Representative Cameron Cooper

Meeting — March 19, 2025 (59:32)

privilege to retirees, but we just want to bring consistency across the state and make all cities are on the same page and that no one is being missed. As well as ensure that firefighter retirees are extended the same benefit that we have already given police retirees with Act 535. I visited with the Municipal League on this bill and they support it. There is no fiscal impact to the state and no known opposition. I'll do my best to answer any questions. I would appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Representative

Meeting — March 19, 2025 (58:57)

that this bill does it simply states that if a firefighter retires but is not yet of age to qualify for medicare they can stay on the health insurance plan of the city they retired from until they reach medicare age and the city will determine the amount of the premium the retiree will pay. Now, it's understood that likely the city will require the retiree to pay the whole insurance premium, but ultimately that determination is left up to the city. This will just give the retiree an additional choice when planning for their health insurance needs after retirement. Most cities are actually already extending this

Meeting — March 19, 2025 (58:25)

is not yet of age to qualify for medicare can stay on the health insurance plan of the city they retired from this bill amends act 535 of 2023 this is a great bill passed by representative baker it brought consistency across the state regarding police officers who retired but were not yet of age to qualify for medicare benefits allowing them to stay on the health insurance plan of the city or county they retired from a constituent of mine who is a retired firefighter asked if we could extend this same privilege to all retired firefighters and that's all

Meeting — March 19, 2025 (58:20)

explain your bill thank you mr speaker colleagues hb 1313 ensures that a firefighter who retires

Legislative Joint Auditing - Counties & Municipalities — Sept. 12, 2019 (1:02:39)

so each, each instance is a different individual. It's not one person that's abusing their position. Yeah, actually, each one

Legislative Joint Auditing - Counties & Municipalities — Sept. 12, 2019 (1:01:21)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I see a pattern here of several small amounts. They add up to nearly $1,000. But considering that it looks kind of like a pattern, was this traced back to a specific city employee or city official? What I'm talking about is the charge assessed for smoking in a hotel room, travel-related expenses without a business purpose, et cetera. Did y'all trace that back

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:06:12)

say that Senator Mark Johnson and I, he's the Senate sponsor, We have agreed to sit down with the collectors to

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:06:04)

to notify the collector of this, or else they are breaking the law. I mean, it's very clear they're breaking the law. Also, just want to

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:06:20)

address any lingering concerns in an amendment should this pass today. I would appreciate a good vote.

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:05:09)

been paying property tax on it. They would also be subject to penalties, fees, and interest for that period of time that they were not paying property tax. Another follow-up, Madam Speaker.

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:04:56)

violation, and upon conviction shall be fined in any sum not less than $100, nor more than $1,000. It's already illegal, and I would venture to say that if they were guilty of an illegal offense of trying to claim this exemption, they haven't

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:04:22)

is illegal and uh let let me quote that for you 26 3306 that established this exemption only a disabled veteran and a surviving spouse and minor dependent child of a disabled veteran who are citizens and residents of the state of arkansas shall be eligible for the exemption provided in this section any person evading or violating any provision of this section or attempting to secure benefits under this section, to which he or she is not entitled, shall be guilty of a

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:03:48)

that property does there's there's taxes aren't being paid on it there's it's going to go to the state land commissioner i'm assuming for is that what you're asking if there's no heirs to that property yeah follow up madam man speak

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:03:41)

guess well if if they owned property and they passed away and there's no heirs then what happens to

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:03:13)

should remarry then you would be required to notify the collector of that so that you because you would then lose that exemption

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:03:08)

think that you would because you have already established that exemption however if you

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:02:09)

disabled veterans to help ease this burden they paid so much to ask for so little I hope you

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:01:39)

a big part of this bill. Friends, this bill was brought to me by disabled veterans and I believe that it's a reasonable request. We're trying to help these women and men who may be mentally or physically unable to acquire this paperwork and get it filed in a timely manner. There's really no great reason to require them to file this paperwork annually when they have a permanent disabled status that is highly unlikely to never change and if it does change remember I've added protection in the bill to cover that we owe it to our

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:01:08)

but I believe by reading of the law that the original intent was for the letter to be submitted once to establish eligibility. The Assessment Coordination Division has no rules on this issue. The AG's opinion said that legislative clarification is needed, which is what I'm trying to do. Essentially, the collectors have been left to make their own rules on this, and theoretically, 75 counties could handle this 75 different ways. think bringing consistency across the state to this issue is also a factor and

Meeting — March 20, 2025 (1:00:35)

he went into remission, so he lost that status. Section C would cover that issue if that ever should become an issue. It would be very rare for that to happen, but if it does happen, Section C will cover that. The veteran loses that exemption, they're required to report that to the collector, and resume paying taxes.