ALC-JBC Budget Hearings
Video
Transcript
3 documents
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Members will grab your seat. We'll go ahead and get started. Cher sees a quorum, uh, first things first, Representative Holcomb. Representative Holcomb's gonna pray for us, if y'all would stand and bow.
All right. Members get started. We don't have any reports today, so we'll go to Billy, and if you would, go ahead. Thank you,
Speaker 20
2:51
Ms. Cher Billie Parish, Legislative Research. Shay Lewis,
Speaker 23
2:57
uh, secretary of the Department of Parks, Heritage and Tourism.
Speaker 25
3:02
Jamie Fisher, Chief Financial Officer for Parks Heritage and Tourism.
William Parrish
Unverified
3:09
Thank you, Mr. Cha. Members, we're in week 2, page 1, week 2, page 1 is manual. We're in the, uh, Department of Parks Heriage Tourism. Uh, this first section on page one begins the shared services for the, for the department, uh, the department's comprised of agencies and programs from the division of Heritage that includes Arkansas Arts Council, Natural and Cultural Resources Council, Delta Cultural Center, Mosaic Temple Cultural Center, Ota House Museum, and many other programs. Uh, it's also the divisions of parks and tourism,
which also include Keep Arkansas Beautiful and the War Memorial Stadium. And also, uh, the, the next bill will be the Capitol Zoning Commission. The cabinets were provided a shared services section to eliminate duplication of services and to provide efficiencies on page one, it shows the state contracts awards, minority owned businesses and in employment summary. On page 2 is their shared services, uh, budget requests. Again, this section provides for the, uh, shared services of the department, uh, it's across all divisions and programs. It's
supported by a paying account. On page 3 is their shared services appropriate summary, uh, in 5th year 25, what was authorized was 12,024,000. The requests for 26 and 27 is 11.2 million. That is a 6% decrease. The executive recommendation is for 10.8 million. That is a 10% decrease. And we'll look at those change levels beginning with regular salaries, uh, in fiscal year 25, 5.8% was authorized. The request is for
5.9. That is a 1% increase, but the Executive recommendation is for 5.6%, that's a 3% decrease. Personal services matching, 2.1 was authorized. The request is for again 2.1, that's about a 3% increase, but the executive recommendations for 292,000, that is a 2% decrease, uh, for the agency requests, the salary match changes are due to adjustments for employees is authorized by law. The executive recommendation is to reclassify 6 positions, discontinue 5 positions and adjust the appropriation downward from
those maneuvers. And there'll be more discussion about the positions and personnel subcommittee. Next line is professional fees, 943,000 was authorized. The request is for 93,000. Uh, that is $850,000 difference or 90% decrease. This is a transfer of 850,000 to the division of Heritage and their conservation tax appropriation section, and that's for a marketing contract for that division. Uh, the next line is Capital Olay. They are also not requesting Capital LA
in this budget, but I was told when I spoke with the agency that I was an inadvertent mistake and so there might be a motion later on to restore that. Lily. Uh, Mr. Chair, that is the Shared Services section, uh, request. Thank you, Billy. Uh, do
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
5:55
we have any questions, members? Represent Bentley, are you about to ask a question?
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
6:11
OK. OK, thank you, Chairman, I appreciate it. I'd like to make a motion that we restore capital outlays to their FY uh. Budget for FY 24 to 25 levels. I remember you just heard the motion? Do we have a second? We have a 2nd.
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
6:41
All in favor say aye. In your post. All right. You Representative Wootton, did you have
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
6:57
a question? Yes sir. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um On your desk, you have a copy there of a report. personnel, you do.
And uh that's research. It shows that you have 975 positions. Keep
these off. 154 vacant positions in 53 of them are over 2 years old, how many,
how many positions have you given up that are over 2 years old. And the
Jami Fisher
Unverified
7:46
The law that covers that that 796 positions, those that are over 2 years old, is that the question?
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
7:53
The question is, how many have you given up? In this past report, how many did you give up? I have them. I don't have
Speaker 56
8:01
them in total. Yeah, I was gonna say I was gonna say we'll have to get the total for you.
Jami Fisher
Unverified
8:09
I have them by business, each of the six business areas. I don't have them in total. You don't have
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
8:17
the total? Not, not compiled, no. Are you evaluating these two year old positions each time and looking at
Shea Lewis
Unverified
8:30
them seriously. Yes sir, on a, on a biweekly basis, we review every vacant position that comes available within uh across the department we take a look specifically at what positions have been out the longest number of uh amount of time and comparing also what the current priorities are, uh, one thing that uh our department's
slightly different is that we are a department that operates a state agency that operates within the hospitality industry uh within our. Kansas State Parks, um, uh, and so on any given day if suddenly a restaurant manager chain resigns from one of our locations, that becomes a priority for us or a lodge manager, uh, for continuity of operations and so our priorities changed constantly in that and what has happened over time and some of the positions that we haven't used for a longer period
of time, have, have remained vacant. For for some time and that those have been identified through that. I think
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
9:31
Jamie's working on the numbers here. Well, I understand what you're saying, but what I'm asking is, uh, and I understand the prior prioritizing, but what I'm trying to get to is,
are you evaluating those positions, if a position has been vacant over 2 years. What's, what's the
leading cause or reason for the fact that you're still carrying that in your budget. I'm not trying to Take your money away from you, but I'm trying to find out why do, why the necessity to have a position of open for 2 years. It appears you can't feel it, feel it, or you don't feel like you need to feel it at that point in time. So I guess my question is why do you continue to carry positions that are over
2 years. Oh, and you've got 53 of them. And in $45,000. $50,000 average if, let's just say half of them are budgeted. That's a, that's a pretty good amount of money that you could use somewhere else in your program. Is that not is that not be true, it is true,
Shea Lewis
Unverified
10:40
and, and we have been purposeful in the unbudgeting of some positions if, if we had have had the idea that that position might be used at a different location in the
future, we have unbudgeted those at that time so we don't pay those continued matching. costs and expenses associated with them we have given up 23 positions 23 positions. And they sent over the
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
11:04
past year or the past two years or? Yeah, 2 years
Speaker 76
11:08
or more, and they're, they're referenced in this request. We'll go through them as, as we progress next question is,
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
11:15
moneys that you hold on to that you don't need right now. And you
Gives the state treasury to invest those funds. Where, where is that interest income shown in your, your, uh, budget request, under, underfunding sources, I don't see anything. Um Fun balanced, shared service transfer total funding. I don't see it we're interest is shown explicitly shown it is included in that fund
Jami Fisher
Unverified
11:47
balance as we are earning interest on each included
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
11:54
in the fund in the existing cash balance is it
earmarked as interest income? When we do our annual
Jami Fisher
Unverified
12:01
certifications, we do certify that revenue as interest income you show it in an annual report. Yes. But you
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
12:06
don't show it in the budget. I'm not sure that the manual allows for us to show it
Jami Fisher
Unverified
12:11
explicitly. OK. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. So I know we've already
settled the issue because we already had
the motion, um, and I'm sorry I had to step out for a second, but it looks like you spent $10,0168 of that $50,000 capital outlay in, in the year 23, 24. Walk me through what that was for and in what you suspect you would spend out
Jami Fisher
Unverified
12:44
of 50 in the next biennium. So in the shared services, those purchases were for, um, a computer
as well as a camera for our, um, department, our communications department.
That was one expensive computer, computer and camera. Do, do you expect buying more of
those in the next biennium or is it that just there for insurance or Within our budget,
Speaker 86
13:11
it also covers uh any uh equipment, furniture fixtures that we need
Shea Lewis
Unverified
13:15
to buy as well. I don't think there, there's not a specific plan at this point for those dollars or. And within shared services. OK.
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
13:30
Representative Richmond, you're reckon for a question. You meant Richardson. OK. Uh, just a question about the motion. So is it for, is it to go back to the actual span or to
Speaker 92
13:42
the budget from representative Bentley. Representative Bentley, you recognize. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate it.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
13:54
I'm sorry for the confusion. I was a little delayed in traffic, but I want to uh. Change the amendment or to move
the executive recommendation and the agency request for capital outlay, so
we're executive recommendation and the agency
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
14:09
request for capital outlay. But But there's not an executive
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
14:14
request on here, I, I guess for 25, 26, 25, 26, 24, 25 levels,
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
14:20
sorry 000. Yes. For the capital outlays for 50,000. On
page 3. If you read page 3.
OK. Executive recommendation and amended to add 50,000 for the capital outlay.
Representative Bentley, you can clarify your executive re motion. Thank you. I'm gonna
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
14:49
read the entire thing and that's OK, Chairman. So I moved to the executive recommendation and agency requests for capital outlay that was inadvertently left out on the budget. So on page 3 to be amended emergency executive recommendation amended
to and capital outlay for 50,000. On page 15 capital outlay is amended to 250,000 and executive regs. On page 75, Kappa Outlay is amended to 3,500,000. With emergency, emergency uh executive recommendation, sorry, and Cali on page 79. Executive rigs and capital outlays amended to 125,000. On page 83 executive recommendation agency requests
for capital outlay is amended to 500,000. And they could answer specifics if we need
them. Preim Bentley, I think you're getting ahead of us. So we're only on page 3 you're recommending executive rec, correct? That's
Speaker 106
15:53
and and amend it to 50,000 for the capital outlay. Representative Dean. Thank you,
Speaker 110
16:02
Mr. Chair. I'm a little confused. I don't see an
executive wreck for Capitol Outlay. Or On page 3. Because it's 0 right now. We wanted
Speaker 113
16:19
to add it, I'm sorry. Thank you, ma'am. It was inadvertently left off.
Speaker 115
16:27
I apologize. I will clarify real quick,
she made a motion earlier to put the 50,000 back for capital outlay on page 3.
Everybody stay on page 3. We did not accept executive rec on that page. So only thing that has been done up to this point is a 50,000 has been put back in
order to keep it equal, we have to accept re executive rec. Representative Jean, you're recognized.
Speaker 117
16:58
So the 0 here is. An era, and it should be 50,000
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
17:04
executive rec would have been 50,000. OK, thank you.
It's an agency request, Representative Jean. OK. Did we not get
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
17:22
an executive recommendation on this? Mr. Secretary, is the executive OK
with adding a 50,000 back. They're fine with it, thank you. I would guess they wouldn't sit
at the table and asked for that had
they not had the approval for that, but OK. Representative Wootton, do you, do you have a question on this motion of executive Brick on page 3, that's another question. OK, we'll come to you when we get to that point that's fine. Thank
you. All right, members, everybody OK where we're at. We just need to adopt executive Act
to amend the 50,000. Do I have a second? I have a second. All those in favor say aye. All opposed. I have it. So
members, I'm going to let Billy explain all the rest of the budget for parks
and heritage and tourism before we go back to questioning. Mr. Billy, you are recognized. Thank
William Parrish
Unverified
18:23
you, Mr. Chair. We're skipping ahead, members to page 10, on page 10 begins the division of heritage budget requests. And on page 10 shows the overview of the Department of Arkansas Heritage, which was created in 1975 to preserve and promote Arkansas's natural and cultural heritage as a source of pride and enjoyment for all,
consists of 8 sections, the Arkansas Arts Council, the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, Arkansas State Archives, Delta Cultural Center, historic Arkansas Museum, Mosaic Templar Cultural Center, and the Old State House Museum, pages 10 through 11 show an employment summary, publications, and state contracts awards minority owned businesses. On page 12, is there appropriation summary. The division has 18 appropriation requests, 6 sections have a changed level. There are other sections where the only change is carrying for salary and match
adjustments into the new biennium. The total authorized budget for fiscal year 25 is 66.4 million. The division requests 59.9 million for the biennial, that's a 10% increase. I'm sorry, 10% decrease. The executive recommendation is 286,000 less than the agency requests. The division is funded from general revenue, special revenue from 9% of the 18 cent conservation sales tax, Federal grants and cash funds for
museums, gift shops, and cultural center proceeds, and per the chair's request, the department returned 969,000 in general revenue funds at the end of fiscal year 24. Our first change level will be on page 13, I'm sorry, on page. On page 14, this is a request for conservation tax Amendment 75, and this section provides for programs and supplements general revenue for administration of the division. It's supported by the division of Heritage Special Fund account. On page 15 is the appropriation summary.
That 3rd column, uh, 24, 25 authorized. Uh, was 6,023,000 is the total for that year. The request from the agency is 7.9 million. That is a 31% increase. Uh, the executive recommendation is for an 18% increase. I'm sorry, 30% increase. So we have 31% by the agency and 30% by the executive recommendations. So we'll go through those changes. They begin with regular salaries. 926,000 was authorized for 25. The request is 1.1 million.
That's a 21% increase. However, the executive recommendation is for 190, that's an 18% increase. Personal services matching is 405,000 authorized, 488,000 requests, a 20% increase. The executive recommendations for 472,000. That's only a 17% increase. The salary and match changes are due to adjustments for employees is authorized by law, but the executive recommendation, which is different, reclassifies 3 positions, discontinues one position and it's associated appropriation. That's about
47,000 less than the agency requests. Looking at operating expenses, 1.45 million was authorized, 2.45 is a request. That is a 69% increase. This is due to rising costs associated with vendor services and supply chain demands. I did speak with the agency and they had large increases specifically in electricity, networking, telephone, janitorial, and insurance. The next line item is professional fees, $25,000 was authorized. The request is
875,000. Uh, that is an 8050. 00 $0 increase. That's the transfer that we talked about in the last section from Shared Services, it's for a marketing contract. The contract is with Bingham Hokum Partners and it's for promotional activities like social media, radio, television, and billboards for activities like the Arkansas Food Hall of Fame, the King Biscuit Blues Festival, Arkansas Constitutional tour, 2nd Art Friday night at museums, exhibit openings, and other promotional work. Uh, the next line item is capital outlay. This is what we've been discussing this
morning so far, 250,000 was. That was not requested, but that was inadvertent and there will be a motion to restore that. Uh, looking at fund sources, that's the bottom table. The fund balance going into fiscal year 24 was 8.19 million. The fund collected special revenue in the amount of 9.9 million, that's 9% of the 18 cent conservation sales tax. The division spent 4.7 million in fiscal year 24. That leaves a balance of 11.1 million going
into fiscal year 25. Our next change level is on the next page, page 16. This is the state operations section, and it provides for personal services and operating expenses of the division. On page 17 is the appropriation summary? In fifth year 25, 6.6 million was authorized. The request for 26 and 27 is 6.7 million. Uh, the executive recommendation is for 6.4 million, so the agency has a 1% increase request. The executive recommendations for a
3% decrease, uh, looking at regular salaries, what was authorized in 25 was 3.89. The request is for 3.9. Again, that's that 1% increase. Uh, the request for the executive recommendations for a 3% decrease at 3.7 million. Personal services matching is 1.5. The request is for uh 1.55 and the executive recommendations for 1.47, that's a 4% decrease. Again, salary and match changes are due to adjustments for employees authorized by law and the agency requests. However, the executive
recommendation is to discontinue file positions and associated preparation. It's about 238,000 less than the agency requests. Looking at the fund sources table, the fund collected 6.7 million in general revenue fiscal year 24, a transfer of 1.14 million was made to shared services, and due to its support from general revenue and no carry forward special language, there is no fund balance. The next change level is on page 20. If you go to page 20, this is
for the Arkansas Cultural Institution's Trust Fund. It's used for major capital improvement projects at Arkansas Cultural Institutions and is supported by a trust fund for that purpose. On page 21 is their summary. Uh, what was authorized in 25 was 8 million, and they are requesting to discontinue, uh, this appropriation. If you look at the fund sources table, it says it's funded by grants and donations. However, the table shows no revenue for fiscal year 24 and no expenses. However,
special language also allows the secretary to make a transfer of conservation sales tax revenue to this fund. They were also requesting to discontinue this special language. Uh, the last and only utilization for this was at $2.5 million dollar transfer in fiscal year 23. The next, uh. Change levels on page 26. On page 26 is their old state house cash and treasury uh request, and this supplements the operating expenses of the
Old State House programs and activities. It's supported by cash in treasury fund on page 27 is a summary and fiscal year 25, 3,086,000 was authorized. The request for 26 and 27 is 157,000. Uh, the executive recommendation provides for the agency requests. Uh, there are some changed levels, uh, operating expenses was authorized at 266,000. The request is for 100,000, that's a 62% decrease. Professional fees was authorized at 337,000. The request is for
15,000, that's a 60% decrease. And then the resale on item was authorized at 60,000. They're requesting 20,000, that's another 67% decrease. And I spoke with the AC all the changes are to align the appropriation with the annual revenue and cash reserves. Looking at the funding sources table, the fund balance going into 5th 24 is 187,000. The fund collected cash funds in the amount of 40 I'm sorry, 48,000 and that's for rents, donations, interest, and gift shop sales. There was a $4000 interagency
transfer from the Arkansas Arts Council, and that was used at the Old State House to hire Arkansas performers per a federally funded program. The division spent 99,000 in fiscal year 24, and that leaves a balance of 140,000 going into fiscal year 25. Our next change levels on page 34. On page 34 is request
Speaker 27
26:54
for the Natural Heritage Commission, Natural Area Management, cash
William Parrish
Unverified
26:59
and treasury, and this provides for a management stewardship funds. The next page, page 35, is their appropriation summary and fifth grade 25, the total authorized was 316,000 to request for 26 and 27 is 256,000. That is a 9 19% decrease. Uh, the executive recommendation provides for that request. The change levels began with professional fees, $60,000 was authorized in 25. Uh, the request is 0 in professional fees. That's discontinues that
one I, and this is to align the appropriation with their anticipated spin. The agency He also told me Natural Heritage Commission has other funding sources they can use for professional fees. Looking at funny sources, the fun balance going into fiscal year 24 is 495,000. The fund collected cash funds in the amount of 30,000. That's from interest, donations, timber thins, and grants. The division spent 62,000 fiscal year 24. That leaves a balance of 463,000 going into fiscal year 25. The
next change levels on page 48. On page 48 is uh Arkansas Heritage mosaic Templer's Cultural Center exhibit project and this section provides for spending authority to spend a federal grant to advance support and empower Arkansas's exhibits. On page 49 is their summary. And the total authorized in 25 was 248,000. The agency request is to discontinue this section and the executive recommendation provides for that request. Uh,
there are no fund balances, revenue, or expenses for fiscal year 24. Um, however, in fiscal year 23, they received an expense the entire $250,000 grant award on an exhibit that interprets the African American experience in Arkansas. Mr. Chair, those are all the change level requests in the division of Heritage, uh, budget. You know. Thank you. We have a couple of
questions. Senator Irvin, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Back on page 17, I think.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
29:13
17. No, sorry, it's on 15. Um, you, on
the professional fees that went from 25,000 to 875,000. That was because was that previously in
Shared Services and it gets transferred over to you. So we'll, we'll see a reduction in the shared services line item, is that correct? That's correct. OK. And then,
um, for those types of advertising, are you looking at a statewide reach for those. I heard mention a couple of different things, um, but they seem to be in certain areas of the state. How, how do you, you know, clearly heritage is all over the state. So do you have plans to kind of look at. I guess advertising more areas of the state of Arkansas with those funds? Sure. Um, so the
Shea Lewis
Unverified
30:15
advertising component related to the division of Arkansas Heritage, the division of Arkansas Heritage includes 4 museums that we have, uh, as well as, uh, the, uh, how many other agencies, the four other agencies that that represent the state as a whole and so through the advertising approach, it has been an in-state uh approach to share with the success of. The agency and and department uh of those programs out there, whether that's historic preservation, natural heritage
commission, um, Arts Council, etc. those programs, uh, use those advertising dollars in different ways. But primarily in
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
30:55
little bit more context. Um, we actually have a big goal of 75 county outreach, not just from a public relations standpoint, um, we're actually working with county judges in the areas on the impacts of heritage and sharing that with every county, um, the Food Hall of Fame, which
has been, uh, it's now in its
7th year, um, is a 75 county program, all of, especially with our historic preservation, that's a lot about education, Arts Council is really focused on education across the state, and it's been a really big goal for us to have, um, all of those programs be promoted for all Arkansans. So yes, that, that's a huge priority for us. Well, just for example, you know, Cercy
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
31:38
County has created the Buffalo River, um, Historic Museum and out of the old jail and they've gotten great grants to restore that you've been
there, you've seen it, you know, that's part of the Arkansas cultural heritage of our state. And so things like that. or what I'm looking at is there any type of partnering partnership with any type of entity like that, that may not be under your umbrella, so to speak, but that our efforts that are happening in these different counties. Yes, um, a couple of different things
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
32:12
just come to mind, um, one is our small grant, or small museum grant,
which, um, allows small museums to, to receive, um, programmatic support, but also, um, from the standpoint of tourism, making sure that those two things work hand in glove. So
yes, that's, that's very important to us.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
32:33
OK, thank you. And then my last question is, um, could you explain on page 35. And this may be for Mr. Parish, but the fund balance and how that is being changed. Um, or, or how that, could you just go back through that fun balance, those numbers are.
William Parrish
Unverified
32:54
Confusing to me. Yes, ma'am. Uh, the fund balance going into 5th grade 24, that's the top line. It's 495,690. The fund collected, uh, cash funds, that's the amount of $30,0158. That was interest, donations, timber thins and grants. The division spent $62,677 in fiscal year 24, and so that leaves a fund balance of 463,000 going into fiscal year 25. OK, but that's not reflected
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
33:25
over here in the agency request and executive recommendation. So why
isn't that carried over into those requests. Yeah
Speaker 156
33:58
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Senator Irvin, that, that is a good point. What you're pointing out there is when you look at the, um, excess appropriation on page 35, exis appropriation slash funding in parentheses, that means that if it's in parentheses, that's money that they have cash on hand. And as you can see in 24, they have 463,000. And when you go all the way across, it shows where they would spend it all. That's assuming they use. all of their appropriation
authority that's showing worst case scenario if the agency were to make all of these expenditures that they have authority to do. As you can see, they are actually only spending 62,000 but they have authority to spend over 256 requested 1000. So that's the reason why it shows that fund balance going, being totally spent and more often, the reality is the agencies do not spend that much money in those fund balances carry forward, but they do have flexibility to spend it as needed. OK.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
35:05
All right, thank you. Representative Kavanaugh, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for being here. Uh, my question is just gonna be kind of in general because on page 15, you're asking for a million dollars increase in operating expenses because you talk about how things are getting more expensive. Can you be a little more specific about what's really driving those costs up because I see that you have that in several of your appropriation requests,
but it's kind of a generalization. Can you tell me
what is really driving that cost to go
Jami Fisher
Unverified
35:41
up. Sure So, specifically, some of those amounts are, um, janitorial or insurance, our electricity, our telephones and our networking. So our networking was up over 100,000 for the last fiscal year. Our telephone expenditure is almost 40,000 electricity of over 100,000, our insurance increased 7% or 15,000 and then janitorial 30,000, so I can understand like the janitor and
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
36:05
those things, but you telephone, are we adding, did we add more phones? I mean, why, normally, like a business of ours, we're under contract for so many years. Did our contract. And we're set with a certain level. It, it's actually
Jami Fisher
Unverified
36:19
through, uh, Department of Information Systems. It's, it's shared costs that are passed through to us, so we don't really have control over those contracts. There were increased across the board that we received from networking and telephone, uh, contract costs. OK, so they're not actually
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
36:33
your cost. The costs that the, uh,
state is appropriating to you. Correct. OK, so they're taking that from you and sticking
it to shared services. For DIS, yes. OK, thank you. Representative
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
36:57
Wooten, do you recognize? OK, Mister Parris, I may need your help on this, but On page 12 Department of appropriation summary.
Under the actual It's 15 million 286,000. Budgeted 66 million. That's, that's a, that's a drastic difference between actual and budgeted. Why is that? I mean, what is that? And then, and then, and under uh excess of funding. We have 56 million and that drops to 13
million. So we're, where, where's all that money going? During the last session, we received 40 million for major
Jami Fisher
Unverified
37:45
historic tax credits. So that's the large increase that you see reflected there. That's right. Well, where, where did that money go? So we currently are holding
Shea Lewis
Unverified
38:01
that we have a uh a program that's in place where you can apply for those tax, historic tax credits,
uh, we have, uh, 3 entities that have currently have holds placed on those dollars, uh,
but have not issued any of those funds out yet for at
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
38:20
completion of the project. Well, why is the budget dropped to 60 million. From 66 million about 6 or $7 million difference. Between what you asked for in the budget, this, uh, for 25, 26 and 2627.
It's uh About $6 million.07 million dollars. Drop in your budget is. Am I reading that correctly? Where did, where did that money go to? Those were some of the change, uh, levels that we just discussed.
Jami Fisher
Unverified
39:00
We have various decreases and increases that kind of affect those costs across the board. Um, we do
have the increase that was discussed a moment ago in maintenance and
operations, but because of the positions that we're giving up, there is decreases reflected in, uh, salaries as well as the matching and benefits for those. And
then we have some decreases for Old State House, Natural Heritage. So it's some of the decreases throughout the heritage
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
39:29
departments that are causing that, that total decrease. OK. On page 14. Next to the
last paragraph, transferred 850,000 in professional fee administration.
I, I'm assuming that that was transferred from Shared services, which to me is the central office operation. Is that correct? Correct the reflected on page 3 150,000, then went to the heritage group. Well, what is
850,000 professional fees for. So that
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
40:05
is our heritage department marketing contract that before
we were all here, it was set in shared
services, and it belongs in heritage. So it's really a correction. It's not a shared service. It is a heritage function. So we transfer for? That's used for marketing, um, social media advertising. That's what that's
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
40:33
for. Yes. OK, then the item above that. $1 million increase in operating expenses associated with vendor services and supply chains.
I may be wrong, but I think this is the first agency that has recognized not use the language but recognized that we've gone through an inflationary spiral. In our cost just like the average citizen has, but we've ignored that in our budgeting process. So my question is, where is that million dollars coming from and and what is it going for? I mean, it's one
thing to say vendor services, it's another thing to say supply chain demands. I mean, what is that million dollars for, is that's a million dollars that representative Kavanaugh was asking about. Well
Jami Fisher
Unverified
41:33
Yes, and we'll be utilizing the special revenues from Amendment 75 Conservation sales tax as well as our existing fund balance to support that
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
41:41
request. So Back to the, the, uh, difference of uh of uh 1566 million.
Are you, are you telling me that you're holding on to that 40 million. you have that in-house? Is it invested? Yes. And this is earning interest.
Yes, sir. And where are you showing that interest income and what are you using
Jami Fisher
Unverified
42:10
that for? We will use it to go towards those, uh, historic tax credits to fund that project. Um, we received $329,000 in interest in 24 and this far in fiscal year,
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
42:22
132,000. So it is being show up in your, again, a question of where does that show up in
Jami Fisher
Unverified
42:28
your funding. It, it doesn't show up explicitly as I understand it the way these reports are queued up, but
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
42:34
we do serve at DFA I think telling you where to put this and how to use it. It's, it's where the, the get this cleared up right now. Mr. B, where is that going, right? What we're, we're, where's that $329,000 going and
how is it being used? Representative Wooton, we do have a lot of people in the queue, so as you get this question answered, let's be conscious. This will
Robert Breck
Unverified
43:10
be it, Mr. Chairman. If the interest stays with the agents, if the interest stays with the agency, it does show up in the manual, just, just not as explicit as interest, but it does, it is showing in their revenues for the year, how do we
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
43:22
account for that $329,000. You have a report that says explicitly how much
Robert Breck
Unverified
43:29
money they they received last year. That money does show up. In the manual. It's just not on an interest line just like many other things are not explicitly listed, but if the interest stays with the agency, it is accounted for in the main. But if 10 agencies have 329,000,
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
43:45
that's $3 million. It is not important enough to show it as a funding source. I know we, we've talked about it and we're going to do that, start doing that, but you see my point? All interest is accounted
Robert Breck
Unverified
44:01
for. It's just not accounted on an interest line and that's why we've provided that interest report to the entire committee. Everyone can see exactly how much interest has been earned by every agency. It's just not listed on a line in the manual as interest. You'll see it in a couple of places. perhaps, but it's not if that's the will of the committee that there be a special line just for interest, and that's up to you, not up to us. All right, Representative Wooden, you're going to get the rest of that offline. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. So, um, secretary, I've got a couple of questions. Looking back on page 21. Um, I believe it's called Arkansas Culture Institution Trust. There used to be a mechanism there for
about $8 million on an annual basis to be granted out to institutions. If you look back 2023, it looks like the Arkansas Museum of Fine Arts, the Symphony Orchestra, US Marshals Museum, all received money out of that. It hasn't
been done in recent years and you're 0 in that line, not amount in this budget hearing. Can you kind of explain to me what the plans are because looking at the fund balance looks about like 11.1 million. sitting there. So there's more than enough money. To do something similar, and when you did it before, you know where it came close to giving out $8 million. So, can you kind of walk
me through the, the thinking behind doing away with that. Yes, sir. Back
Shea Lewis
Unverified
45:29
when, uh, those museums were coming online, there was kind of a, a
momentum in the state of some new museums taking place, uh, and that was under the direction of Governor Hutchinson, uh, and his direction for finding a funding source for supporting those
new museums coming on board and so. that's where that original direction came from. That's fine with that thinking, what you're thinking and doing away
with it to 0 when you have fun bouts 11.1 million and there's still needs out there
that could be fulfilled through your $11 million fund balance, right? I, I think, I think we have to be
Shea Lewis
Unverified
46:07
cautious in our approach of um looking at opportunities that come across the board. Uh, I think there are lots of museums that are out there specifically, um, and, and we've got. to try to prioritize the use of our funds, uh, towards the goals of Governor Sanders and, and that's what we're doing here is just aligning that uh we haven't had, I don't think as many uh request specific to that, uh, I think when we were looking at those a few years ago, the US
Marshals Museum, the scale of those museums, uh, were impacts on the state at the time and in the tourism industry specific so, so that's our recommendation. is that that we don't continue that program. It also is just difficult in determining which, you know, how much funds to sit there but also determining uh which museums would get that funding? Is
it just new new museums? Is there a certain size of a museum. It, it gets
Chair
Unverified
47:13
complicated and in, in managing Fortner you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a, a general question for understanding, uh. On all, uh, almost all department appropriation summaries down to next to last line, it'll say excess appropriations. And then there's the amount it's in brackets. I know that's funding that you didn't use, but where does that go? Does it go back and you just keep it, or is that a part of your next year's or next ask.
Does it go away? Is it used? What's it's not, I don't have a specific, it's just there and I want to know where they
Jami Fisher
Unverified
47:52
go. Sure, it's, it's our cash balance and it does carry forward. We are able to use it to support our operations if we see a decline in revenue, and it does earn interest. So it does carry forward as it's part of the accumulated cash balance if there's unspent appropriation. Uh
Chair
Unverified
48:07
If, if it carries forward and say you don't use it in one year. Does that affect how you
budget for the next year? Is it applied in there or is it
Jami Fisher
Unverified
48:20
just held? Well, some of the increases you see us bringing forward today are to utilize some of that fund balance
Chair
Unverified
48:25
that's there from the past. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Collins, you recognize.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
48:33
Thank you. And I think this was asked, you know, in some part, but with regard to getting rid of the appropriation for the
cultural institutions Trust Fund. I mean, all that Bill did that we passed in 2021 was
create the trust fund and so by taking this appropriation of 0, it seems like it's effectively repealing the bill that we passed, and I wonder what is really gained by that when, I mean, you guys still have the flexibility to spend this how y'all want there's, it's all set up in statute. It's not like you have, you know, when you say it's difficult to decide where this should go. I mean, you have parameters of budget and you have discretion. So what are we really gaining by eliminating this altogether.
Shea Lewis
Unverified
49:18
Administratively it just allows us if if there are requests that come forward to say that we don't specifically have funding for those types of requests, um, so it, it, it helps us make the decision on the front end of how we're gonna use our funds specifically, um, I don't think it, it. I'm not an expert in this category as far as repealing the existence of that act or that taking place, it just is eliminates the funding for it for this, uh, time period.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
49:48
thing by having zero balance in there, you could say there's no funding available because you haven't put any in there
Shea Lewis
Unverified
49:57
if that's really the issue. Would you agree? I think so. That would be possible too, so zero balance would be there again if
we're in the process of trying to not over appropriate dollars, um, if even
with a zero balance, but it has the appropriation that doesn't achieve the goal of us reducing overall state appropriation
though. I guess not. OK, thanks. I guess representative Collins, one of my biggest problems with that is, is that is tax dollars associated to this
agency that can't be pulled to general revenue. So that money just sits there. And a good way to get it out was this mechanism, but now we're not going to use it. And I kind of agree with you, it's kind of a backdoor way of repealing it. Senator Hammer, you
recognize. Thank you, Ms. She, uh, going back to the conversation that was, uh, mentioned about the
phones and the TSS and Shared Services, um, did you do an analysis as to what your cost was prior to versus what it is now by going, uh, under the Shared Services model.
Yes, that was actually provided to us by
Speaker 169
51:04
DIS. We, we recognized an increase across the board with all of our parks,
Jami Fisher
Unverified
51:08
heritage and tourism departments from DIS for networking and phones. You, you write, you realize they cost
to your budget by doing that. Correct? Is that in my understanding what you said,
right? What was, what was it before? Um, the
Jami Fisher
Unverified
51:25
total amount of, I'd have to pull it. I know that it increased by 110 for networking. I don't know what the total expense was. I'd have to
pull that. What would it have been had you not had TSS. I mean, you're, you're picking up a larger portion by being shared. By, by having to utilize TSS. I'm just wondering. Did you do any kind of cost analysis that were you not having to do under TSS what
would it have cost you otherwise? No, sir. Why would you not have done that so you could see if it was
Jami Fisher
Unverified
51:59
a benefit or a loss. I believe it's a requirement that we
utilize state networking infrastructure. Yeah, that's, that's the point is you're required to do it, but does that necessarily mean to your agency, it has realized in a cost savings
Shea Lewis
Unverified
52:13
in in some ways, no, uh it has cost us, but in other ways we have been able to expand what we're offering, uh, like
for instance with the form, uh, phone systems, we have primarily switched over to. Voice over IP, um, better phone use, better phone service, uh, it has gotten us away from using independent phone systems at each location that often costs collectively a lot of money that don't get calculated in the same way, uh, in the service contracts associated with each of those phone lines and phone systems. Uh, we have also expanded our broadband network
within the museums and state parks, uh, and that comes at a cost. as well, but it's also an expectation of visitor use to be able to have Wi Fi connectivity, uh, and connection points through those two, so, so, so parts of it, it has increased cost, uh, for, for good reason and in in other ways, some things just cost more. If that makes sense. OK, um, you don't
have. What you're saying, are you able to back up with a study that you have done or an analysis that
you've done or is that just from your perspective, not that I'm questioning it, but from your perspective, this is what you've witnessed, but as far as actual any kind of study
Shea Lewis
Unverified
53:36
or analysis, have you done anything like that? No, sir. No. We, we've primarily worked with, uh, DIS
on that specifically we have um, you know, realized some savings when when you switch over, uh, local network. work services, uh, we also went through a phone line analysis through that we, we did see some
savings that DIS helped us with, uh, and just realizing existing phone lines that have not been used for long periods of time, and they've helped us with
Speaker 227
54:01
that as well. So, thank you, thank you, Mr. Cha. Sent
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
54:13
her love. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I'm back on page 3 in regards to your shared services, and I know you said that, uh, or not just shared services,
but Your professional fees. I know that you said that you
transferred to $850,000 over for the Make them contract, but I'm noticing that in 2023, the actual was 559,000. That's under your professional fees, and I'm looking. And then I noticed that you reduced it to 93,000, um, uh, it wouldn't have really had this question, but Has Mangum had this contract, the, the advertising contract, have they had it for a number of years. OK, so.
Tell me what was the increase? It looks like
Jami Fisher
Unverified
55:06
paying them. Uh, so the actual expenditures were the 559 and fiscal year 24. It's a maximum of 850,000. They don't always, you know, expand the full maximum 850. It's not to exceed 850,000 per year. And so in fiscal year 24, it was just the 559,000. OK, so
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
55:23
that was, that was the 559,000 was what they spent. OK. All right.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Kavanaugh, you
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
55:35
recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair, um, the conversation about the grant and the appropriation going away for it. Which everybody knows I'm all for getting rid of appropriations and getting them down to actual spend, but as representative Wardlaw brought out, this is special revenue. It sits there. So what are you going to do with this special revenue? They're gonna let it sit there
and draw interest. What are you gonna do with it?
Jami Fisher
Unverified
56:06
In part, it will go to support the increase that we're asking for in conservation sales tax and Fund Center 476 on page 15 for that million dollars. It will also go to support the $850,000 marketing contract that's going there as well. So they're, there will be uses of that
Speaker 240
56:21
fund balance that we're being requested. So what I hear
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
56:25
you saying is you're gonna take away a grand opportunity for museums in the state of Arkansas and move it to another area in your area because you don't prioritize the museums in the state of Arkansas.
Because I'm gonna tell you from somebody sitting right here, I've got a museum in my district, and I'm sure everybody else does too, that could use part of this money. It's a World War II museum, telling the history of World War 2 in Arkansas. specifically in Walnut Ridge, what we did for the effort there. It is already a tourism draw. We get no assistance from the state on it after multiple times of asking for it. But you're gonna do away with
the ability to help museums like that and to put it to an advertising contract. I don't agree with that. That's this money was set aside to help museums like that. Another example is we're creating a museum for the Hoxy first stand, who talks about the first challenge integration in the United States. And we can't get money for that, but you can take that money and give $850,000 to advertise. That's not what that was
Speaker 244
57:51
designed for. I don't agree with that. Thank you. If you liked your microphone up,
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
58:06
it might be the proper time. Representative Kavanaugh, you're recognized for your motion. I will move for executive rec with the, with the exception that the funding amount for this particular grant stays at exact level with the explicit direction that I would like the agency to make sure and reach out to us and tell us how this funding can be used in our local districts.
second. It's proper motion in a second. All those in favor say aye. I opposed. I
have it So, still have a few questions, Senator Hammer, you recognize. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. 11 of the comments that was made on that subject just a minute ago was, you know, the challenge of what I would interpret as your view of picking winners and losers. Uh, is there not a grant process that you have in place with
regards to the money that's under discussion. To where you could Determine needs and appropriate grants on the basis of needs. Do you have that in place now, and how, how has it been utilized? Yes, we, uh, we administer multiple
Shea Lewis
Unverified
59:11
grants in different uh programs throughout uh the department and, and we can figure out a way to do that, uh, in the past as I alluded to, uh, with the chairman was specific to uh some executive direction
that we had received, so. You think
it'd be prudent to maybe evaluate that grant process so as to alleviate some of your concerns, uh, to where moving forward, especially after this motion that, um, You could, you could relieve yourself of some concerns as far as if you're gonna give grant money to, uh, Representative Kavanaugh's World War II museum over there or the bauxite museum down in Senator Clark's district, uh, to where you could do it in a way that, that it
Speaker 141
59:57
would be defensible. Yes, there's, there's certainly we can, we can create a process for
that. OK, and then I guess the next question is, why is that process not already been established in place if this legislation was passed that allowed that funding stream to go through. Why, why is it not already been put in place given the fact, I think it's 2 or 3 years that it's been sitting
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:00:19
there, right? It was not funded, uh, the previous year, uh, as well as I was under the impression that it was more of a, a, a one-time approach, um,
um, and not a something that was to be sustained, but that was just my. OK.
And then the last question is with what was just done in the way of a motion, um, and you got about 2 minutes to absorb that. How do you, how is this going to impact your budget as far as the, uh, advertising and the other things you intended to use that money for and did you come in here with a plan B and if so, what was it, please? We'll
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:00:52
have, we'll have to take a look at at fund sources as as well as balances for that and and and make a recommendation
for an amount. See no further questions for the following budgets. Do I have a motion for
executive Rick? 2nd. Oh, I'm sorry. Representative Bentley, he wasn't there when I said that you recognize I just make a recommendation
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:01:28
that we do, uh, on page 15 executive recommendation and replace the capital outlay that was inadvertently left off on page 15 to return that to 250,000. So executive recommendation and capital outline amended to $250,000.
is the executive branch OK with that? Representative Kavanaugh,
do you have a question on her motion? Yes. During all their
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:01:57
presentation, I didn't hear anything about them saying that they needed this additional appropriation that it was left out inadvertently or did I miss that? Yeah, it was, if you
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:02:08
look on page 15 on that capital outlay, inadvertently was left out, so I didn't hear them say that. That's what I'm asking
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:02:13
about is I never heard them ask for that
additional. I heard it on the 1st, 1st 1 we did, but I've never heard anything about
this one. They never go back to questioning to hear them. I need the motion withdrawn. Yes I'll
Speaker 102
1:02:28
hold the motion till we here. Thank you, Representative Kavanaugh,
would you like to question the secretary on that? Thank you. I heard on the first time
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:02:35
when she made the motion that it was inadvertently left off. I didn't hear it on this particular appropriation. That's right, and, and as uh we, we are making that
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:02:48
recommendation as well. This would also be used for, uh, this primarily in heritage is used for, uh, replacement of state vehicles. OK, so, How
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:02:59
come we had them left off invertently by not just you, but the executive both for us
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:03:05
it was simply a just a error in in review of the exact instructions we thought that for appropriations that we're gonna, we were requesting
the exact same amount again and that there were no changes to that those
carried over and we found out that they did not carry over and so, OK, and I want
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:03:23
to make sure that I do have somebody from the executive branch because this is 2 times it's happened that they're OK with it. somebody come down and say they're OK with that. Yeah. We, we have
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:03:37
the same issue in in each of the fund sources as well. So, uh, as we continue, there are 3 other requests if we can just do it this one time, then we should be. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Jim
Speaker 266
1:03:50
Hudson, Secretary of DFA. We were aware of the error. We, we were made aware of it by the agency. We support the change. OK, just
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:03:56
want to get that on the record so we don't have to ask it every time. So I appreciate it. Thank you.
All right. Representative Beatty. You have a question for the agency? You recognize. Thinking, can we just hold this until session?
You can, we can adopt executive rec today and then you can flag it in your name if you would like. OK, flag it in my name then. Got it done.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:04:39
Thank you. Representative Bentley, do you want to restate your motion? Yes, Chairman, thank you. So again, we will, uh, I make a motion to adopt executive rigs and amend capital outlay back to 250,000 that was in the year before. So on page 15. Thank you.
And that's adopt executive rate for all other. Yes. OK. That's a proper motion. I have 2. OK. I have a second. All those in favor, say ah. I'll post I have it Billy, you recognize to move
William Parrish
Unverified
1:05:12
on to the next item. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're in the parks and tourism division budget request. This is page 65 in the week 2 manual. So we're on page 65. The parks and tourism divisions missions to enhance quality of life through outdoor
experiences, connections to Arkansas heritage and resource management. There are 52 state parks located across the state. Pages 65 through 66 show an employment summary, publications, and state contracts awards minority owned businesses. On page 67 is the Department of Appropriation summary. The division has 12 appropriation requests. 5 sections have a change level for something other than the normal salary adjustments being carried over into the new biennium. The total authorized budget and
fiscal year 25 is $212 million in spending authority. The division requests $233 million for the biennial. That's almost a $21 million increase or a 10% change level. The executive recommendation provides for just 477,000 less than what the agency is requesting. The division is funded from general revenue, special revenue from 45% of the 18 cent conservation sales tax, federal funds, and cash funds from sales and rentals at state parks. Per the chair's request, the division, uh, returned 3.4
million in general revenue funds at the end of fiscal year 24. On page 72 is the first change level. On page 72's request for state operations, and it provides for the administration of the division. It's supported by a general revenue fund account. On page 73 is their summary in fiscal year 25, 18.46 million was authorized, uh, it's the same request for 26 and 27.
However, the executive recommendation is 382,000 less than the agency request for each year. Uh, those changes recur on the, uh, regular salaries on item 12.8 is authorized, uh, the request is again for 12.8, but the executive recommendations for 12.5, that's a 2% decrease in personal services matching. Uh, what was authorized in 25 is 5.6. The request for each year is 5.6% by the agency, but the executive recommendation is a 2% decrease of 5.4. And the executive recommendation
reclassifies 3 positions, discontinues a positions and removes the associated preparation for salary match, that's at $382,000 difference. Look at funding sources table, uh, the fund collected 18.65 million in general revenue. The division does not have carry for language, the art of fun balances. And there was a transfer of almost 3.8 million to shared services. The next change levels on the next page, page 74, this is conservation tax requests. It provides for the special revenue Administration of the division.
It's supported by a special revenue fund account. On page 75 is there a summary in 5th year 25, 65.7 million was authorized. The request for 26 and 27 is 80.1 million. That's a 22% increase. Uh, the executive recommendation is for 95,000 less than the agency requests each year. Uh, starting with regular salaries and 25, 6.9 was authorized. Requests for 7.7, that's an 11% increase. Personal
services matching was 3.18. The request is for 3.38%, that's a 6% increase. The salary match changes are due to adjustments for employees as authorized by law. The executive recommendation reclassifies 3 positions. This continues two positions and and uh also removes the associated appropriation by about 95,000. Looking at operating expenses, uh, in 25, 12.3 was authorized. The request for the biennium is 16. That's a 32% increase. This
is due to rising costs of operations associated with supply chain demand, utilities and network broadband expansion at parks. The next line items construction, 32.8 million was authorized. The request, uh, is 45.8 billion. That's a 40% increase. This is to support construction projects in progress and upcoming planned projects. The she told me this increase is needed for continued investment priority projects throughout the system and to support federal grants for the final phases of the Delta Heritage Trail. The increase
will also support development of the Mina Trail project at Queen Wilhelmina State Park. Uh, the next line is Capitol Outlay. 3.5 million was authorized. There is no request, but again, this is a part of the, uh, the line item that was inadvertently left off by the agency. Uh, if you look at funding sources, The funding balance going into fiscal year 24 is 49.26 million. The fund collected special revenue in the amount of 48.6 million. That's the 45% of the 18 cent uh conservation sales
tax, a transfer of 673,000 was sent to Shared Services and the division spent 43.9 million in fiscal year 24. That leaves a balance of 53.25 million going into fiscal year 25. The next, uh, change levels on page 78. Page 78 is a request for tourism promotion. It provides for the administration of that program. On page 79 is the appropriation summary. In fifth year 25, 28.4 million
was authorized. The requests for the biennium is 33.2 million. That's a 17% increase in the executive recommendation provides for that request. Uh, the change levels began with capital outlay. It was authorized was 125,000. Again, that request is 0 because it was inadvertently left off. The next line items, advertising expense, uh, 25, 19.26 million was authorized. The requests for 26 and 27 is 24.2 million, it's. $5 million difference. It's a 26% increase. Uh, this is to
support growth and enhanced promotion in advertisement of outdoor recreation through regional, national, and international initiatives. The agency told me that this will be through additional media buys year round, they advertise Arkansas as a destination for premier outdoor recreation. If you look at the funding sources table, uh, the balance going into fiscal year 24 was 14.3 million. The fund collected special revenue in the amount of 24.8 million, that's a 2% gross receipts tax on tourism related business, the transfer, uh,
there was a transfer of 714,000 shared services and the division spent 22.28 million in fiscal year 24, that leads the balance of 16.4 million going into fiscal year 25. The next change level is on page 82. On page 82 is their operations and construction, cash and treasury request, and it provides for staff and operational support to park and museum activities on page 83 is their summary.
In fiscal year 25, 36.9 million was authorized. The request for 26 and 27 is 40.9 million, that's 11% increase, and the executive recommendation provides for that request. The change levels begin with regular salaries. 8.5 was authorized, 9.7 is the request. That's a 14% increase. Extra help, 5.3 was authorized. The request is 6.5 million. That's a 24% increase, uh, personal services matching 491,000 was authorized, 4.5 million is the request. That's a
10% increase. Uh, salary changes or adjustments, uh, and adjustments are for employees as authorized by law. The extra help and personal services matching increased to support the hiring during peak season operations. And operating expenses, $10.4 million was authorized. Uh, the requests in 26 and 27 is 11.5 million. That's an 11% increase. This is to support rollout of a new point of sale reservation system and included merchant fees. Uh, the next line item is resale, uh, 5,058,000 was
authorized, 5.5 million is is the ask. That's a 10% increase. It's uh again due to rising cost of inventory and then the next line item is Capital Outlay, 500,000 authorized. There is no requests, but again, that was inadvertently left off. Looking at funding sources, the cash fund balance going into fiscal fiscal year 24 was 11.18 million. The fund collected cash fund, uh, it, it collected cash funds and that line shows 40.6 million, that's fees, rentals, and sales from state park
system. The division spent 36.76 million in fiscal year 24, and that leaves a balance of 14.38 million going into fiscal year 25. The next uh change levels on page 90. On page 90, it's a Delta Heritage Trail grant cash fund requests, and this section spins a grant from the Walton Family Foundation and a federal raise grant on the development of a Delta Heritage Trail State Park.
It's supported by a cash fund account. On page 91, is their summary, uh, in fiscal year 25, 40.48 million was authorized the requests for the biennium is 37.8 million. That's a 6% decrease. Uh, the executive recommendation provides for that request. It all happens on the construction lot item. Uh, this is to align appropriation with the remaining costs to construct the park. The agency told me that 9 miles of trail from Elaine to Millwood in 12 miles from Millwood to Snow Lake had
been completed. Trails under construction include 1.72 mile section over the Arkansas River, uh, remaining projects using the federal raise funds include the White River to Arkansas River, uh, Snow Lake to White River, Benzel Bridge, and the Benzel Bridge. Looking at funding sources, the fundal going into fiscal year 24 was 10.15 million. The fund collected cash funds, uh, shows 347,000. This is the interest earned on the cash balance. The division spent 2.6 million in
fiscal year 24, and that leaves a balance of 7.89 million going into fiscal year 25. Uh, Mr. Chair, that is the end of the parks and tourism budget requests. Representative Kavanaugh, you're recognized
Chair
Unverified
1:15:29
for the question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:15:31
I have several in this area, so I'm just gonna kinda go real quick. My first question is going to be on page 69, which is the, um,
outdoor grant program. You're asking for a continuation of the, um, Appropriation that you have. I go back and look at your historic spend and historic high spend has been 2.3 million. Um, sorry, this is page 69, um, but you're asking for a continuation of 8.3 mL and I realized those are federal funds, but are we expecting to get $8 million from the feds for this program?
Jami Fisher
Unverified
1:16:13
So this is our land water conservation fund, and those funds do fluctuate. So this is the authority and ability to spend, but we will
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:16:20
block down whatever we don't receive in federal funding. Well, I realize this is an appropriation. This is your credit limit, but my, you didn't answer my question. My question is that you historically have not spent near this amount of money. You have spent your high historic has been 2.3 mil, but you're asking for 8.3 million. Are we anticipating that the feds are gonna fluctuate 5 million. us in their funding that they give us. So there's a a couple
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:16:40
of factors in it, uh, one of the factors is
the amount of time that these grant
periods take, so having the funds available over up to a 4-year period, uh, in the distribution of those funds, uh, can get complicated in that as well. The other, uh, aspect is, yes, uh, there are, uh, congressional acts right now that are looking to find, uh, great outdoors, uh, for the purpose of
funding LWCF. I don't know if we'll see. $5 million to that but we have seen growth in the last couple
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:17:15
of years from that. OK, all right, and my other question is gonna be on page 75. Well, my second question actually. Um, this is doing with the increase for the construction. Um, you're asking for a $13 million increase, your historic high spend has been 15.6 million, um, so we're gonna be increasing it when our current appropriation would cover historically based on an additional 13 mL. Why are we asking?
For 13 million above when we don't even. Spa what we historically, we don't spend our appropriation. Why we need to increase it 13. What constructions are gonna cost us that
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:17:57
much money. So, uh, part of the construction planning process is the reason we
need that that uh space under the appropriation for it when you start a design project and have to certify those funds, uh, at the beginning uh of those projects, uh, before bidding or having those funds available,
uh, for construction. It often is kind of this revolving pattern that takes place, so you may start depending on when you start design versus when you start construction depends on when you need to have the funds available to that and for us it, it's this never ending cycle. It just doesn't fall perfectly within the fiscal year, so, uh, we are on pace this year to spend more funds, uh, from Amendment 75 for the purposes of construction than we ever have before, um,
but we also have some really big projects out there, uh, including, uh, work at uh Queen Welmina State Park and the Mina Trails Project, uh, as well as Delta Heritage Trail that was mentioned earlier too. We also have some projects that Devil's Den and Queen Wilelmina. I'm sorry, uh Delta Heritage though has a special line item for it, so it's not
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:19:05
included in this. So it, it has its own, uh, appropriation for that because it's a mash from the Walton Foundation, so that doesn't go into this. So what I would like to do is have a list of those
projects that required this additional, so we can kind of know. where the money is actually going, um, because that's a big increase when you're not even historically spending what you already have, um, and then on page 79, we're doing a $5 million increase in advertising. And Is that advertising across the board for Parks and heritage or is that just gonna be one specific area technically falls
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:19:42
under the tourism division, so, uh, you know, we've been fortunate to see, uh, receipts
grow in tax collection for the 2% tourism tax that was created for the purpose of promotion of the state. We've been working closely with the State Park Recreation Travel Commission on a, uh, task force to help see how those funds could be best utilized for the promotion of the state and that's what those that recommendation, so we don't, we don't currently have a use for this. We're
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:20:10
thinking we're going to do this, but we don't really know how we're going to use it. We, we are putting a
plan together right now for you because we don't really, it's not out to a contract to anybody. You don't have a plan yet, OK. And my last question is on page 85. Um, this is the retirement relocation program, um, it has a fund
balance of $16.89 million. What are we doing with that money? It's a
Jami Fisher
Unverified
1:20:40
it's a shared fun balance with the previous request on Fun Center, um, For the other 2% tourism.
Speaker 56
1:20:49
their, their primary budget in 504. OK, so But what
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:20:53
are we doing with that money? You, you have a fund balance of $16.8 million. It's not being spent. And it's designed for this program, so what's it being used for? Or is it just sitting
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:21:07
there? So this year we have budgeted just under a million dollars and we we've got a couple of
things that are in the works specifically. Uh, we are partnering with the Department of Commerce on life works here
program, a promotion of workforce development, uh, and promotion of the state as a whole to where we're inviting uh people from around the country and across the world to come to Arkansas. Uh, live here, become part of the workforce, uh, and enjoy the quality of life that we offer and so there's a promotion campaign that we're partnering with Commerce on. We also are working with locations like Hot Springs Village and some other retirement communities on a couple of uh travel shows uh
where these where you work, uh, and promote the state in those, so that's part of where those funds
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:21:56
are going, OK, so if it's a million dollars, you've got $16.8. You can almost do that for 17 years. What can these? lines be used for,
Speaker 173
1:22:06
it's a repeat of the fund balance that's shown on page 79. It's a shared fund
Jami Fisher
Unverified
1:22:11
balance between those two sources. So, That's why it's reflected it so high. OK, so you don't
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:22:17
have, you don't have a fine balance of 16.4 and
you don't have a fund balance. What page
is that one now? And you don't have, but they're not the same, so how is it shared? So I guess what I'm asking is, is it really 32 million that you have a fund balance?
Speaker 56
1:22:42
No, the 16.5 is the total fund balance. OK, well,
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:22:44
on page 85, it shows it to be 16.8. So I'd like a clarification
about how much is in each one of these
because this is misleading about what your fund balance is. If we could get that corrected, I would appreciate it.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:23:09
Thank you. So Irvin, you reckon? Thank you. Um, also with, with that information, I'd like to know historically what those funds have been spent on. Um Because that's a lot of money sitting there, and there's a lot of areas of the state where
tourism are, is the key driving economic. Component of those very rural communities. And this money can be well spent. I have asked repeatedly for the Buffalo River Conservation Committee, which is now in statute to be funded at the same level that Governor Hutchinson supported it at. And there are entities all across the state. Where this could be utilized. Rural Arkansas depends on tourism.
There are so many areas of rural Arkansas that depend on tourism as the main driver of their economy. There are small businesses all along these small, these main streets and all these rural towns. Y'all might not live there, but I do. A lot of us live there. We live in rural Arkansas. We're the legislature. We represent rural Arkansas. I cannot say this repeatedly enough and enough and enough, I want you
all to understand, you grow tourism through promoting and helping those rural economies that depend on tourism. And so if this money is sitting here, why can't we utilize it? Better. Instead of just collecting interest on it. We've got to create those partnerships. If you look at the reports that were done by the Buffalo River Conservation Committee, which is a huge part of north central
Arkansas. In here, I have appropriations for the Delta. Which is great. I want, I want to support everything that's happening in the Delta. But there are other areas of the state of Arkansas that are just as important, that are just as poor. There are parts of the river valley that are just as poor. There are parts of southwest Arkansas that are just as poor nor Central Arkansas that are just as poor as the delta. There's a lot of cultural and
heritage in all of the areas of our state. We've got to stop just focusing on doing what we've always done, and we've got to do better at partnership with these small chambers of commerce and small rural towns. And so my plea to you is I want to know exactly what you're doing to, to help that. And why can't we utilize these funds? And if you look at the report from the Buffalo River Conservation Committee, which brought together 4 different
agencies. It was the most efficient and effective use of funds. I would argue in state government, because it was grassroots driven, and it was all different types of sectors that we were able to help and Mr. Secretary Lewis, you're a huge part of that. I mean, all of you were a huge part of that. And that was excellent, excellent work. And that model could be replicated all across the state of Arkansas. For different pockets and areas,
and it would be a much wiser and better use of money than some of the other ways that we're spending tourism and advertising dollars, to be honest, because you're actual grassroots are meeting together. They're discussing the issues and they're solving the problems at hand, and they're promoting exactly what's gonna work. Because you're listening to the people on the ground there versus listening to someone in a big haros in downtown Little Rock. So, my challenge to you is get us this information and then figure out how you partner with
us. We're the legislature representing all these areas of the state. So I, I, I hope that, you know, as we move through this budget cycle, we can look at trying to go back and see what's being effective and fund those things that are effective. And that's a good use of that money, and there's no reason in the world why you couldn't find something that's already in statute that worked and worked well. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So along those lines.
I want to capitalize on this moment, Senator Irvin is teed up for me. If we go to page 91. And we look at the Delta Heritage Trail, which is in my rural district. I'm blown away that we're budgeting $37.8 million or $0.88 million to be exact. And it looks like 20 of that or over half of that is federal funding. Can you walk me through the plans and what it looks like on the expenditure
side of the net, just the next physical year, not necessarily the whole biennial. But that seems like a
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:28:12
lot of money. For levye trail. It is uh it's been a, it's gonna end up being state park's largest investment in in a single location, uh, eventually the last 3 phases of a construction at Delta Heritage State Park will cost $47 million. That includes, um, a, a large area includes the crossing of the Arkansas River. It also
includes a large amount of trestle, elevated trestle to be replaced or repaired, uh, for the purpose of of the trail itself and so that investment uh is is big we're we're really excited about this opportunity, the, the completion of the trail is one part of this just making the physical physical trail be completed. The second part of this and, and the part that's
gonna is gonna be support structures and facilities that go alongside the trail, whether that's overnight
facilities or camping or uh other support structures, uh, to help facilitate the experience along the trail, and that's gonna also require uh further investment, but the dollars that you're seeing here are directly related to the completion and construction of the final phases of that we have. Uh, Jeff King, our deputy director is here, if we have specific questions about what is under, we have several sections
under construction right at this point in time. So what's the projected completion date? So we are looking
Speaker 295
1:29:31
about this time next year. OK, so it will be completed in
the next fiscal year, yes. OK. Thank you. Uh, we do have.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:29:45
Representative Collins, do you recognize? Thank you. Um, so I'm looking at, um, I guess page
73 and 75, and it looks to me and correct me if I'm wrong, that, uh, the executive recommendation is to cut about 10 positions and I, I realize those are not filled, but I, I guess I just wanna ask you guys because it's a red flag for me a little bit when it
feels like in a lot of areas of state government, but especially parks and tourism, we're asking. People to do more with less and, and on both sides of that we're asking parks and tourism to be, you know, the key industry maybe for our entire state and be what brings people in and generates all this revenue. We have such high expectations, we're doing a lot of new things and you know, here we are cutting positions. I, I realized that again, they're not filled, but as we
ramp up, are we gonna need those positions? I'm just concerned. I wanna. Just get your explanation and if you agree
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:30:49
with this executive recommendation and why the
positions that are on the list are related to places where we have changed our operations um we have some security officers, uh, we have, uh, some entry level service uh positions, desk clerks, maintenance assistants, which are GSO ones, uh, as well as some administrative, uh, specialist positions within our
central office we have kind of changed our way of working with administrative specialists and and in in state parks specifically have gone to a pool approach instead of each um let's say executive level, uh, leadership position, having support positions to help that we've gone to a pool approach where one person is responsible for procurement, one person's responsible for and then the team goes to that person for specific needs, so that's uh allowed us to make these changes
that you're seeing, so I think the positions that we have identified here. are positions that have been vacant, some going on, uh, almost 5 years or some as many as 6 years and that, that we can, uh, live without.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:31:55
But just to clarify, your recommendation was to keep the positions, that's the executive. Is that right?
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:32:01
I mean, we've been working with uh OPM on the Act 796
of trying to prioritize what the what positions that we really need and and we've placed more emphasis on the
professional level positions, but another thing that we've done is, is worked to find uh employees that are capable of multiple things, pay them a little bit more, uh, and, and then, uh. Increase productivity in that direction, so these, most of these positions that have been identified here have been vacant for a
long period of time. So you don't think this is going to put strain on the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:32:33
people working on the ground in parks and tourism and, and it's not going to make it harder for you to keep people and fill positions. Not, not at these locations
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:32:43
specifically. I also feel like we have a process in place that if if a key location needs a position we can make
those requests. We can also uh transfer other positions, but as to. Representative Wootton's questions earlier we're, we're. Evaluating positions every single day and the priority shifts. You, you look at a place like Delta Heritage Trail, coming on board with 86 miles of trail, we're gonna have to add some positions there, none
of these positions would be, uh,
positions that we would consider, uh, adding at that location and so uh. The only I guess thought process behind maybe using these would be trading those in towards another position to get us what we need at Delta Heritage Trailer. Or one of the other locations is a priority right now. Representative Kavanaugh, you recognize. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:33:45
Something you, uh, said caught my attention. I wanna make sure I understood when Representative Wardlaw was asking you when that project was going to be finished down there, um, and that is the money that's a match for the Walton Foundation, correct? OK, uh, you said it was gonna be finished next fiscal year.
That would be 26, so why are we at, so we're asking it to go through fiscal year 27. Because
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:34:10
Timing of payments, um, if there were change orders or you also
have a warranty period that takes place for a year after construction, so if there was something that was going on, let's say something was constructed a certain way and we needed to change that still needing some
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:34:30
flexibility to pay during those periods. Would you already not have paid those bills in
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
1:34:35
26? Depending on the completion date itself. We're, we're very hopeful that we can finish um by fall of next year, but,
you know, time, oh. OK, and I guess the other
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:34:47
question is, if that's when it's going to be finished. Why do we keep asking for the full appropriation when we're spending that down. Why do we keep asking for the 37.8 when we know that
we've already paid part of that money. I guess that's one other question.
Speaker 306
1:35:03
Hi, Jeff King, Deputy director for the division of State Parks. So just to clarify, and this is this kind of goes back to, to one of your previous questions, Representative Kavanaugh is, um, we're gonna utilize some state funds from Amendment 75 to really get the project underway
and under contract, uh, once we do that, we'll receive reimbursement of those federal funds after the project is completed, so this will also allow cash, those cash dollars to be put toward future state park projects so that's, that's really the the reason to keep. Moving forward into the future, uh, years after the Delta Heritage Trail project is complete. OK, so I wanna make sure we're getting how much money from the
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:35:38
Walton Foundation for this? $20 million. OK, and then is that we're using 20 million for the federal, we use, how much money are we using for federal
Speaker 306
1:35:49
and how much from state. Federal is 20.48 million. That's the raise grant. And so, uh, there's a matching component there, 80/20, and so, um, and then the, the Walton Family Foundation grant is a 1 to 1 matching grant, so, uh, that's where all these pieces kind of tie together on the increased appropriation request from Amendment 75, um, and then back to these cash funds. OK. Appreciate that, but you didn't ask me how much
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:36:12
is the state putting in? With the matches.
So we got 2 from the feds, basically, 2 from the Walton Foundation. And how much From state. And it's special revenue. It's not GR
so, but how much? I'd like to get you that in a you don't mind, I would appreciate that. OK, thank
you. In your hammer, you reckon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, 2 questions.
Do you have a study that shows the return on investment for the advertising dollars that you are spending out. I know this has gotten covered in another committee sometime in the last few months, but how do you justify the amount of money that you're spending on advertising to know that you're getting a return on investment. Senator Hammer, we just had our economic
Speaker 318
1:37:29
impact report, and we all failed to walk out of the
office without it, but we will provide that to you and all the
members. All right. Chair, Mr. Chair, they can send it to you and get it out to us, please. Um, second one is with the, with the talk of giving up the positions and the talk of bringing the trail online. Um What the safety feature as far as policing that route, uh, because people are going to be vulnerable out there on that route. The positions that you're talking about giving up, or have
you taken that into consideration to make sure that you have adequate patrol on that trail and how's that fall in the mix of giving up positions. That's correct,
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:38:17
uh, and, and as we continue to build out Delta Heritage Trail State Park and, and the linear nature of that park, it, it does have
some, you know, strategic challenges associated with how you manage that and manage safety on that as well. We will have park rangers, uh, that will be
stationed along that trail. We'll have also park interpreters who are not commissioned officers, uh, that will be present there, uh, as well to help protect and and maintain safety on. So you have
positions, you're not giving up positions or those positions are protected to make sure that safety's there, so
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:38:52
we're in the process of working, uh, just through some law enforcement changes within the uh division specifically and through that process we have uh created uh some uh sergeant type approach that that where a
sergeant will cover an area or district that would include Delta Heritage Trail. So, so we do have some of those positions available. The other position that will be needed through that change will be handled through attrition or through, um, as positions are vacated moving those positions to that need. Did you want to say something on
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
1:39:27
the in there so I was just gonna add that um this is also um overlaid with a wildlife management area and, and many county, um, jurisdictions, and
it's going to have to be a team approach that's kind of knitted together because it is such a vast area. It will require a lot of multi-jurisdictional support. I
just want to make sure anybody goes on that trails safe and protected. Thank you. Representative
Eubank should recognize for a quick question. Thank you,
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
1:40:03
Mr. Chair. Uh, a few terms back, we passed some
legislation dealing with uh the, the wine industry and I believe there was supposed to be some money dedicated towards a visitor center and uh the Alus area. What's, what is the status of that? Senator,
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
1:40:23
that is um in uh commerce's budget currently, uh, and we are actually visiting with them as we speak about, you know, the future of that program, because it's not within
Speaker 322
1:40:39
our, um, appropriation. All right. Thank you. It may need to
be moved. Again This won't be the first time. Alright, members, uh, do I have a motion for
executive Rick? I have a motion. Do I have a second. capital
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:41:01
Boy, this is getting old. Representative Bentley, you recognize. Thank you, Chairman. I make a motion for executive rigs and to, uh, make an amendment on page 75, 75, 75, 79, 83 to, uh,
put back the capital outlay that was inadvertently left out. So, page 75 is 3.5 million, page 79 is 125,000 page 83, it's 500,000, so that's my motion. Proper motion to
Speaker 296
1:41:25
have a 2nd. I was a favor Say ah. I'll post no. I have
it. With that members, we missed two budgets. I'm going to have Mr. Billy go ahead and
Do both of those budgets and when we get done, we'll have to have a motion to include both budgets. Or allow them to be batched. Mr. Parris, you're recognized.
William Parrish
Unverified
1:41:53
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My apologies, members, uh, go to page 50, please. Page 50 in your manual. This is the Arkansas Arts Council. It's a part of the division of Heritage Appropriation Acts. So on page 50. And the Arts Council seeks to advance the arts in Arkansas. The council expands cultural and educational opportunities by investing in museums, theaters, symphonies, and other providers
of artistic programming, uh, and page 50 shows state contracts award to minority owned businesses and employment summary and publications on page 51, is there a appropriation summary. The division has two appropriation requests. The only change level is request for match adjustments to continue into the biennium. The total authorized budget and fiscal year 25 is 1.24 million. The executive recommendation is to discontinue a position and the Associated appropriation. Uh, division is funded from federal grants and cash funds, uh, from registration fees,
sales and interest income. On page 52 is the change level. This is the Arts Council Federal program. On page 53 is a summary, uh, what was authorized in 25 was 945,000, uh, the request for 26 and 27 is uh 945,729, so it's less than 1% increase. Um, the executive recommendations for a 5% decrease. Those change levels begin with regular salaries, 77,000 was authorized. That is a request by the agency, uh, but
the executive recommendations for 45,000 or 42% decrease. Personal services matching was 36,000. uh, authorized request is for 37,000, that's a 2% increase, and the executive recommendation is for 20,000. That's a 44% decrease. The agency request increase is uh for match due to adjustments to employee salaries. It's authorized by law. The executive recommendation is to discontinue a position and associate salary match, that's about 49,000 less than the agency requests.
You look at fund sources, uh, the fun balance going into fiscal year 24 is 55,000. The fund collected federal revenue, the amount of 1.3 million. The division spent 861,000 in fiscal year 24. That leaves a balance of 502,000 going into fiscal year 25. That is the only change level for the Arts Council. I've been instructed to move forward with the next budget. It is for the natural and cultural Resources Council. This begins on page 57. So if you move to page 57 in
your manual, uh, the natural and cultural Resources Council administers a grant and trust fund for the acquisition management and stewardship of state-owned properties acquired or used for council approved purposes, grants are for projects to uh protect and maintain state-owned natural areas, historic sites, and outdoor recreation, uh, on page 57 shows state contracts and um that are awarded to minority owned businesses and their publications on page 58 is the appropriation. Summary. The division has 3 appropriation requests. There
are no change levels. The total authorized budget fiscal year 25 is 54 million. The council requests 54 million for the biennium. The executive recommendation provides for that request. The division is funded from proceeds from the state's real estate transfer tax, and, uh, the first appropriations for 0. This is to allow the appropriation to be transferred in from the 2nd section. The second section transfers appropriation to agencies when grants are made by the council for the acquisition, management, and stewardship of state-owned property.
The 3rd section does the same for the Main Street and State Historic Preservation programs, you will not see actual expenses for the last two sections. Special language specifies that when grants are made to state agencies from these sections, the corresponding amount of of appropriation and funding may be transferred to the receiving state agency. Therefore, actual expenditures are reflected by the recipient agency. But sure those are both the budget requests. Thank you, Mr. Parris. Representative
Kavanaugh, you recognize. Thank you. Um thank
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:45:54
you, Mr. Chair. Mine's gonna be on these interstate, um, Transfers
on the first page, uh, 62, there was an interstate trans um agency, should I say fund transfer of 35.2 mil. Where did that actually go?
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:46:26
Were, were you looking for a specific list of where all the, the, the, the grant
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:46:32
funds went to, we just say it's an interagency fund transfer. So what interagency did we transfer that to? So these awards are to
Jami Fisher
Unverified
1:46:40
other state agencies and state-owned properties. So it is a list that is primarily made up of universities, um, heritage receives receives a portion as well as state parks. Um, the governor's office or governor's mansion, it's, it's a list of
Speaker 240
1:46:57
awarding agencies. We have 23 in total for you if you could
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
1:47:00
provide that list of staff so they can get it out and also the same thing for page for
Main Street would be good. All right, thank
you. Senator Hammer, you recognize us. Thank you, and I may have missed. I got distracted a minute ago dealing with something else, but you're eliminating a position is what I understood the responsibilities that would have been assigned to that position, who's going to assume that responsibility.
Shea Lewis
Unverified
1:47:31
If you said that, I'm sorry, I may have missed it, it's administrative support position that has been in the the efforts of
that position have been absorbed in different ways. OK, all right, um. And the
amount of funding that was assigned to that one position. is going to remain the same, so whoever is going to absorb those responsibility will Will perform the functions of that portion of the, of the budget minus the cost of that position.
Or is that funding staying in there for that position that you're going to absorb into, um, somebody else's duties. Do they know that's coming yet or are they finding out this
Speaker 207
1:48:12
morning. It's vacant already and uh have those those responsibilities have already been absorbed. OK, thank you. Senator Irvin, you reckon. Thank
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:48:26
you. Sorry, one last question. Yesterday in joint performance review, I believe, um, Senator Hammer just brought this to my
attention that, um, the Buffalo River Conservation Committee is, um, not complied with Act 276 of 2021. Um, which requires a report of the regularly scheduled meeting dates for the state board or commission for the previous two fiscal years, um, so I know you're not the chair of that, but that needs to occur because we have had meetings, but furthermore, when I have tried to call to schedule a meeting, I have been told, why do we need
to meet? because we have no funding. So this is again, this is in statute that we're supposed to be meeting quarterly. This was a statue. passed by this legislature, and there's a lot of people other than just me that really love the Buffalo River all across the state of Arkansas. So I get phone calls from people from every corner of the state about this because they've been involved in this. So, again, you know, I would ask, number one, let's look at really considering.
I think appropriately funding this, but 2, making sure that we're complying with the laws of the state of Arkansas by both submitting the reports required and by meeting and having the quarterly meetings that we're supposed to be having. I'll reach out to Secretary Ward and Corey on that, appreciate that
Speaker 260
1:49:54
very, very much. Thank you. And again, thank
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:49:56
you for your work on that. Y'all have been stellar and spectacular. I just want to continue the work. Thank you.
Seeing no further questions, do I have a batch motion for executive rec on these two and do they have capital outlay that has to
be added, I have a motion. Do I have a second? Of 2, all those in favor, say ah. I'll post. I have it with that, we'll
move on to the Capitol zoning district, uh, Mr. Parris, you recognized. Thank you, Miss Cher, we're on page 4, so all the way back to the
William Parrish
Unverified
1:50:35
front of the manual, page 4. This is the Capital zoning
District commission. The commission regulates zoning development and design within the Capitol zoning district pursuant to a master plan formulated and maintained by the commission. Page 4 shows state contracts awards of minority owned businesses and employment summary and publications. On page 5, is there an appropriation summary. The division has, um, excuse me, division has two appropriation sections. One has a change level, the total authorized budget and fiscal year 25 is
258,000, uh, the commission requests less than 1% change level for the personal services matching for the biennial. The executive recommendation provides for that agency request. The commission is funded from general revenue, cash funds, and cash funds in the form of civil funds. On page 6 is that change level it's for the capital zone, uh, Capital zoning district state operations on page 7 is their summary and fiscal year 25, 256,050 was authorized. The request for the biennium is 257,040. That's a less than 1%
change level and the executive recommendation provides for that. This all occurs on the personal services matching line item, and this is a change due to adjustments for employees as authorized by law. If you look at the funding sources table, the commission, uh, collected. 144,000 from general revenue and their mis miscellaneous agencies fund account and they made a $6000 transfer to their shared services section. Mr. Chair, that is the only change level for the capital zoning district. Thank you, seeing no questions do we have a motion?
Speaker 190
1:52:13
No motion. Do I second? Have 2 all those in favor. Say ah. All posed. I have it. Thank
you, Mr. Secretary. With that, we'll move to, uh, DFNA. Give you guys a second to change out the table and introduce yourselves for the record, Mr. Chair. Can
Speaker 116
1:52:34
I say something. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I also
Speaker 156
1:52:39
like to let the committee know, for the 1st 2 on the
agenda on for, um, Department of Administrative Services and alcohol beverage Control Administration. We have a handout that we'll be using on the table. It's, it's, you'll see it's stable together. It says Department of Finance Administration, administration and shared services on the top and the presentation will be from this handout and after we do these two, then we'll go back to the agenda, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Adam, you're identified. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Our first
Speaker 335
1:53:17
appropriation, we're starting on page one of your handout. This is for DFA administration and Shared Services. You'll see on page 1A, the appropriation summary. Now there are 8 appropriations you'll see here, only one of them continues into the next into the biennium because those other 7 appropriations are being transferred. To ABC administration. And so we'll cover those right after we finish this one. So the only appropriation that
is remaining in this section. Department of Finance and Administration is a state central services funded appropriation that provides for the operations of the Shared Services division of DFA. You'll see their appropriation summary on page 1C. The agency is requesting appropriation in the amount of $4.7 million for FY 26 and 27. And includes the following changes. You'll see those changes on page 1B. They're asking to restore one growth pool position approved by
personnel subcommittee in February 2023. And they're asking for the transfer of one position to DFA revenue division. The executive recommendation provides for the agency request and the reclassification of 3 positions. Next, we'll move to page 2. This is moving straight into DFA alcoholic beverage Control Division. On page 2A, you'll see their appropriation summary. With the those 7. Appropriations transfer the
agency has 9 total appropriations for the new biennium. The agency has stated transferring these appropriations in will allow them to better use and allocate funding since all these divisions are part of DFA regulatory division. These 9 total appropriations have a total agency request of 8.2 million for FY 26 and 27. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request with the transfers, I'll go through each of these
appropriations on page 3A is the summary for untaxed tobacco forfeiture. Funding is provided by the tobacco forfeiture fund. And agency requests they want to transfer this $100,000 into the new fund center and the executive recommendation provides for the agency request on 3A and 3B you'll see their appropriation summary. Page 4, this is uh what was regulatory division. This is combines alcohol or
Arkansas tobacco Control and ABC's enforcement division. This appropriation is funded by general revenue and transfers from medical marijuana implementation and operations fund. On page 4A and 4B, you'll see their appropriation summary. The agency is requesting appropriation in the amount of 3.2 million in FY 26 and FY 27. And the agency requests includes. On page 4 you'll see the following the total.
The total changes with the transfer. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request and the reclassification of 4 positions. Page 5, you have sales to minor enforcement. And this is a cash fund. Page 5A and 5B, you'll see their appropriation summary. The agency is requesting appropriation in the amount of 1.1 million for FY 26 and FY 27.
And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request. On page 6. You have cigarette fire safety, Arkansas Tobacco Control, page 6A and 6B are going to be their appropriation summaries. And the agency is requesting to continue appropriation in the amount of $50,000 each year of the biennium. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request.
On page 7, this is one of the appropriations that does have a change level different from the transfer. This is the tobacco inspection program you'll see their appropriation summaries on 7A and 7B. The agency is requesting uh appropriation the amount of $672,000 for FY 26 and FY 27. And this includes an increase in their operating expenses line item on page 7B. They're asking an increase of $30,000 in appropriation to
support costs related to vehicle rentals and enforcement costs. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request. On page 8, there's with ABC administration. This is Spiritous and Vinus beverages. Agency request they're requesting appropriation to continue for $300,000 each year in the biennium. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request.
On page 9. There's ATC revenue enforcement. This is another appropriation that does have a change level aside from the transfer. On page 9A and 9B, you'll see their appropriation summaries. The agency is requesting appropriation of the amount of 1.1 million for FY 26 and FY 27. And this includes in their conference and travel expenses line item on 9B. They're asking for an increase of $5000 in appropriation each
year to allow additional staff to attend conferences and seminars. And the executive recommendation provides for the agency request the reclassification of two positions, the discontinuation of one position. And associated salary and matches appropriation. On page 10 this these are the next two appropriations are the ones that were already in ABC administration. This is their state operations appropriation. This is funded by miscellaneous agencies and general revenue.
Their appropriation summary is on page 11. The agency is requesting appropriation in the amount of 1.1 million for both years of the biennium. This includes the following changes they're asking to restore one growth pool position approved by ALC in April 2024. And they're asking to reallocate $5000 from professional fees to conference and travel expenses due to increased costs of conference travel and to allow additional staff to travel for professional development.
The executive recommendation provides for the agency request the discontinuation of one position and the associated salary and matching appropriation. On page 12 and 13. This is our last appropriation for ABC administration. This is the Medical marijuana commission. This is funded from cultivation and dispensary application of license fees. The agency is continue requesting appropriation in the amount of $500,000 each year of the biennium that includes a
discontinuation of $2 million in their contingency appropriation line item you'll see that on page 13. The agency states this is no longer needed and the executive recommendation provides for the agency request. And Mr. Chair, that concludes my presentation for DFA Administration Shared Services and ABC Administration. Thank you. We got a couple of questions. Senator
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:00:53
Irvin, is your question for staff or agency? I OK, you're recognized.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:01:04
OK, thank you, um, so it could be, uh, it could, it, it deals with medical marijuana, and it could be medical
marijuana commission, where you have excess funding. It looks to me. Um, or the regulatory side of things on page 4B. But the question to you is. I'm not sure if you tuned in to one of our public health committee meetings where the Arkansas Center for Health Improvement actually gave a
fabulous report about medical marijuana and, uh, And, and the data that they have been able to produce, but one of the big takeaways from that is, it is really, really important that we have the ability for the prescription drug monitoring program to have listed. People that have medical marijuana cards. In that registry. It, for, for physicians and and
nurses and anybody who is prescribing. Particularly narcotics or opioids or anything like that. It's very, very important that they know if that person is also using medical marijuana. And we have, they have no ability to know that. We have a system through the Department of Health, the PDMP where that information could be uploaded into that program. I think it's appropriate that
the funding come from the medical marijuana. Uh, fees or funds to assist the Department of Health to make sure that that PDMP has that information that's really, really important to all prescribers in the state of Arkansas. It's really for safety of patients, it's safety of personnel working in our hospitals or anywhere else. It's just good information. And so, um, Is there a way that we could do
that through either one of these appropriations. I'll
Speaker 343
2:03:13
take a crack at it and then I'll switch over to with Andy, correct me. You know, I don't think it's a question of using one of these uh sorry, secretary Jim Hudson, secretary of DFA. Uh, good morning, uh, committee. I
Speaker 266
2:03:25
this question of using one of these appropriations because they really are tied toward the regulatory activity. I think what, what you're asking is, can the medical marijuana funds be a source of fund for potentially some appropriation at the health department or elsewhere to fund that activity.
I do think that there is a healthy fund balance for, for medical marijuana. Um, I think it just be a question of the appropriate appropriation activity to authorize that. Fair
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:03:54
statement, Andy. Well, you could, it could have a regulatory function if you allowed regulators to access
Speaker 346
2:04:03
the PDMP. Andy Babbitt with DFA, um, I, I agree with the secretary. Uh, I think currently in law, Health
Department already has access to certain levels of funding from medical marijuana. So it'd simply be, uh, I've asked about this, they say
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:04:19
that there's not enough funds to be able to do that. So, How
Speaker 345
2:04:26
about I have a conversation with Secretary Mall and then with you and let's just kind of
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:04:31
figure out what the, I, I, I think it's really, really important. And, and if you go back and watch the testimony that was given during the public health committee. It
is very clear that what is being purchased is an in excess of what one person can actually consume in a day. There's, so we're failing at regulating this, in my opinion, if that is the case. So we've got to have some really good conversations between your agency and the Department of Health to figure out how we use these tools that we already have in place that we're already paying for. To be better at regulating
because I ran all of this legislation. On the medical marijuana to set all of that up. And so it is absolutely, you know, supposed to be the job of us to regulate, but the data and the information and the reports from the data do not indicate that we're regulating it at all and appropriately. So one of those takeaways from that meeting, absolutely, is to make sure that
information is on the PDMP Because nobody wants to, you can choose what you want to use for your pain. It's gonna be medical marijuana or, you know, something else, but that's not being, and you can't make somebody tell you the truth. Sometimes they tell you the truth and sometimes they don't. So that's really, really important for all of our healthcare professionals in the state, #1. 2, we are selling so
much of it, and it clearly is being resold. And so how do we solve that problem? Well, we've got excess funding. We've got to use it and we've got to make sure that we're doing our job appropriately and correctly. At least that's my perspective, but I believe that really was a huge takeaway from everybody in the legislature on this issue, if you look back and look at the questions that were asked from both sides of the aisle. So I would just challenge you really, I hope that you will look at that, have a great conversation with Secretary
Mallory. Also visit with Doctor Joe Thompson at the Arkansas Center of Health Improvement, because it was an excellent report and probably one of the first ones actually in the country, maybe, about medical marijuana. So, that would be my challenge to you because, and come back to us with some really good ideas on how we can better utilize that funding, and I would be all for it. Yes, ma'am. I'll make sure I'll go back and watch that committee again and I think
Speaker 266
2:07:12
just, just to echo the concern. You know, it, it is a regulated
product, um, that should be used only in very specific circumstances, um, diversion will not be tolerated and it will be prosecuted, which we just did a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 351
2:07:27
the major operation over over in Helena. So share your concern and we'll look into it and
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:07:32
I applaud you for that. I just want to make it stronger. Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much. Thank you, Senator.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:07:40
Representative Kavanaugh, your question for staff or agency? You're recognized. Thank you,
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
2:07:56
Mr. Chair. Can you just speak about your audit findings for me. Good question. Let me, let me pull that up. There is the one that's dealing with the overpayment of a. Seasonal temp person. Yes, ma'am, I believe on that one. Andy can fill in the
Speaker 355
2:08:27
details, but I, I believe we have fully recovered. That amount from
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
2:08:34
the employee, is that correct? Yes, sir. That was my question. We did actually recover. The other question
was how did it get raised without a, I mean, what was the procedure for somebody to raise.
Speaker 347
2:08:46
The pay on someone. So I'll, I'll take a crack at this. And to the best of my recollection, because I hadn't studied this. What had happened is during that period of time where we were
increasing the, uh, I think the 3 through 5, the GS 3 through 5s. This one inadvertently got raised, uh, due to Um, a script that was running in our system. And it was not caught during testing and so it was after the employee, uh, actually came back to us and we reviewed her file as to when we caught it. So and yes, we have received reimbursement on that. So technically the employee caught
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
2:09:29
it and brought it to y'all's attention. I
Speaker 347
2:09:31
wouldn't say they caught it. They, they had a question and when our personnel were reviewing the file
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
2:09:40
that's when we noticed it. And the other one is, it looks like it's for, um, The monthly disclosure report to
the governor and the co-chairs. Of ALC. On lottery Yeah, I believe the uh.
Speaker 266
2:10:04
That audit finding related to uh an internal audit report. And a variance that was with that in terms of some of the findings that are internal auditor had about the procedures for doing uh a manual draw, I believe. And the issue on that was the procedures were not, they were not as documented as well and as
Speaker 360
2:10:21
thoroughly as they could have been. I believe that's been fully rectified at this point. All right, thank you. Is that correct, Andy? Yes.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:10:39
Reid is your question for staff
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:10:48
or agency? the agency. You're recognized. On page 1 A. The number of positions that you had.
Where Lanny, 7. And then in the budgets in 2025. And 2026. Let's cut down to 45.
Now, where did those positions go where they created
a new divisions. Or did you do
Speaker 364
2:11:27
away with those positions? Melanie has slipped DFA uh, Representative Woon, those positions were or we're requesting those positions to be transferred to 611, ABC admin, so we can get ABC admin, ABC enforcement and ATC all in one bucket.
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:11:43
So you're putting, you're putting all the regulatory. You're splitting them out.
Yes, sir. That's the intent Follow up. On page. No a. You had 401,000 actual expenses. For 8 employees. Then you have 11. Budgeted for 593.
And then authorized 11 at 163,000. So one of the difference and then there's no agency recommendation or executive recommendation. For the next 2 years, where, where did those positions go and while the deviation from 401,000 to 5,093,000 budgeted and then authorized 163. What, why the differences? All
right. And, and how could you spend 593 if you're only authorized 164. OK, let me take a crack at
Speaker 365
2:12:58
this one. If you take a look at 9A in association with 9B. That's that movement of positions. So for the 25 year, although we had 11 positions authorized, uh, we only, here's a guesstimate here on my part, approximately 2
Speaker 347
2:13:19
to 3 employees actually employed within this appropriation. Um, and so that's why you see the funding moving downward. If you look at 9B, you'll see that the
Speaker 365
2:13:30
positions as we move them, the executive rec, there is for 12 at 6:57 along with
Speaker 347
2:13:37
the, the Associated appropriations that we expect as we move the regulatory from shared services into the regulatory division into that one bucket. So I set all that up.
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:13:49
ABC. Alcohol murmurs control. Do they control the marijuana. Function Is that within
Speaker 266
2:14:01
their board's purview. The uh ABC handles enforcement actions for medical marijuana. That's correct. How many
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:14:14
Permits For alcohol consumption, use, sales.
And do I that by the number of The investigators that you have. And do they also investigate. The
moving of dispensaries. From one location to another. Prior to the fact that the board makes a recommendation. How, what, what's the average, uh, uh, permit.
Speaker 351
2:14:53
Investigations that they have. Representing, I'm gonna have, uh, Trent Minner and Christie Bjornsen come up who handle our regulatory division. They can speak to the specifics for the number of cases we're covering in both those areas. Go ahead and
Speaker 367
2:15:15
introduce yourself. Thank Trent Minner Department of Finance Administration, regulatory division.
Speaker 368
2:15:19
Good morning, Christy Bjornsen. I'm the director of ABC and ATC. OK.
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:15:25
How many, what's the average number? You have, you have what, 12 employees. On the
Speaker 372
2:15:32
ABC admin side we do and we have over 6000 alcohol permits we have about 4000 tobacco permits but obviously on the medical marijuana side that number is a lot lower given the cap on how many
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:15:44
investigators do you have that look at that enforce the ABC rules and regs. So, um, ABC enforcement, um, which is separate from Director
Speaker 367
2:15:57
Bjornsen's division has, um, 40, around 40 something law enforcement officers. that in that are charged with investigating and regulating alcohol, tobacco, and medical marijuana. So how many numbers I
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:16:11
I didn't hear a number. It's responsible for, or you, are you saying that they don't regularly enforce the alcohol laws without a complaint being made. No, absolutely not. We
Speaker 368
2:16:28
enforcement officers, and they're split up by region, what their job duties entail are investigating on the front end. They do inspections on every
Speaker 372
2:16:36
single building that holds a permit. They go and inspect it 2 times. One, at the beginning of the permit and one before it's actually issued the permit. And then after that we have at least on the medical marijuana side regular communication with them on alcohol side, it could be um. Undercover buys, undercover sales to minors that may be by complaint or that may be by
standard practice. So I know at least in the Jonesboro area, that agent hits every single permit in her district monthly. Um, so depending on which zone they're in and how heavily populated it is with restaurants or bars may depend on how frequently they can
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:17:14
get there. Do they also handle investigations of marijuana issues um, we have a
Speaker 372
2:17:20
group of auditors that handled. from our office looking into our bioTrack system, being able to track every seed and sale that's
made to a patient, um, on the regulatory side, we have access to that, but we also have the enforcement agents who actually go out. They do biannual inspections on every facility. So that's 2 times a year, but they also go in between that to help if there's an issue of regulatory compliance that they need information on or to follow up on complaints or anything that the auditors may have found that give them kind of a red flag or a question mark in the sea of sale. system that is immediately referred to enforcement to go out and check in it. OK. Following up on Irwin's
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:17:59
questions. Do they regularly check the dispenser areas. Absolutely they do
from a compliance standpoint I'm, I'm trying, what I'm trying to figure out is if you
have enough manpower to adequately police and enforce the marijuana laws and the alcohol laws. Repres Sorry, I, I,
I don't think we would ever turn down more
Speaker 367
2:18:32
resources, but, um, I think it's important to note that ABC is charged with a regulation of, of the, the people that grow medical marijuana and sell medical marijuana, the industry side of it and Amendment 98 charges Department of Health with the patient side of things and the cardholders. So that's separate from us, but I, I do feel like we're doing an, an adequate job representing our regulating the Permit holders within the medical marijuana industry, many of my constituents you're not. OK
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:19:06
Why would you move or permit, or how would
you handle moving a dispensary. From Pine Bluff, Arkansas to the middle of nowhere in Lone Oak County. I'm giving you a specific example. And I know I'm asking you to comment on something that you're board did, but that doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense to me. It doesn't make any sense to my constituents, and I don't understand how you could
do something like that and, and, and, and, and your enforcement division, which you have 40, 45, I believe you said officers and how they could approve something like that is it's just. looks like to me that you, you either don't have enough. Are they, or, or we've got a void in the law relative to moving those dispensaries around like we do, and that's not right. That is simply not right.
Speaker 266
2:20:09
Representative Wooton, and I, I understand your concern. I received your letter. I, I read it. Um, it is within the province solely of the medical marijuana commission to make those decisions, the decisions to move a license are not made by DFA staff. They're not made by enforcement personnel, so it's not really an
Speaker 343
2:20:27
enforcement decision. So I, I appreciate your concern. I understand your concern, but it's not something that, you know, DFA is do you investigate as to whether or not they have
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:20:41
the right or should be permitted to move.
Speaker 367
2:20:46
Representative, we uh, we investigate if there's an issue, uh, on a transfer of location of, of that location being too close to a school or a church. Those are the, those are the only. Real location parameters that are set out in the medical marijuana commission rules. So once those boxes are, are checked, there's not under general circumstances, not a lot of other legal issues for our enforcement officers to follow
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
2:21:13
up on. OK, so you've got enough personnel to investigate and handle that portion of the law. You're, you're, you're stating that you said Real location parameters that are set out in the medical marijuana commission rules. So once those boxes are, are checked, there's not under general circumstances, not a lot of other legal issues for our enforcement officers to follow up
on. OK, so you've got enough personnel to investigate and handle that portion of the law. You're, you're, you're stating that you look at is located. Yes. We're going into policy. Now where where we've gone way off budget. Well, it's all it's my, my main question was, do you have enough personnel as an adequate level of 45 to do what you got to do. Yes sir, we do, and you know whenever we have an instance
Speaker 266
2:21:43
where we feel like we need to add resources, we do, uh, recently felt like we were a little short on the legal side of things in terms of medical marijuana to be able to handle enforcement proceedings, so
Speaker 65
2:21:56
we had a an attorney added to the staff there to help expedite cases. That's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:22:03
forbearance. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Senator
Hammer, you got a question for staff or agency's go
to agency real quick. Um, quick question, along that line, our officers
specifically assigned to the marijuana investigation or do they have to share duties. Some of
Speaker 382
2:22:22
them work specifically on medical marijuana and some of them are in more of a cross-trained role with alcohol and tobacco. OK, and so
for the area of investigation of marijuana only if you have officers that are assigned to that. Are they sufficiently able to handle the caseload that they have now or is there a backlog on that side?
Speaker 384
2:22:47
I think we, uh, again, wouldn't, would never turn down more resources to do our job, but I
Speaker 382
2:22:53
think that we've got the resources we need to carry out our responsibilities right now.
OK, but Do you, so how much more resources do you think you would need in order to make sure that we are investigating in a timely manner and prosecuting in a timely manner when it comes to the marijuana side. Do you'd like more resources, but you also just said it I interpret it
saying we're, we're keeping up, but are you falling behind or are you just keeping up, just a, a true picture of where you are. I think we're
Speaker 343
2:23:28
keeping up in a timely fashion. OK, that's all I need now. Thank you. And again, I
Speaker 266
2:23:34
mean, I'll elaborate on that. My Secretary of DFA, they understand this particular area in terms of medical marijuana is an area of concern for me to make sure we are upholding the public health measures relating to that and so if they come to
me with a request for specific resources funding or personnel, I'm gonna hear them out and I will favorably receive that request, but you know, at this point I don't have anything pending asking for more. I think as he said, they're on top of it, but we'll continue to watch the situation, right. That's all one knows where we are right now,
snapshot of time, we're on top of it and with it having been at least defeated for the moment. I don't think they're done. They'll be coming back. I just want to make sure you can stay ahead of it, uh, so we can keep it, keep it where it's supposed to be according to law. Thank you.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:24:23
Representative Lynch, your question for staff or agency staff. Staff needs to come back
to the table, I'm sorry. All right,
Representative Roger D. Lynch
Unverified
2:24:34
agency. You're recognized. OK, back on, uh, Representative Wooton's question around the relocation, the medical marijuana dispensary. Um That location, um, you said that the only thing you check is whether or not there's a church or a school. close to that area?
Speaker 367
2:24:54
Those are the main things that our rules as far from a location standpoint that that
Representative Roger D. Lynch
Unverified
2:25:01
limit and restrict the location. The, the people that live in the area where the dispensary is, uh, relocating. Do they have no input whatsoever on whether or not The dispensary can be relocated into their, um, township. Our area The law does not give them
Speaker 367
2:25:22
a a formal input, but they're always
welcome and they do come to the medical marijuana commission and submit letters that we give to the medical marijuana commission and the commission also hears, uh, verbal testimony before making those decisions. OK, just follow up, please. Go
Representative Roger D. Lynch
Unverified
2:25:38
ahead. OK, they're just one comment around this particular move, um, we were led to believe that um. There was no opposition to this thing being relocated. Since that's been announced and the people in the area where
it's actually being located and found out about it. I've received numerous phone calls and uh I'm telling you, that relocation is not popular with the people who live in the area where it's gonna be relocated, and they are looking for a way of clawing this thing back and getting this thing out of their community. And uh in fact right now I'm researching the applicable law to see if I can help them, uh, but I'm telling you they were misled and we were misled about the support of this, this thing being relocated in their area.
And so we're, we're in a quandary with those people. They are really upset at, at us. Representative, I,
Speaker 266
2:26:34
I just again want to stress that DFA as a department, including the staff that are up here with me are not advocates or endorsers of the transfer of the license. Palm Bluff to, you know, that part of the state. It's just we don't have a role to play in it and I think it's, sometimes we, we may think that medical marijuana may be like an alcohol. Permit where there really is more of a formal input by the
public, but this is governed by a constitutional amendment. And we are heavily constrained in what we're allowed to do to change the process. Well, it certainly needs to be
Representative Roger D. Lynch
Unverified
2:27:13
changed. I can tell you that based on my experience with this, this particular incident. Yes, sir. Senator Irving, you're recognized. I would, thank you. Just for
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:27:26
Representative Lynch and thank you for the caveat, Mr. Chair, but.
This is an area policy. I'm not, I'm not sure if the legislature can change that statutorily, but you could have the staff research that and see if the constitutional amendment would allow, um, statutory changes be made, um, as in regards to location of licenses. So I just give you that information because it's outside of this agency's, but it could be something that the legislature could look at.
Speaker 150
2:28:02
Um, and change statutorily next session. OK, thank you,
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
2:28:07
Senator. No more questions. We'll, uh, batch these 1 through 9 executive director do we have a motion? We have a motion in a second, any discussion? All in favor say aye. Any you opposed? Uh, members, I've been asked by the council chairs to shut this off at 11:30. We will pick up tomorrow morning with the assessment coordinating. Uh, remember we do have for
those that are on the personnel committee at 1:30 in this room, personnel committee will uh. Uh, start this afternoon at 1:30. Appreciate your the
good work we, we are adjourned. Where's the gavel at? Oh What in the world did he do with the guy?
Agenda
A. Call to Order
B. Reports and Communications
C. Presentation of Budget Requests
Audit Findings
Audit Findings
D. Other Business
Administration of Justice Fund 209
E. Adjournment
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — ALC - JBC BUDGET HEARINGS, Oct 22, 2024 | Agenda | 5 | Official source ↗ |
| DFA HANDOUT | Exhibit | 31 | Official source ↗ |
| Oct 22 AUDIT FINDINGS | Exhibit | 6 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Chair
Unverified
Speaker 20
Speaker 23
Speaker 25
William Parrish
Unverified
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
Jami Fisher
Unverified
Speaker 56
Shea Lewis
Unverified
Speaker 76
Speaker 86
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
Speaker 92
Speaker 106
Speaker 110
Speaker 113
Speaker 115
Speaker 117
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
Speaker 27
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Suzanne Grobmyer
Unverified
Speaker 156
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
Robert Breck
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Speaker 206
Senator Kim Hammer Chair
Unverified
Speaker 169
Speaker 227
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 232
Speaker 240
Speaker 244
Speaker 141
Speaker 102
Speaker 266
Speaker 173
Speaker 295
Speaker 306
Speaker 318
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 322
Speaker 296
Speaker 207
Speaker 260
Speaker 190
Speaker 116
Speaker 335
Speaker 343
Speaker 346
Speaker 345
Speaker 351
Speaker 355
Speaker 347
Speaker 360
Speaker 364
Speaker 365
Speaker 367
Speaker 368
Speaker 372
Speaker 374
Speaker 65
Speaker 382
Speaker 384
Representative Roger D. Lynch
Unverified
Speaker 150