack Hussein Obama
User avatar
John Q Public
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:40 pm
Location: Somewhere in a tall building in downtown South Bend

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby bob_rx2000 » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:45 pm

JQP, I quite agree there has to be a limit for approval, but $500 is fairly low. That was my only point. You're balancing some sense of accountability versus workload. I'll grant you that we're dealing here with public school officials so the level of accountability is fairly low in the first place.
Bob_Rx2000
"Because, Gentlemen, I don't trust you..." Gunning Bedford, U.S. Constitutional Convention
"First God created the idiot. That was for practice. Then he created the School Board." Mark Twain
User avatar
bob_rx2000
 
Posts: 3981
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:27 am
Location: South Bend, in a subdivision scheduled for annexation

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby Kingsman » Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:37 am

Snippets from an article, (“Bill to ban teacher union deductions advances to House”) in today’s SBT. “The legislation, which has the support of Gov. Mike Pence, cleared the House Education Committee along party lines….a major blow to Indiana’s unions….President of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce said a school district or other government unit should not be involved in collecting money that can then be used for political purposes….unclear how the legislation would fare in the Senate…measure now heads to the full House.”
Kingsman
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: 2013 IN General Assembly

Postby Shinigami » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:13 am

Silencers on hunting rifles? Awesome. Time to get me an M1A with a Surpressor.
Image
For Hire, will post and moderate for beer.
User avatar
Shinigami
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 6:10 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Next

Return to Indiana and Midwest

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron