ALC-Review

All right, members, everybody take their seats. We're gonna go ahead and get this meeting started. And I call this Review committee meeting to order. Before we get going, we do have a supplemental agenda and you'll see the letter in your binders members give you a second to take a quick look at it and while we're doing that, Katie, if you just want to briefly, it's for ASU just a brief description and I'm a motion to. Or we're gonna put that on the agenda without objection. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Katie Walden Bureau of Legislative Research, the supplemental item that is before you today is a construction project request from Arkansas State University, Jonesboro. This is a project that they have proposed to build a college of veterinary medicine. They're proposing that it, or they're estimating that it will cost $33.2 million and it is to build a $55,000 facility. OK. All right, member for an explanation, we're gonna put this on the agenda without objection. All right. Thank y'all. All right, Katie. Let's start with the method of finance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Under item B of your packet, you have the methods of finance that are presented today for the committee's review. First, you have a cover letter. Under item B and then behind that you have a schedule of your requests, and I will review those for the committee now. Item number one and methods of finance is from ASU Jonesboro. This is a new project for a chilled water loop upgrade. And they estimate at this time that it will cost about $298,000 and they proposed to use the university reserves. Number 2, also with ASU Jonesboro, this is another new project for their North Park Plaza renovation estimated to cost $4.7 million at this time. They're using federal grants for this project. Number 3 is with the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and training. This is a revised project for their Camden campus renovations. They've increased their cost estimate to total $12.9 million and they're using 100% ARPA funds. Number 4, also with the Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training. This is another revised project for their Northwest campus renovations. They have projected this project is actually going to cost less at $8.4 million and they're also using federal ARPA funds for the project. Number 5 with Henderson State University. This is a new project request for their Reynolds chemistry lab renovation. They estimated this time it will cost $850,000 and they're using 100% insurance proceeds. Number 6 is with UA Little Rock. It is a project estimated to cost $1.5 million for their stabler hall suite renovation, and this is for their radio station offices. They proposed to use 88% cash funds and 12% private donor funds for this project. Turning to the next page, number 7 with UA Little Rock. This is for their fryborg hall Vivaium HVAC replacement. This project is estimated to cost $724,000 and they want to use 100% cash funds for the project. And the last project for your review today is with the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff. This is an increase in an existing project up to $35.1 million. They are building and renovating a new student center. And this is going to replace their student union and bookstore, mail center printing services, cafeteria and office spaces, and they proposed to use a variety of funds for this project, bond proceeds, federal grants, university reserves, and student fees. These are the methods of finance for the committee's review today. All right, members, you've heard an explanation of the MOFs. Are there any questions from the committee? All right, so no questions and without objection, these items will stand as reviewed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This would be the time when you would normally hear the construction projects estimated to cost over $50. So I'll go over in a little more detail, um, as I stated earlier, we received A little bit of a late supplemental from ASU Jonesboro. They wanted to go ahead and get this project reviewed if they could, because they have high hopes of opening this facility in the fall of 2026, so they have to get their bond issued out and everything. So they requested that the committee review this today, as I stated before, it is for the construction of a college of veteran veterinary medicine. It's estimated to be a 55,000 square foot building, and they think at this time that it will cost about 33.2 million. They want to use 90% bond proceeds and 10% university reserves for this project. All right, members, you've heard an explanation, the supplemental agenda and questions from the committee. Alright, see no questions without objection, this item will stand as reviewed. You just. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The next section for your review today are discretionary grants, that is I C. We received grants from two separate agencies this month. The first one under C1 are two grants from the Arkansas Department of Health. Number one, is with a grant with the Tri-county Rural Health Network. It is a $1.6 million federal grant. And this is to pay for social services and support needs for community health workers across the state. And number 2 is a grant with also with the Department of Health, the division of Health Protection. It is a grant with engaging Arkansas communities. For $400,000. And this is to connect individuals across the state with medical transportation services for individuals with HIV as well as, um, like social service programs for those HIV patients as well. Turning to the next page, you, you will see item C2. These are the grants that we received from the Department of Human Services for your review this month. And grants one. Through 7 are all going to be with DHS division of Aging, Adult and Behavioral Health services. They are all for various providers, but they are all to engage in agreements with programs to address the opioid crisis in the state and it is. For evidence-based strate strategies, capacity building and collaboration using federal SOR4 grant funds. So that's grants number 1 through 7, all for that same purpose. Then turning to page C4, that takes us to grant number 8 with DHS division of Medical Services. They have a grant with the counseling clinic in Benton, Arkansas, valued at $100,000. This is to establish a residential community reintegration program for adolescents and youth. Grant number 9 with DHS DMS is valued at $3 million. It is with Independence Care of Arkansas at Little Rock. It is a federal grant and is for the Construction of treatment residences for adult substance abuse residential treatment programs in Washita County. And finally, number 10 on the next page is with White County Medical Center. It is a $2 million federal grant also for the construction of treatment residences for youth substance abuse residential treatment programs to serve White County. So those are the grants for the review of the subcommittees today. All right, members, you've heard an explanation of the grants or any questions from members of the committee? All right, see you no questions objection, these items will stand as reviewed. And Katie just move on down the list here. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Part D in your packet or the contracts that have been submitted for the subcommittee's review today. You'll see on the first page of the contract, the contract section, there is a letter from Jessica Patterson at the Office of State Procurement. In this letter she states that all of the contracts were reviewed to be accurate and lawful. And in accordance with the request of Arkansas Legislative Council, you will note that there is a table where the Office of State Procurement has gone through and has notated the new contracts that were procured under the previous method of, um, procurement that was the approval was rescinded by council. So all of those contracts are there and then you will see them sprinkled throughout, um, the contracts for your review today. I also want to mention if you turn to the next couple of pages, item D1. Was originally submitted timely by, um, OSP, but it was an OSP approval request for a request for qualifications with ADEQ. They requested to pull this request. And so this is removed from consideration of the subcommittee. So moving to item D2. That's under item D, page 5. If you look down on the bottom left hand part of the packet. These are the construction-related contracts for your review today. The first one is an original contract with the Department of Corrections Division of Corrections with veneer construction management. This $16.5 million contract is for, um, to provide professional owner representation for a new correctional facility? Using state funds. Number 2 is with the Department of Parks, Heritage and Tourism Division of Heritage with a revival architecture Incorporated. This is an amendment to an existing contract to continue architectural services for the Arkansas Historic Museum. Number 3, Department of Parks, Heritage and tourism with the state parks and tourism division with pollution management. This is, this is Amendment 5 to an existing contract which is adding funding for reimbursable expenses for the Mount Magazine State Park, Cameron Bluff Campground. Item number 4 with the Department of Public Safety division of Arkansas State Police. This contract is with Whitzel Evans Rascoe. It is Amendment 1 to an existing contract to increase funding for architect and engineering services for new barracks at Camp Robinson. Number 5 with the University of Arkansas. This amended contract is with Diigsaw Architecture. As I stated, Amendment 1 is to change the scope of a contract to provide for new a new classroom building in the Walton College of Business Space. Number 6 with the University of Arkansas Pulaski Technical College. This is an amended contract with Whittle Evans Rascoe Architects and planners. This is to add $300,000 for on-call architectural services. Number 7 is with the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences with Big Oak studio. This is an original contract for on-call professional services. And I also want to mention to the committee that item number 7 through Turning two pages over. To number 18. These are all contracts with UAMS with various consultant and professional providers for on-call professional services, and they're all valued at $750,000. They are all new contracts. And they're all to provide engineering, professional services as needed for construction, renovation, or maintenance projects for UAMS. So with the review of all those, that concludes the construction contracts for the committee's review. We have uh somebody from OSP here. I think I see Jessica out there. Just come up here real quickly. We'll go ahead and give us your name and who you're with for the record. Good afternoon. Jessica Patterson, um, director of the Office of State Procurement. OK. So, Jessica, just question, um, when did y'all decide that you wanted to pull this contract? Where this contract, you know, you, you know, to. Request for qualifications, the RFQ? When did y'all decide you want to pull that from the agenda, um, ENE is the one that requested to have that pulled. OK, OK. When did that take place? I guess the point that I'm going to get at here is, you know, like, that has already been on the agenda, you know, for a number of days and so we decided we're going to leave it on the agenda, notify members that we're pulling it down. But if you can give us an explanation for why. Um, we were not, we were just notified from A&E that they wanted to pull it from the agenda. It was not our decision to pull it from the we got somebody from A&A here. Energy and environment Michael, come on up buddy. The point that I'm gonna make is like. If there's a problem with it, let's not let it get so far that it gets added to the agenda and then we gotta go back and pull it down without a very good reason. You got a microphone there or I think. There you go. And Jessica, if you want to tap yours off, yeah, thank you. Michael, introduce yourself. I know who Michael Grape, Department of Energy and Environment. I think there was, uh, some internal issues they want to get correct. So they pulled it before they brought it before the committee, um, that's thought that happens maybe notify the co-chairs a review as well. All right. Thank y'all. Anybody else have any questions? Uh All right. All right. Thank you. All right. Representative Kavanaugh, bear with me, brand new to the system. They just installed it on Friday. So Thank you. Uh, my question is for the Department of Corrections on. Item number one. We got somebody from the department of corrections. The F is gonna have people here today be the Department of Corrections. All right, welcome guys. You'll give us your names and your positions for the record then Representative Kavanaugh, you'll be recognized to proceed with your question. Thank you. I'm Anne Laidlaw, director of the of the division of Building Authority. I'm Nathan Alderson, state architect, the division Building Authority Chad Brown, CFO, Department of Corrections. Thank you. uh, thank y'all. On this, uh, consulting fee on, for the construction management, that's, is that based on a percentage of what you project the cost of the project to be? Yes, ma'am, it sure is. And what is that percentage? Um, this one was procured at 3.32%. OK. And do we know what the projected cost of the project is total? We have not actually gotten into project design and for that projection. However, we do know what funding that we believe we have available to work with. OK, well, if you don't know the project cost, how did you come up with $16.5 million for a fee. We use the funding that we have available to us, which is around 470 million. OK. If that's not what it cost, if it costs less, is this contract going to be less? Yes, ma'am, this is a not to exceed contract. OK. Yes, I am. OK, but just want to make sure though it's not to exceed contract, if the, if it comes in at 300 million, then it will still be based on the 3.32%. Yes, ma'am, that's correct. OK, thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Representative. All right, Representative Painter. You recognize your question? Mine's for UAMS. OK, OK. Is there anybody else that's got one for Just bring it, OK. Representative Pater, you'll get back in the queue real quickly. I'm gonna a Springer. All right. Representative, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. I'm just curious, where is this proposed facility. Gonna be built. We have not, um, selected a site yet. So we're still working on that. In fact, the owners' representative will help us with, uh, finalizing our options for the best site for that's most suitable for the facility. Can you tell us Any place all over the state of Arkansas, is it any particular area of the state? We have looked at many, many sites. Uh, we're working with criteria for, uh, the facility which involves workforce numbers, access to emergency, um, services, infrastructure, there, there's quite a bit of criteria. Workforce is a, is a heavily driving, um, criteria for the site as well. So I, I guess I'm still trying to see where it's limited to. So could that be all over the state, could be anywhere in the state or do you know some defint? We've looked at sites all over the state. Yes, ma'am. All right. Thank you, Representative. All right. Any questions for Department of Corrections. Right, see you then. Thank you all for being here. You're excused. Thank you for your patience, Representative Painter. You just said yours is for UMS? OK. And what was that number again, Representative? Well, it's a matter of fact, it's for all, OK, so the 1 through 7, yeah, it was it was it was I think it's 777 through 18, which my math was kind of maybe 11 or 12. Well, you're the whip, so we'll go with your math then. Yeah All right, there you go. And if you'll give us your name and your position for the record, then Representative Painter, you'll be recognized proceed your question. Good afternoon. My name is Mark Golden, UAMS director of external and governmental relations. I'm right here. Uh, appreciate you being here today. I just have a question. We got 12 contracts that are tolling worth $129 million. And when you read it, they all say the exact same thing. It's like a copy and paste on call professional services. But there's there's some architecture, there's some engineering. Can you explain some of those contracts because Me being the average person, it doesn't tell me anything about what those contracts, what those companies actually doing for UAMS. Oh so those contracts are varying, and they relate to some of those services that we utilize. So for on call doesn't mean that they're immediately doing those services that over over the course of time that as needed, that we may need to call them, for example. Like, for one, I, I get it like Kirchner architecture is probably gonna deal with, deal with architecture, right? But Walter Moore and Associates doesn't tell me exactly what they do for 750,000. That's right. And so, um, services will be incremental. They're not, they're not the full amount typically it's just up to the amount for specific projects. As as needed. Can, can we get it, Mr. Chair, Can we get a, or have UAMS give us each of those contracts, those 12 contracts, exactly what those contracts are for. Yeah, if you want to give a, uh, is there any specific breakdown that you're looking for representative they can absolutely get that just to like, you know, I get it one contracts for architecture. I get it because it's in the name. But when you have something that, you know, Walter and Moore and Associates, it doesn't tell me what they're actually doing just on the, the objective is all the, they're all the same objective. And so it doesn't tell me what they're providing at 750,000 or at the end of the day, $9 million for all 12 contracts. So, so it'd be simple if we provide you a summarization of the services that have been provided in the past for you or even what this contract is for all 12, that would be great. OK, yeah, and if you can get that stat, then she can get that out to members of the committee. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Representative. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right, Representative Kavanaugh. Yes, if he can come back I'm sorry. Thank you. I have a my question is just real simple. Why are they all $750,000. Do we just come up with a figure of $750,000 for these on-call contracts and they're not negotiated based upon what services they provide. No, not necessarily, and I, I, I believe our CFOs basically designated out specific amounts for that. Um, So, understanding the, the how that those contracts are set up or is that? They are the amounts are budgeted out evenly, but when they get ready to use those services, they actually negotiate. The uh the expenditure cost for that, for that service at the time. So those are just appropriated costs within our line items, which allows us to spend up to that amount, not necessarily that we're gonna spend that full amount for that service. I guess I'm confused because these aren't appropriations. These are actual contracts. So there is a difference between an appropriation and contract. I'm aware of that, yes. I mean, so it's not that we're appropriating the money to you we're approving contracts, but they're all designated at $750,000. So for me that's a question is how are we deciding that they're all 750,000 when one of them may need to be 500,000, 1 of them made to be 800,000. How are we? How are they all 750,000. That's just a little strange that we would have a dozen contracts for on call for, for the exact same amount on each one of them. That's correct. Oh, I'm sorry. So, I mean, I'll, I'll be happy to have our CFOs provide you an explanation for that also. Yes, if you can, I'd like to, because I don't quite understand how we can have all these contracts. We're just gonna hold these, uh, sir, until you can get, you know, you know, staff a a little bit better answer to some of these questions that represent a painter and Representative Kavanaugh and other members are going to have, and I'm sure we can get this fleshed out till Friday, but in the meantime, members, if you want to get with them offline as well, if you've got any specific questions you'd like to have answered, just make sure that we get those two committee staff and that they were going to assimilate that out to, you know, full membership. OK, great. Because I agree there's, you know, these are, these are very legitimate questions, um, should be a very straightforward answer to, so I think we can get that done between now and Friday. Thank you. Right All right. Represented or excuse me, Senator Peyton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd just like to request that. The language of the contract. I mean, surely if there's a contract, we can get a copy of it. Thank you. Did you, so we're gonna, the language of the contracts as well. All right, so with the exception of. To here. OK, with the exceptions of contracts 7 through 18. And without objection, these items will stand as reviewed. All right, Katie, if you want. Members moving to item D3 in your contracts packet, that's item D page 10. These are the intergovernmental contracts presented for the subcommittee's review today. The first one is with Department of Commerce, Arkansas Rehabilitation Services. This is a contract with the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. This is a new contract valued at $176,000 for a comprehensive statewide needs assessment for rehab services. Using federal and state funds. Number 2 is with Department of Health contract with UAMS. This is a new contract for $225,000 for an environmental scan of screening for social determinants of health in the state. On behalf of the Department of Health Office of Health Information Technology. Number 3 is University of Arkansas Little Rock contracting with ASU Jonesboro. This is a new $100,000 contract. It is federal and it is for the Arkansas Small Business and Technology Development Center. Number 4 is with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock with Arkansas Tech. This new contract valued at $65,000 is also for an Arkansas small business and Technology Development Center at tech. And then finally, number 5 is University of Arkansas at Little Rock with Southern Arkansas University in Magnolia, also a federal grant. Contract or federal contract, new contract at $60,500 for an Arkansas small business and technology Development Center. These are the intergovernmental contracts for your review today. All right, members, you've heard an explanation. Are there any questions from members of the committee? All right, see no questions and without objection, these items will stand as reviewed. Moving to item D4 in your packet. That is I page D 12 on the bottom left hand side of your D packet. These are the out of state contracts for the subcommittee's review. The first one is with apers. They're contracting with Boston Partners. This is a new contract valued at $50 and this is for funds, investment and management of their US value equity investment strategies. Number 2, also with apers, they're contracting with Castle Ark Management LLC. This is Amendment 3 to an existing contract, and this is to just change the scope of another funds. Fund investment management partner they have. Number 3 with apers. This is a contract with Connor Clark and Lynn. This is a new original contract valued at $1.6 million using trust funds, and this is also to handle their investing and fund management services. Number 4, with apers. This is with Linear Solutions Incorporated. This is a new original contract valued at $515,000 for professional consulting services. Item number 5 with Arkansas State University. This is a contract with Upchurch Services LLC. This is a new contract valued at $200,000. Using cash funds. This is for HVAC repair services for ASU. Number 6, Department of Commerce, Arkansas Development Finance Authority, contracting with Aspire Resources. This is Amendment 4 to an existing contract to increase funding for the management of the student loan Authority? And this is to provide servicing, loan repayment, counseling, and payment collections for student loans. Number 7, Department of Commerce division of Workforce Services with CarraSoft Technology Corporation. This is Amendment one to an existing contract to increase funding for the DWS unemployment Insurance mainframe modernization project. Number 8, Department of Commerce division of Workforce Services with the innovative Policy Lab. This is Amendment one to an existing contract, and this is to add funding and scope to a project where they are. Creating the UI certification hub. Number 9, Department of Commerce division of Workforce Services with NTT Data State Health Consulting LLC. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract. They're using federal funds to provide technical assistance. For their UI modernization project. Number 10, Department of Corrections division of Correction with DWD of Arkansas LLC. This is Amendment 5 to an existing contract. This is to add money. And time to provide waste disposal services for the East Arkansas Regional Unit located in Brickies, Arkansas. Item number 11 with the Department of Education. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract with Cambiium Assessment. This is for the design and implementation of the new statewide Atlas assessment. And there's, there are no funds being added this time. This is to just change the scope of the project. Number 12 of the Department of Education with Trian Incorporated. This is Amendment 6 to an existing contract. This is to increase funding for this contract. This is the statewide transcript system. For students to, uh, send transcripts to institutions of higher education, and so they're just making modifications to that. Number 13, Department of Education, division of Career and technical Education with Sage Learning Incorporated. This is a new contract valued at $750,000. This is a an allowable vendor for their new adult diploma program, and this vendor will provide services and assistance to adults who want to obtain high school diplomas. Number 14, Department of Health with Bamboo Health Incorporated. This is Amendment 3 to an existing contract. It is to increase funding. And to continue the integration of the controlled substance database in electronic health records in the state. Number 15, Department of Health also with Bamboo Health Incorporated. This is Amendment 7 to an existing contract. They're increasing funding. And this is to continue to provide controlled substance database with the ability to collect prescription data for dispensaries. Number 16 with the Department of Health and multilingual technologies Incorporated. This is Amendment 1 to an existing contract using federal and state funds, they're adding funding and extending the date for on-demand interpreter and sign language services in units statewide. 17 Department of Health with Wiat Incorporated. This is Amendment 6 to an existing contract. It's going to add funding and extend the end date for abstract review services for the Arkansas Central Cancer Registry and also for, um, tumor tumor information collection. Number 18 with the Department of Human Services with primetime healthcare LLC. This is Amendment one to an existing contract to add funding for nursing and medical staffing services for the Arkansas Human Development Centers. Number 19, Department of Human Services with Dataman USA LLC. This is Amendment 9 to an existing contract. They're increasing the contract by $1.6 million. And in extending the date for temporary employment services for administrative support, healthcare staffing services, and professional services. Moving, we're now on item D page 20. And we're on item 20. This is with the Department of Transformation and Shared Services with the building authority. The contracting with Republic Services Incorporated? This is Amendment 1 to an existing contract. It is adding funding and extending the ending date for waste disposal services. Number 21, this is the Department of Transformation and Shared Services also building authority with S&S Management Group LLC. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract adding funding, which will provide unarmed security services to the old Dillard's building in 900 West Capitol. Which is per the staffing requirements. Item number 22, DTSS division of Information Systems with Karasoft Technology Corporation. This is an original contract valued at $1.3 million using federal AARPA funds. This is for the continuation of the existing edge factor content. Which is being implemented for the Arkansas workforce strategy Program. Number 23 is another contract with DTSS Division of Information Systems with the velocity Network Foundation. One thing I want to point out for the committee's information, you'll see this, the procurement was handled by Sole Source by Justification. And so if you look in your packet, there's a salmon colored. Form and letter. That staff has provided for you. This is DIS's explanation for needing to use sole source by justification when selecting this vendor? This is an original contract valued at $1.2 million. And this is for a digital credential ecosystem. For the Arkansas workforce strategy. Number 24 is with the University of Arkansas with Karasoft Technology. This is Amendment one to an existing contract. They are increasing by the contract by $930,000. And this is to develop software for system-wide budget and financial planning for the 21 campuses in the UA system. Item 25 is with UAMS contracting with 4M Building Solutions. And this is an original contract valued at $228,000 for cleaning and sanitation services for UAMS Family Medical Center in Jonesboro, Arkansas. These are the out of state contracts, Mr. Chair. All right, members, you've heard an explanation from the contracts. We do have some questions we're gonna start with Representative Kavanaugh. Representative Kavanaugh, who's your question for? Uh, All right, members, you've heard an explanation from the contracts. We do have some questions we're gonna start with Representative Kavanaugh. Representative Kavanaugh, who's your question for? A, please. OK, up here from apers. Y'all know the drill, we'll get your names and your positions for the record and then Representative Caineau, you will be recognized to proceed. Thank you. Good afternoon, Ashley Gallagher, Apers. Philip Norton, IT director at Apres. Carlos Bormeo, chief investment officer. Thank you all very much. My question is, like, on Boston Partners, Castle Mark, and Connor Clark and Lunn, are those based on a percentage? Are they a fee-based? It is based on a percentage, yes, ma'am. OK. And what are those percentages? Is it different for each one of them? It is different for each one. OK, if you wouldn't mind if you'll get to staff those percentages that we're paying each one of these, so that the committee could have it. I'd like to have that information. And when you do that, can you, can you show the asset that they're managing also, so we understand the fee structure based upon that number of assets they're handling. OK. Thank you. And my last question is gonna be about. Uh, Lena Solutions, just what are they and what are they, because it doesn't really tell us much like we were asking earlier, it doesn't really tell us. So thank you for the question and I actually noticed that too and asked OSP to share with me if it was on our end like how we would make sure that the objective is clear. Um, but linear Solutions is, uh, we're going to contract with them to provide, uh, project management oversight for upcoming upgrade that we discussed during budget hearings if you were here, they're going to provide some uh, um, some project management oversight for that. They're going to do some cyber assessments on our existing software and also what needs to be, um, included in the upgrade. Um, and also virtual chief information system officer, which Philip can tell you more about what that mean, but that's a role for that also is, um, has to do with ensuring that our policies are up to date and preventing fraud and so this is not going to be an ongoing contract with the, when the new software is developed and everything, this contract should go away. That's correct. OK, thank you. Yes, ma'am. All right. Thank you, Representative. And so I think those percentages, Ashley or whoever and just get that to staff and they can disseminate that to members. All right. Hold on one second. Representative Painter, if I can. There you go. I have a motion at the proper time. Uh, is it regarding, um, if it's anything in an out of state contracts now would be the proper time, I've got a motion to hold Lena Solutions Public Employees retirement until ALC on Friday. OK, that was the one I think Representative Kavanaugh was just questioning on, OK, I'm fine with that. So without objection from members, we're gonna hold that just contract number 4, members page D 13, um, With apers and Lena Solutions. Until Friday and we'll get these questions worked out. All right. Representative Richardson is your question? For acres. Excuse me, Richardson. Is there a question for rapers? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, so just help me understand a little bit why we're using external resources for project management and for, uh, you said CIO, was it CIO or CSO? So, uh, We are using uh linear solutions because they're pension experts really, uh, they have a great depth of knowledge working with pension systems all over the country, and we feel like their best positioned to help us, uh, develop, uh, a new software. So we don't feel like the uh that DIS services, the project management, and uh, of course, our cybersecurity, uh, experts over there can provide us with those services. We certainly do use them, uh, and, uh, they're going to be part of this effort. Uh, but we feel like, uh, it's probably prudent to have. Uh, vendors in place that are, uh, experts in, uh, pensions, using your pensions are a target a lot of times of uh of fraud actors and so we feel it's best to have a, a company that has the experience dealing with that. So, so we feel like that, um, the pensions are more of a target than the state government. I'm not sure how to answer that. I mean, I think that, yes, definitely, research shows that pension systems, that's kind of what we have focused on are a, um, a major focus for, for bad actors. Sure, sure, and, and I, I appreciate that. I'm just, uh, uh, a little concerned that we have an office that is supposed to be responsible for cybersecurity. Um, have we ran this through them and talked to them about uh, um, oversight for, uh, and helping manage the, uh, The external resources. Yes, sir. So we shared the RFP with DIS before we, I mean just a draft to see, you know, what their thoughts were to give us any guidance, advice, um, and, you know, we, we definitely, like you said, we do work with them, um, I don't know if we asked them specifically about them doing a project management piece of this, um, but they did respond and say that the RFP, um, that they agreed with the, they didn't have any concerns with it. I, I'm wondering, uh, Mr. if we can get DIS up. Yeah, we got somebody from DIS. I guess not. Yeah. OK. Well, thank you all for that and thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Representative. All right, Representative. Love is your question for. Papers. Here, let me. mine is not for mine is for DIS on the sole source. Yes, we don't have anybody from DIS up here. Well then I think we might need to hold this. Then oh well, here's a, here's a, here's a gentleman. Popped up. All right. Now mine has nothing to do with apers. But I, I just want to talk about number 23. So if you all have questions for April, I can get back in the queue and hold on real fast and I appreciate that like is anybody else in the, uh, Representative Meeks, do you have a question for? OK. S Peyton. OK, then I'm gonna recognize you real quick and represent Senator Love, you just want to jump back in. Perfect. All right, Senator Peyton. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and if I could remind you, I think Representative Richardson was wanting DIS a minute ago, so we're gonna get him back in the queue as well, uh, so the other day we talked about the $4 million contract for new software or upgrade the software or whatever. Is, is this number 4 here with lending us solutions? This is paying them to manage us spending that $4 million or what? Not to manage the, the spend, um, Senator Payton, it is to manage, uh, what we put the RFP out for is for project management oversight, which we wanted to attract bidders who had experience, experience in overseeing pension administration upgrades, um, all the way from contract negotiations, um, which we hope to get that 4 million down using that, but also all the way through the project, whether it's change management, uh, changes in Where, um, and the cyber assessments that will be included in terms of scope of that upgrade. So they're related, but they are not, um the same thing. That all sounds very complicated, but the bottom line is we have a software provider that we've been using for 7 years. Yes. They're charging us $400 for the upgrade to what's supposed to be our idea of of the software we need. So it doesn't make sense to me that, that we're paying. $500,000 to a third party to get between us and a provider we've been using for 7 years and Supposedly we think this provider. Is the best source of of the software we need. So actually it's, I understand exactly what you're getting at. Um, and I wasn't here during the original implementation of, uh, Velocity or the, excuse me, Vech, um, their software, um, but it is very common for there to be a separate project manager oversight cybersecurity, so that it's not like just the vendor saying, this is exactly what you need, a project of this size and scope, um, and the dollars we spend, we do want to make sure that we have that third party who's an expert in terms of the implementation. Um, ensuring that all the right things are considered during the upgrade, I'm sorry, it just seems odd to me that we have. Employees in the executive branch, the bureaucracy, and, and we constantly have to go outside of that talent. To get what we need. So, uh, if we, if DIS has the talent, then I think we should utilize it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator. Alright, are there any more questions for aers? All right, y'all are excused. Thank you. And then we get DIS up here and then Representative Richardson, we're gonna let you start first. So I'll come down here and give us your names and then who you're with and your positions for the record. You gotta hit your button right there. TSS DIS chief data officer. What's your name again? Robert McGo. Uh, James Caldwell, CFO for TSS. OK. So y'all did hear, uh, me ask for anybody else from DIS up here just a few seconds after Representative Richardson, apologize for that. We don't have anybody here that can represent cybersecurity, OK, that's still something that you all would step up and come up here and, you know, and then you can say that in front of the committee, but just to sit out there and is not acceptable. Um, Representative Richardson, we're gonna start it off with you, sir. So I, uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate you guys coming up even though this is outside a little bit outside your, um, comfort level and where you're actually responsible, but I, I, I'm very curious on, um, what, uh, collaboration is happening between the other agency and DIS around projects like this and why we're leveraging, um, external, uh, cybersecurity experts when we have this brand new cybersecurity officer that's supposed to be responsible for that stuff and why we're not Using our internal project management from DIS to oversee projects like this from different agencies. Can you speak to that? And I can't speak to the, the cybersecurity office, that's a separate, uh, division than mine, but, um, I, I know with the data office that the other agencies are using DIS quite extensively. Including for especially for project management. So for your office, you are. But you can't speak to why other divisions or agencies aren't. Correct. OK. Then I, I, I don't really have any other questions for you though. Thank you. Representative Meeks. Yeah, I'm well, we're far, far right. Um, I, I'm just, uh, uh, wanting more information about this contract because it's, uh, says something about, uh, wanting, uh, to be able to do credentialing for non-tamperer or to issue verifiable tamper evident and globally recognizable digital credentials for the Arkansas workforce. Can you kind of go, what this is and what it's needed and. The background on it. Uh, yes, sir. So, um, some of this is, uh, verified learning and employment records. These are signed, verified, digital records that that could be for, um, college completion, non-credit, high school, like that mic up close for us if you don't mind. Um. So this is to create a signal of trust, uh, with structured interoperable data that we can give our, our learners as they achieve credentials, uh, licenses, other forms of um verification of mastery of skills that can then be used. Um, to connect them with employers with a verified. Signal. So is this like a card or something that uh people are gonna get that has all this data or how is this supposed to work? There are two major ways to, to do it now, but this one is with uh using a blockchain so that it, it's similar to cryptocurrency. It's, it's signed, it's, uh, in immutable ledger, so it's tamper proof. So it retains the, the trust chain. Right, but, but, uh, which I understand the, the, the technology, but what I'm asking is, you know, if, if I'm a citizen, how am I gonna take advantage of this? Does that make sense? Am I gonna get a card with this or is this like a login or is, uh, you know, if I'm an employer and I'm wanting to hire somebody, I go to a website and I can look up and see Representative Meeks has got this credentialing primarily, it's a website and that's um the the launch suite of applications through the workforce strategy. So there's one for job seekers, one for employers, one for um students. So depending on the they can go in and play their respective parts. Um, it's boring careers, applying for jobs, searching for talent. Um, things like that. So we've built it so that it's, uh, that's how we get our estate administrative data kind of turned over to the resident with self-sovereignty for use across these different tools, but we're intentional about kind of having this layer so there's um, Resident or citizen choice, so they can use it with the launch system, but they have other options. They're not locked in into the launch system. It's has interoperability with an emerging set of different solutions and then my final question is, um, is this something that the government is going to do, or is it I as an individual will opt into voluntarily use this system. Uh, there's definitely consent it real quickly because I've I've given some latitude here. Let's keep the question specific to these contracts, whether they are in line with our state procurement laws. I do not want to go too far down that rabbit hole. that makes you're not the only one, but I just want to jump in there so we can kind of keep this between the lines. So let's just please members moving forward. Keep the questions relevant to these specifics of these contracts and whether or not they're in line with our state procurement laws. OK, um, yeah, that, that was my only question so maybe we need to visit offline because if, if, and, and obviously, um not on the subcommittee, but I'm on ALC. I, I would have concerns on our data of citizens' privacy if citizens were being put into a system that they didn't know about, right? That they had no control over, and I would be very hesitant to support that kind of a contract. So that's, that was my, my reasoning. For that question, you can go with Representative Meeks. Thank you. All right, Representative Jones. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I know I might be out of order, but it's somebody from the Arkansas rehabilitation Services here. OK, yeah, well, hang on. So if you want to jump back in the queue, I know I got at least one to remember this kind of question for IS. OK. Representative Love You recognize her, excuse me, Senator Love, you're recognized her. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so, so my question is in regards to just the contract number 23. Yeah, uh-huh. It's, it's in regard to um the need for sole source. And so, uh, you know, whenever you do a sole source, it always kind of perks my ears. So, so what was the need for soft source? I've looked through some of your information, um. Um, about velocity Network Foundation, but is, is there no other company that could provide this service as to why we sole sourced it, I mean, like, is there technology kind of explain that to me. In this case, that that we're aware of. And when it comes to multi-state interoperability. If every state kind of does their own thing, then we're still speaking different languages. And so where we have cross-border labor markets or, or people coming in with education credentials from other states or things like that. Um, we, we've done a better job of bringing our day together within the state, but we're we still just got a bigger silo. So how many, how many states are using this vendor? If you, if you're saying we're trying to communicate across state lines, multi-state. How many states are using this particular vendor? I don't have the exact number. There's partners in the network from, um, Alabama, Texas, um, Indiana. Um, there's certain. Partners in the network that have these tools, digital wallets for this, and most of the major digital wallets are already interoperable with this, and part of this was looking to see what has the most interoperability. And the In the case of um Europe, the the the European Union actually went and established it to make sure there's interoperability. We don't have a a similar federal option in the US. So this was the one with the the best buy-in and coverage so far. OK, so, but there was uh there were other, there were other vendors that could provide the service, but not that we're aware of. This was the only one we're aware of, and it's, it's the one that's been gaining momentum for interoperability. OK, um, Mr. Chair. I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm done for right now. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Love. Alright Uh is there any more members, any more questions? did I ask? All right, seeing that y'all are excused. Thank you. And then Representative Jones, you want to jump back in there? I didn't get your. OK, there you go. Who's your question for? Arkansas Department of Rehabilitation Services. Are they still here? OK, we had anything with them. OK. Oh, it's, uh, under, uh, it's the intergovernor, that's already been reviewed, so I'll let you ask a question but just very briefly. OK, thank you. Hi, um, I have a quick question. Is this the first um comprehensive statewide assessment that you requested, and if so, I mean, if you have already requested one, do you, can I have a copy of the one that you had before, if you've already requested one. April Cooper, uh, CFO for Arkansas Rehab Services. And yes, ma'am, we have had one in the past and I'm happy to provide that. Um, this is something that is required by our vocational rehabilitation grant that we receive from the United States Department of Education and, um, I'm happy to provide that from the past. This is just, it, it was an old one and so we're just providing a new contract, and I'm happy to provide that. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, Representative. Representative Richardson, who's your question for, uh, Department of Commerce. OK, which contract number 7. OK. This might hear from Prom of Commerce. Y'all, introduce yourselves, give us your positions for the record, then representative, you'll be recognized procedure to question. Chick Quinley, director of legislative affairs for the Department of Commerce. Kristen Rhodesberry, director of the division of reemployment for the Department of Commerce. Great. Representative Richard is going to be right over here. Thank you. Hi, good morning. Thank you all for being here. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, just a real quick question, it looks like, uh, on this particular contract, um, with Carsoft Technology, that this is an extension, um, what, uh, what, what? What drove this project over budget? Um, over budget isn't quite the right word. Um, so we have had, um, difficulty hiring, um, well-skilled IT staff to be DWS uh full-time partners and staff for us and so we were able to push some of this work to AWS without the long-term commitment for staff. So there's a system called ICO, um, which is what we use to verify out of state claims for benefits and to move wages back and forth. So specifically, that got added. To the work that AWS is doing for us, um, as well as there was about, um, uh, I, I don't want to say, I say the wrong number, but, um, several lines of code that had to be added to the scope of this work from the original contract that were left off in error. So error on our behalf, um, caused this contract to go up. Who, uh, who, uh, from internal perspective, who's, who's managing this project from a cost perspective. So it, it is a shared responsibility, so we have, of course, our financial management staff that handle the budgeting of that myself that handles the program side, um, and then Missy, who is, um, our CIO, um, handles the IT side and then we have NTT who does some project management work for us as well. So your CIO is doing that. Actual project management. NTT, a vendor is doing that for us. So a separate vendor is doing. The scoping and the project management. In, in tandem with the program and the CIO of a commerce. Yes, sir. we're paying them to get the scope wrong, essentially. It's a little more complicated than that. I understand why it is that way. Yes, sir. I understand. So the way that mainframe, just to take 11 quick step back. This has been attempted off and on for 25 years to get done. Uh, and it's because it's a very difficult, complicated process written in a very old version of Cobalt, um, and then there was, um, additional, uh, libraries that were written to reference that that are even stranger, um, than, than your traditional co-balding language. Keep in mind, I'm not an IT person, so I don't want to misspeak that. Um, but so through that process, they determined that there was some libraries that were not identified. So when the vendor originally scoped with, with our assistance based on the information that we gave them when they scoped that project, they did not realize and did not notify us that there were some libraries missing. And so when that was identified, that was added to the scope of the contract. OK All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Representative. All right, y'all are excused. Thank you. All right, members see no further questions with the exception of contract number 4 on page 13 regarding Lena Lus excuse me, Lena Solutions. All other contracts will be reviewed without objection. All right, moving forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This takes us to D5 in your D packet. It's page 23 on the bottom left-hand side of the page. These are your in-state contracts submitted for your review today. Number one is with apers. They're contracting with Stevens Investment Management. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract. They're using trust funds to pay for this. This is for the management of their domestic equity mid-cap growth investment strategies and their overall fund management. Next we have items. I'm in a group, a few items, items 2 through 5. These are all original contracts with Arkansas State University with various vendors, they are using cash funds for these. They're all valued at $200,000 and they are all to provide HVAC repair services for Arkansas State University. So that's contracts 2 through 5. That takes us to page 24 and item 6. This is a contract for the Department of Agriculture with Custom Air Incorporated. This is Amendment 1 to an existing contract to increase the contract by $800,000. This is for airborne fire suppression services for the Department of Agra. Number 7 with the Department of Corrections. This is a contract with BFI Waste Services. This is Amendment 4 to an existing contract adding funding for waste disposal services at various facilities throughout the division of Correction. Number 8, Department of Corrections division of Community Correction with renew Life Center. This is Amendment 7 to an existing contract. And this is to add funding for community-based treatment services. And this is for a 74 bed re-entry facility located in Little Rock. Number 9 is Department of Education with umbrella security Solutions. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract. They are increasing the amount of this contract, and this is to provide night security at the Arkansas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired and the Arkansas School for the Deaf located here in Little Rock? Number 10 with the Department of Health with the American Data Network. This is Amendment 6 to an existing contract, adding $275,000 for medical records, abstraction services in support of the state stroke registry. Number 11 with the Department of Health, Arkansas State Board of Nursing. They are contracting with Brenda Turner. They're amending this contract to add funds and Brenda provides investigation services for the state board of nursing. Number 12 with the Department of Human Services Division of Aging Adults and Behavioral Health Services with counseling associates. This is Amendment 8 to an existing contract. They're adding funding for therapeutic counseling services as needed. Taking us to page 27. Number 13. In in-state contracts is Department of Human Services with Division of Children and Family Services. They're contracting with the Washita Children's Center Incorporated in Hot Springs. This is an original contractor, $135,000 for emergency shelter services for children statewide. Number 14, Department of Human Services Division of Developmental Disabilities with Karen R. Moore. This is an original contract for $384,000 for psychological services for the Conway Human Development Center. A number 15, Department of Human Services Divisional developmental disabilities, they're contracting with Terry L. Grimes. This is Amendment 6 to an existing contract for physical therapy services at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center. Number 16 is the Department of Labor and Licensing with the Arkansas Information Consortium. This is an original contract at $1000 for their new electronic licensing program for their boards and commissions? Number 17, Department of Public Safety division of Arkansas State Police with HMO partners. This is Amendment 5 to an existing contract. This is to add funding and extend the date. To provide for additional membership. In their in their ASP health plan. Number 18, Department of the Military with waste Management of Arkansas. This is Amendment 2 to an existing contract adding funding for waste disposal services for the Department of M. Number 19, Department of Transformation and Shared Services Building Authority with Antonio Dean Moore. This is an amendment to an existing contract. Adding funds for janitorial expenses? For the multi-agency complex in Little Rock. Number 20, Department of Transformation and Shared Services DIS with IBM. This is an original contract. IBM will assist DIS with a business automation workflow and operational decision manager services. Number 21 is DIS also with international business machines. This is also an original contract for $248,000. And this is for assistance with master data management. And data-related services. Adam 22 is with the Department of Veteran Services with MedLink Incorporated. This is Amendment one to an existing contract for $1.2 million in this amendment. This is to provide temporary nursing staffing and CNA services in the North Little Rock and Fayetteville Veterans' homes. Number 23 is with UFA Pulaski Tech with communications plus interpreter services. This is an amendment to an existing contract using cash funds valued at a $1.4 million increase. They state this is for the expansion of their interpreter services for classes and campus events? Number 24, University of Arkansas also Plasky tech with graced hands landscaping and lawn care. This is an original contract for $400,000 for groundskeeping and lawn services for all the Pulaski Tech campuses year round. Number 25, University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff with express services. This is an original contract, cash funded at $2.5 million. This is for temporary staffing services such as custodial, clerical, administrative, and temporary athletic game day workers as needed. Number 26 with the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff. This is with IK Network Solutions. This is a federally funded original contract, which will provide for the upgrade of wireless in all of their dormitories and their student union and library and to upgrade their existing infrastructure. These are the in-state contracts for your review. All right, remember, you've heard an explanation of the contracts. We do have a question. We're gonna start with Senator Hammer. Senator, who's your question for and what's the contract number? Uh, first one's gonna be 8 for the Department of Corrections, please. Jim Tre Jim Cheek director, division of Community Correction. Chad Brown, CFO, Department of Corrections. All right, fellas. Central hammer, you're recognized procedural question. Thank you, Ms. Chair. On contract number 8 for the Renewed Life Center, I noticed that one of the reasons it says was new contract created to vendor number changing. Do you know why the vendor had to change their number and what would, uh, Be the impact of them having to change their number? I can't tell you why. I know we, I know the vendor changed their, their name, but I can't tell you why they changed their numbers, so for us, this didn't change anything for us. Uh, we still use them as a vendor, so we carry on. OK, and do you know about the Outcome, the quality of outcomes of the services they're providing with those 74 beds. Uh, yes, sir, we have a good outcome. This is actually to help reduce recidivism. These are re-entry beds, not transitional living beds, so these offenders are actually released from the Department of Correction to start the process of being reintegrated into society. So yes, there is a good program. Do you have the recidivism number for those that go through? The program. No, sir, I don't, but I can get it for you. I'd like to have that. I'd like to, uh, just get a little more information as to the nature of why they had to change their vendor number, uh, and rebrand, if you would, please. Yes, sir, we'll get that, if you just that the staff and then we can just forward that on to members, that'd be great. I've got another question, but not for them, Mr. Chair. No excuse. Thank y'all. Right. Oh, scopes, I'm sorry. Representative Springer. Jumped on me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I would just like to know the location of this facility that's being built in Little Rock. It is located off Markham in Little Rock, Arkansas, kind of behind Shotgun dances. It used to be called Hidden Creek at one time. It well. Thank All right. excuse now. Thank you. All right, Senator Hammer. 21 is the next one for Department of Transformation. Robert McGoo, Department of Transformation and Shared Services division of information systems. Uh, James Caldwell, CFO TSS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This kind of tags on to a conversation about the previous contract that had a lot of discussion a while ago. My question is, if DIS had to hire the quality staff that it would take in order to do things like this, maybe the other contract that was under previous discussion, do you have any idea what price tag would go with that? No, and in this case this is implementation. We do definitely try to maintain the solutions ourselves as we're stand up a new solution, um, we're bringing in the subject matter expertise for that particular solution to help with the initial implementation, but then as soon as we can. We, we're learning and taking that over ourselves internally. So with regards to this contract, y'all do not have the in-house expertise to facilitate this or because of the product brand that we're using it's maybe proprietary or what is the reason we could and have, you know, learned ourselves reading the documentation in, in this case, when we can use implementation services like this, it, it helps to get there faster, uh, and to make sure that we're leveraging that expertise. From the vendor who does this all the time to make sure that, uh, particularly when we're dealing with say administrative data we're getting everything set up for the, the highest level of security and fault tolerance and Delivering value faster. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Sher. I got one more after this one. OK. All right. I don't see any more questions, so y'all are excused. You've got another question for Veterans Affair. Veterans Affair? OK. And what's that contract number, Senator? I'm sorry, um. It is one with nursing, um. Contract number 22, 22. Thanks. If y'all just introduce yourselves, get your name and your position for the record, then Senator Hamburg will be recognized for the seat. Wayne Ruthman, chief of staff, Veterans Affairs. Car right out, procurement manager. Danny Linford, I'm the division director for the Veteran's Home. Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chair. The, the phrase in here temporary nursing staffing with the amount of money that we're granting you, which I know, you know, nursing is a problem we're staffing up. I, I acknowledge that. Do you think this is gonna carry you when it, when it gets over being the temporary phase, do you anticipate that you're going to be staffed up enough to where we wouldn't have to have these kind of contracts again or can you look in your crystal ball and give me an idea. Uh, I don't. Currently are, uh, pay scale isn't such that we can hire, we're not competitive enough to hire. Uh, nurses. For for the homes. So what are you having to pay under this temporary contract to nursing, is this, is this hiring traveling, nursing, temporary, you know, from temporary services or is this, how is this money going to be utilized? it's for temporary nursing. OK, and do you know what the hourly rate is that you're having to pay for that? Oh, it depends on the, the whether it's an RNLPN or a CNA, um, how about an RN. Probably about 51 to 60 an hour. So here's what I'd like you to do, um. We, we spend an enormous amount of money. Hiring temp services in order to staff up and number one, that, that's a high dollar cost. 2, I'm not sure there's not a little resentment among those that are there at the salaries that have been there for 1015, 20 years that have been there, come and go, and I'm not disrespecting traveling nurses at all. But I would like you to do a 3-year look back of how much money you've had to spend in temporary services because I think it's time to have the discussion that maybe we ought to look at those salaries of those nursing and that staff because it's money, whether it's coming, going out the door this way or it's going out the door that way. I think it's time to have that discussion because we're just spending money out the Wazoo, um, trying to keep staffed up by using temporary services, so I'd like a 3 year book back and to the, I actually would agree with you there, um, It's time that we take a hard look at that and I mean it doesn't sound like there's any cost savings whatsoever, you know, and using dr nurses and to the point of the offense, yes, I think anybody who works in an organization for 58, 10 years and see somebody brought in making more money than them is going to be problematic. It'll put you at fault for that, but I think it's a good time for us to do a deep dive on that and to see if there's a better way to proceed forward. So if you can get that information to staff and then she can, they can submit that out to members of the committee, and if you're done, Senator Hamer, I got up, Senator Love, he's, he's out. All right, I just want to say thank you and, and I'm not disagreeing with what's going on. I just think it's time for a hard look. No disrespecting nursing or temporary service, or you guys either one. It's where we are and we need to look at where we're going. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Very good point. Thank you, gentlemen, you're excused. All right, members, you've heard an explanation of the contracts now without objection, these items will stand as reviewed. That's Mr. Chair, I thought I muted you. Uh, yeah, you wish, um, I'd appreciate if the press didn't quote the Baptist preacher with the word wazoo, please, I'd appreciate that. Thank you. Noted. All right, members. Yeah, so you know Adams. Now, There is there anything that you noticed in the reports that any member wants to discuss, and they're not required for you, they don't require review. OK. All right. See no and without any further business come for this agenda, we're excused.