ALC-JBC Budget Hearings

Welcome everyone to the 3rd day of. Legislative Council joint budget. Budget hearings first up we have our analyst Mildred Hamilton, if you, you're already there and ready to go, Ms. Hamilton. Thank you. uh, Department of Health. If you come up to the table. Thank y'all for being here. Uh, start with you, Ms. Hamilton, and if everybody identify themselves across the table. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members. I'm Mildred Hamilton. I work in the fiscal division of the Bureau of Legislative Research. Good morning, Don Adams, Department of Health. Matt Gilmore, Department of Health Pickle, Department of Health. Casey Cochran, Department of Health. Thank you all for being here Ms. Hamilton. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you will open your manuals, we're gonna start on page 25. And with the approval of the chair, we're just going to go through the health department in its entirety. The first appropriation. Is for the shared services paying account. This is used to pay for the secretary of the Arkansas Department of Health, their salary and their matching. This is funded by transfers from their paying account as well as transfers from the various boards and commissions that we had discussed on Monday. The agencies requesting appropriation the amount of approximately 425,000 for both years of the biennium, and that includes the following change they would like to transfer 7 extra he positions from their paying account operations into this appropriation.ximately $143,000 increase. This is provided for by the executive recommendation and you'll see on page 27. When you look at the regular salaries, there is no change, but there is an increase in the number of extra help positions. So the total at the bottom of the page and authorized the 278,000 for 25 increases to 425,000 approximately for 6 and 7. I'm gonna go into the Department of Health proper if you all will turn to meet to page 56. You'll see that there are 9 appropriations for this part of the department. There are 14 appropriations that are not being requested for this by any of these were all funded with ARPA funds. There are 3 appropriations with changes, and you can see that they've got approximately 2300 full-time positions. This agency, the funding sources are located at the bottom. You'll see that they've got general revenue approximately 62% of their budget is federal revenue. They also have special cash. They've got some tobacco settlement funds on the next page, page 57. You'll see that they also have some third party reimbursements and some transfers. First appropriations on page 58, it is for their emergency medical services. The funding for this appropriation is derived from certification and renewal fees. And it provides for the on-site examinations of the EMTs, maintenance of their certification software and educational programs. The agency is requesting that we continue their current authorized amount of $60,000 for both years of the biennium, which is the executive recommendation. You'll see that detail on page 59. Moving to page 60, this is their operations appropriation to paying account that has a number of funding sources. This is their largest appropriation. It funds their two central office locations. They're 92 local health units throughout the state. Each of those health units has telehealth capabilities that allow them to access care, particularly in rural areas. They provide regulatory and preventive services. They operate the substance abuse and injury prevention branch, the medical marijuana section, and a number of other Kidney disease programs, cervical cancer programs, breast programs. As I said, their funding consists of general revenue, federal funding, some special revenue. They've got a number of fees related to their vital records, immunization, rabies, swimming pools, etc. They also have third-party reimbursement tobacco settlement funding, and some other funding for this appropriation. The agency is requesting appropriation of approximately $327 million for fiscal year 26 and 327 million for fiscal year 27. That's just appropriation. They would like general revenue funding of about 62.7. For both years of the biennium. The request also includes the previously mentioned transfer of the 7 extra help positions from their operations into their shared services paying account? That transfer is going to provide flexibility to utilize the positions that were needed within the boards and commissions? There's also a request for a reduction of about 166 million and this is further infectious disease control appropriation to better line with their funding. Over the biennium they received a number of federal grants, and they increase their appropriation significantly. All of these were approved through LLCP and you'll see that on the next page. They're also requesting restoration of about $1,000,000 in capital outlay. They need to replace some necessary equipment at their local health units. The executive recommendation provides for all of these requests, including the reclassifications of some positions and the discontinuation of some positions. Those are going to be discussed in the personnel subcommittee at another time. Page 62 gives you their budget detail. And you'll see, as I mentioned, The change in positions in extra help. Reducing from 22929 to 222. You'll also note the decrease in positions that's approved by the executive recommendation. Going from 2200 to approximately 2100. And then in the infectious disease control, which is the last line item on this page. You note that they had an authorized appropriation of approximately 197 million and that's being reduced to 30 million for each year of the biennium. Moving to page 64, we have their nuclear planning grants appropriation. Disappropriation is funded from special revenue, which is assessments against utilities that operate nuclear generating facilities within the state? The agency is requesting to continue their current appropriation amount of $325,000 for both fiscal years of the biennium. The executive recommendation provides for the agency's request and on page 65, You'll note that they expanded all of the appropriation in their grants and AIs line item. These funds were sub-granted to the county surrounding nuclear one, so we had some go to Conway. For residents in Russellville. Popeye, Logan, and Johnson. Each of these entities receives 65,000 annually and quarterly payments of $16,250. Next, appropriations on page 66 as for the trauma system. This is a fully funded general revenue appropriation. The agency is requesting appropriation of 26.2 in both fiscal years 26 and 27. And actual funding in 20 million for both years of the biennium, which is also the executive recommendation along with the reclassification of one position. On page 67. You know that the trauma assistant expenses are at the bottom of the page. They're currently authorized 24.2 million, which is approximately what they'll be asking for in the upcoming biennium. Promise system does have carry forward. And it is going to be addressed in special language. Page 69 is your tobacco and prevention cessation programs appropriation? This was created by initiated Act 1 of 2000. It's funded with revenues derived from tobacco settlement proceeds. The agency's requesting appropriation of 14.6 million in fiscal year 26 and 14.7 million in fiscal year 27, which is also the executive recommendation. There is going to be a reclassification of one position requested again discussed in personnel and that's the only change to this appropriation. You'll see the detail on page 70. On page 71 is there health building and local health grant trust appropriation is used for the expansion, renovation and construction, or improvement of the state health building and for grants for construction, renovation, and other expansion of approved local health units. It's usually not sufficient funding to do any actual construction, so they usually use it for upgrades and renovations. The appropriation funding is from fees. And they're requesting to continue the appropriation of 1.9 million for both years of the bienn you'll see that on page 72. That is the executive recommendation. On page 73, we're going to move to their WI Food Instruments cash appropriation, which provides for the issuance of vouchers to at-risk persons to improve the nutrition and eligible pregnant, breastfeeding and postpartum women and to provide for infants and young children. This appropriation is funded by federal revenues derived from the USDA. The agency's requesting to continue their appropriation amount of $60 million for both years of the biennium, which is the executive recommendation and the budget detail is included on page 74. You'll see that they have spent almost all of the appropriation allotted 48.8 million was expended in 24. Last appropriation is. On page 75, it's a full independent practice credentialing. Appropriation, it provides for operations of the credentialing committee. This is a fairly new appropriation, funding for the appropriations derived from application fees, agencies requesting continuation of their current appropriation of 350,000 both years, which is the executive recommendation. As I mentioned, it's a fairly new appropriation, so you'll see on page 76 that they don't have any expenditures as yet. Oh, I misspoke. We've got one more appropriation. Interpreters for deaf and hearing and pain is on page 77. This appropriation provides for the advisory board expenses. Funding is derived from special revenues that are provided in statute. And they're asking a continuation of the appropriation of 25,000 for both years of the Bunny, which is the agency's request. On page 78 you'll see that they've expended approximately 4000 of this in the last fiscal year. And at the request of the chair. We were Requested to provide recoverable general revenue for each agency that we present the health department. Turned back $5.7 million in fiscal year 2024. And that concludes my presentation, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Hamilton. You do a good job. Uh, Matt, is your, many of the health team have any comments before we get started? I'll defer to the Chief of Staff Adams. Yes, sir. Thank you. Uh, just wanted to express the apologies of Secretary Mallory for not being here today. I think she's spoken with some of the leadership and explain why she couldn't be there, so I wanted to express that, uh, her regret and not being here today and so with that we'll we'll be glad to answer any questions. Uh, just for personal, who, who's in charge of the trauma system now? Who's Person's over that. Uh, Joe Martin is our, uh, office, uh, director over the trauma system. OK, thank you. Uh, I'm gonna go to our Number one senior senator, Senator Chesterfield, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am feeling very much that way. Uh, on page 27. Uh, I am looking at the appropriation. I'm looking at the actual and the budget. Uh, for 23, 24, 24, 25, which was 250, well, the budget was 256. We're then jumping to 425, 501. Could you explain, uh, why that almost doubled. Give me a little time to catch up with you. We're on page 27. Yes, ma'am. So historically, we just had one position and shared services business area and that was the secretaries. So what we're asking to do moving into next biennial is add 7 extra help positions from our, uh, 0645, our main operations budget into this shared services budget and that will allow us to use those um, extra help positions and other business areas. And you're gonna use them to do what in other business areas. Well, we've had requests from like, uh, minority Health commission, the nursing board, and some of these small, particularly the smaller ones, they don't have any extra help positions and we have extra, extra we have additional extra help positions in our main operating business area, but we can't loan those extra help positions to them as long as they're in that 0645 primary business area. But by putting them in shared services, then we can allow some of these. smaller boards and commissions to use those extra help positions. Thank you. And on page 72. Um, Is this new, this 1.950 because it's not in 2023, 2024. What necessitated this budgeting for one.95. Senator Chesterfield, no, this is not a new fund center. We've had this for quite a while. The, the structure of this fund center is, it's a little bit complicated if, if you'll allow me a little time to explain it. Well, what I need to know is, was it there? I don't, I see 0 and 23, 23 was our expenses. So in the last fiscal year, 24, we had no expenses from this fund center, but you anticipate now that we're going to have 1.95 million in Construction projects, it sometimes takes 2 or 3 years and the, the expenses from that account can vary greatly from year to year. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Representative Kavanaugh, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You probably already know what I'm going to ask about. I'm gonna ask about fun balances, and you know me, I'm always looking at the fund balances to see in what ways they can be used. So the first one I want to ask about is tobacco prevention. I think we've had this conversation many times. And my understanding is. And correct me if I'm wrong, we're and this is on page 70 just so for y'all, so you know. Um, that fund balance is 26.1 million. And I just, if you can correct me, is this fund balance the one that has to be used for health related issues? Yes, ma'am. And are we in the health department, are we looking at ways we can use that fund balance where particularly maternal health is what I'm, as Matt well knows, I've, I've been trying to get some of this money to go toward that, that problem that we have in the state. Is that something that y'all are actively looking at now is that maybe we can use this money to do some grants and stuff and try to make an impact upon that that we're currently. Yes, uh, Representative Kavanaugh, we've had a series of meetings on this issue. We have a list of different projects and increased funding and some existing projects, but maternal health is at the top of the list. And this is probably gonna be a little harsh question, but if we could have been doing this all along, how come we've not done it and we have this money available to address some of these issues. Has there been a barrier that, um, has kept us from being able to do those things and We overcome that barrier and I guess what I'm asking is if we haven't really overcome that barrier, is there anything that we can do that will free up these funds to be able to be used for what they're directed to be used for. So, so I'll start and then turned over to, uh, Chief of Staff Adams. Let me go back. These funds are for health issues, but it needs to be somewhat tied to tobacco use and, um, smoking and cessation efforts. So we are looking at ways where we can take some of these funds and work with individuals, women, pregnant women that are, uh, have those tobacco issues. So that's what we're looking in there. We're also looking to see if there's a ways we can use it with maybe some stroke and and uh stemming money and stuff like that. So because old dog can be related back to the back of that's, that's where we're going to this. OK. That is on that fund balance and if you give me a little leeway, Mr. Chair, on 72, we have, um, another fund balance and this is a health building and grant page number 72, and I think we just talked about that with Senator Chesterfield, but you know you've got a $20.4 million. And I realized that that's used for construction, you don't really ever know what it might be. But you're only asking for 1.5, 1.9, almost 2 mil, but we've got a 20 million excess funding out there. Is it your intention that you're going to use all that 20 million for this particular type of project. So if you, if you'll let me explain this, this particular, uh, fund center has two components to it. If you notice, it says local grant trust fund and then it says health building fund. So the appropriations is just for the local grant trust fund side. And that fund balance in that particular component of the fund center is around 3 million. The rest of the money that's in the fund balance is the health building fund. We do not have a prospirations to spend that money at this time. We're putting about $3 million into that component of the fund center annually that comes from a portion of the vital records fee. And that fund is being set aside for potential of refurbishing, replacing, adding on to our Building, uh, on Markham, our main building. So we don't have appropriations to spend that money. We're not asking at this time. We'll ask for special appropriations when we get to that point, but the appropriations are for the local grant trust fund component of that fund center. Of this additional funding that you're just putting out there for a future project. Do you have any idea how big you're going to let that fund grow? Do you have an idea of what you're wanting to do to that building, I guess is. Yes, ma'am, we have done quite a bit of work and preparations and some feasibility studies. We've engaged with an architect, an engineering firms we've drawn up some preliminary proposals. We're talking to the governor's office about that, so that's all in in the planning and in the works. OK. And my final question is going to be on 76. I think No, that's a well. My question on that was this is the, um, established in 21, um, to provide for the certified nurse practitioners. How are we going in that program because you know, we've worked with trying to get more nurses in and more health workers quickly as possible. How is that program going? Is this, is this having an impact on it or is it going to have an impact on it? I can discuss the numbers and then uh. Matt can maybe elaborate for me, uh, you know, the, the, the committee has been functioning since 2022. Uh, there's 8 members on the committee. They processed a little over 900 applications. I think they've issued a little over 700. I'll, um, They've approved over 700 applications, some of them are still pending and being reviewed or maybe turned back for additional information. So, um. We've also lowered the fees on this particular board recently because they are accumulating a fund balance in part because they have no expenses right now. That committee is being supported by some of our other areas, but in the future, they may have some expenses, uh, but, but for right now, we've lowered the fees, uh, for those applications and renewals. And matters it, is it? Is it going to make an impact? Is it going to? Assist us in trying to get people out in the work. I think the intent of the legislation, um, was to give these nurse practitioners that had so many hours, some independent authority, and as Chief of Staff Adams said we've got, you know, About 700 or so that are, are actually more than that out there. I think long term it will. These are, these are, these are, you know, APRNs that can practice on their own, um, have a little bit more flexibility. So I do think long term that will help. I think, you know, as, as Chief of Staff Adam said, you know, it's, it's, uh, they're meeting quarterly. I think they're processing them as fast as they can. I think it took a little while to, it was new territory for Arkansas, so they had to kind of figure out, you know, what this is gonna look like. They had to do rules, um, and get kind of the, the foundation set, but I think they're in a, In a rhythm now and able to do these quickly, but I do think long term I think it will have an impact. I think that, um, you know, the Medical and nursing board are working together on this. So I think that's been a good, a good fit as well. They're supporting the efforts and the work on this. So it's, as he said, we're not seeing a lot of expenses, we're just absorbing that, but we do want to take that fund, and those, those funds that are coming in and try to give that back to those boards that are supporting that and and reimburse them that staff's time. So I think it's, I think we need a few more years, but I do think I think the intent of what the legislation was trying to do is, is being met and will be met. Thank you. Representative Wooton, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Adams. My questions will be on page 56. First question is, We're, where are you moving the money. For all the programs that you're doing away with. And why are you asking for an increase To 431 million. Actually, you're cutting your budget from 540 from 544544 million down to 431 million, but yet you only spent 357 million in the last Fiscal year Representative, we're we're we is all this money going this $8 million in the health workforce. There's 3 million in uh Uh, ARPA sharp. And all that, so where, where is all that money going to? So the ARPA funds that are listed on the summary sheet, I believe they're listed only because we had expenses and. Fiscal year 24, but that money is no longer available for us to us, so we're not budgeting that money into the next biennial. So we did have some expenses and fiscal year 24, but that money is no longer available to us. When you say not available is this federal grants. My next question has to do with the, uh, you have a sheet, uh, the state is uh 5th of September on your, on the table that was provided for you. And I got, I got you under that sheet it says you're authorized 2405 positions. On this page 56, it says you're authorized 2,365. So what is the difference between what you reported on the 5th and what is showing on the budget here. There's a, you know, there's 2,365 positions authorized. And you showed 2,405. So I believe what you're looking at today on the summary sheet it's just our 0645 business area, our primary business area. Of course, we have other positions in the boards that were reviewed on, uh, Tuesday. So I think this number, the 2400 number reflects all of our positions across all business areas this biennial of course going in the next biennial, we are reducing. I think by 54, the number of positions we have across all business areas. Next question. You're asking for 7 more positions. No, sir. You're just transferring those from one to another, you're increasing the 2405 number. OK. Why, why are you holding on to 96 positions that are over 2.5 years old. Well, across all your business areas. Well, I, I, I. That that number surprises me that's that big. We did ask to retain some of those that were on the list, but we were very selective about which ones we asked for. We do have some higher level positions that we had chose not to feel at this moment and some of those have not been filled in a few years. We also have some very hard to recruit positions. Health physicists, nutritionist that can go, you know, a year or more vacant and so we're hoping the pay plan. allow us to recruit and retain some of those positions. How many of those 96 are budgeted already in your budget. Are those higher level positions budgeted. Yes, a few of them are higher level and they're budgeted, correct. Can you come back to the personnel committee in the ACL and they asked for ALC and ask for additional positions if you need them without tying up that much money in your budget. We can, uh, if that's the will of the, the body, we can do that, you know, some of these positions, there's a certain churn within the department with registered nurses and others and. So you know if we have a health unit that sees an increase in demand like in Northwest Arkansas we may decide based on case loads to increase the nurses. It's good to be able to respond to that as quickly as possible. We have other needs that require us to respond quickly to changing demands. So it's good to have some level of flexibility there and I think overall we have cut several, you know, positions, uh, well, over the last 2 or 3 years. I understand what you're saying and and I trying to hurt. The health services, uh, of, of what you, what y'all do. But at the same time, we look at millions and I mean millions of dollars that are tied up in budgeted numbers. It was an agency when sometimes they come in and they ask for that money to be shifted to another cost area in order that they can use it. Then, then you make the comment that you need to be able to respond quickly to situations which I fully understand, but the, but the problem is we've tied up the's see, let's say 45 of of the 96 positions or budget. We've tied up several million dollars in cash flow that you could have had access to and service areas, you follow my train of thought. Man. I think we would like to look at as chief of staff Adams said that number is a little higher than we thought we'd like to maybe look at that a little closer and make sure that we're on the same page because I think in this last go around with the legislation that makes us evaluate the 2, 2-year vacancies. I think our number was a, was a lot smaller than that, in fact, I remember we requested to retain 9 positions from the list that was given to us in this last round. For this fiscal year and then the fiscal year before, I think we had a total of 50 positions on that list, and we may have asked to retain 12 of those. So that 90 number is a little bit. Surprising to me, but I'm not saying that it's not accurate, but, uh, I think we've been very progressive in turning back positions that we're not using. Our total number of positions over the last three years has reduced dramatically. I think what we want to be sure of is that you're looking at them each and every, ever by any of now ever the report is due I'm personally involved in evaluating those and discussing with individuals and deciding what we'll ask to retain. question and I'll be done. On, on your, uh, uh, shared services which we used to call central office when we went through this. How do you arrive at, do you have a formula for which you charge each of your uh boards and commissions and agencies within the health department, do you have a formula that you go by if you charge them. $35,000 a year for services or 15,000. Do you have a formula that you use to arrive at that for operations. That they provide to various agencies currently the Department of Health is not charging our boards and commissions any indirect cost. Now we may have to look at that in the future, uh, but currently we're not charging our, our boards indirect costs to spend more money. OK. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Adams, Mr. Gilmore, and the others. Senator Hammer, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Char. Let me pick up on that comment you just made. First of all, the, and that's related to the shared services conversation that you're not charging the boards, is that correct? Is that what I heard? Correct. I would encourage you to begin to look at that because based on some other legislation where we are looking at a 3-year average that they would, um, you know, reduce the fees that they're collecting at some point in the future, you began to charge that might have a direct impact on that effort over on that side. Um, so I'd encourage you maybe start looking at. Getting that started sooner than later, so if that happens later, we would, we would have a true. Picture of it, um. On the shared services, just help me understand a little bit better. You're going to transfer. Um, 7 extra help positions. And those are now gonna be under the shared services, is that correct? Correct. They're currently in the 0645 business area. Our primary business area, we have, you know, a lot of extra help positions in that business area because it's so large, so we're going to take 7 of those and transfer them so that it's a net zero, increase. OK, not an increase and the 0645, I'm, I'm not familiar with that. What is it about that that prohibits you from. Doing what you want to do without having to move them over to shared services. It's just the, the, the rules of the game that if you've got a position authorized in one business area, you cannot use it in another business area. You think it'd be better to look at change in 0645 than having to move them over to shared services if it's a net zero cost. Well, I, I'd probably have to defer to DFA on that question. You know, I, I think that's what shared services is for in part so that you can. Put positions in that area so they could be shared across all your business areas. Right. OK. And, but those would be restricted just in the Department of Health that they would be used, right? Correct. The business area is under the Department of Health. OK. And then on page 54, um, it's the women's right to receive adequate information before terminating pregnancy, unborn pain, Awareness Act. Do you, do you have any numbers and you can get this later if you want to, but do you know, do you have any numbers as far as it looks like there's 6000 copies of that that's been distributed, and I guess that's through all the Department of Health offices that that's distributed, is that correct? That's correct. I, I'd probably defer to either Casey or Matt if they know any more details, but that's my understanding. Yeah, yes, sir, it. We, I think we've got it in, uh, print, I think we discussed the, the DVD and the video type thing because I think there was, you know, that's antiquated now, but, um, are you asking how many we've distributed or? Yes, not, not what you distribute it to the office, but do you know how many within the office have been distributed to the public. I don't have, we can check and see. We can look and see if we got some numbers on that. I'd like to get that if you don't mind, please. And then on page or page 61, last question is about reclassification of the 40. Of the 48 positions. And you may be a We're talking about this a minute ago, uh, with the representative, but the reclassification, what were they reclassified to and why were they reclassified Senator Hammer, I believe this is in reference to uh throughout this biennial we occasionally come, uh, come to this body or the personnel ALC personnel and asked to swap positions or change positions and create new titles if we need new titles, um, so I believe that's the accumulation of what is. this biennial so far and the changes we've made. We've, we've not asked for any growth position pools. They've always been surrender positions. We've created some new classifications when we saw needs arise, but we, we surrendered an equal number of positions that we requested. So this is basically a summary of what's already been done. Yes, sir, it's making the changes that we've made throughout this biennial going into next biennial. Do you know what the total cost for reclassifying them was, no, uh, we could, we could. Put that together and get that to you, but I don't have that with me if you don't mind, I'd like to know what the total cost was for that, please. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Ladyman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, my question is on page 76. The full independent practice credentialing. Uh, and, and I know that's new. I, I guess, uh. Last year was basically the first full year of that, but I, I guess, uh, how, how was that number arrived at on the 350,000? Is that just based on other boards of that size? I'll start and I think Chief of Staff Adams or Mrs. Hamilton might be able to jump in, but when this was, uh, put together in the, I think the 21 session. I think it was 21, um, it was new, we had to create a new program and I think we pulled a $350,000 and just said, that's what we need to set aside for that. I think we were looking at possibly, you know, nurses are usually a little bit higher level, uh, graded employees. So I think we were thinking if we had to have staff there what that might look like, um, you know, I, so I think that's where it came from, to be honest with you. Well, the reason I asked that question, that's a good enough answer. I, I appreciate that, but, um, I've met with some of the members of the nursing board and the, uh, members of Public Health, we had a, I think it's a quarterly report that shows those numbers you were talking about a while ago, uh, only one nurse practitioner, I think, has been declined during this time period, but a number of them have had to Provide additional certifications or information, uh, and, you know, we're, there is legislation being written now to improve this process because I believe it is working, but it can be made a lot better. But They may be doing more in the future is what I'm saying. Uh, but do you know, uh, Matt, if If this board is not functioning, say there needs to be a change on the board. Do you know what the process is? Who appoints those members, are they there for, I forget how many years they're appointed for? Do you have any idea? Uh, give me one second. There's 8 members on the board and they are appointed by the governor. It's. My understanding of. What's their term, do you know? uh. Give me 1 2nd here. 3-year terms, um, Yeah, there's 8 members, 3-year terms. OK. All right, thank you. Representative Beck you recognize? Thank you, Mr. Chair. This has been an easy question. I'm, I'm looking at page 62, and I'm, I'm curious as on the 22, 24, the, the actuals there versus the budget that's that's set up for 24, 25 and then carries on out through there. There's a, about $180,190 million dollar. Uh, increase in the federal revenue line. Do you know what that's about? Are you, um, The the federal the funding sources from the federal revenue line and, uh, 2324 is. $125 million and then the very next year you got in the 24, 25 budget we've got, um, or is that a two year thing versus a 1 year or something representative, this, this is the first column is the actual expenditures for the last fiscal year and then the next column represents the budget or the available money we have. So many of these federal grants are multi-year grants. And so the money is available to us to spend all in one year, but we typically spend it over several years depending on the grants. So that's what that represents is federal grant funding that we certified that we have available to us, but obviously we don't spend all that. It'll be spent over, over, um, several years. And that's one reason why the appropriations, if you look, uh, in the table above it that under that infectious disease control we're only asking for. Uh 30 million. Uh, it aligns better with our expenses and that, in that line item. Historic, even though we have more available to us to spend based on historical spending that 30 million is appropriate. So and that, and that's how, well, my concern was, is like that number goes up and it's there every year and that's not an increase in federal amount. In fact, that that amount is going down as we get away from the pandemic and some of those grants expire, actual federal funding has been reducing over the last few years. All right. Thank you. Center love you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. um, Mr. Adams, I'm just. Listening to testimony. um something for me. Did you say that you had 96 open positions? Can you repeat that, Senator Love, I'm sorry. Did you say you had 96 open positions. Uh, no, sir. I mean, we have more open positions than that. I think that was the number of positions, uh, that. Representative Wooton was discussing about they had been vacant more than 2 years. And so, of the, of those 96 physicians, how, how many are slotted for nurses? Yeah, we'd have to get with you on that. Uh, I'm not sure, uh, that exact number. Yeah, I think this is the list provided that we saw this morning. I'm, we need to double check that number. I'm not. Not sure that that's. Anyway, we, we need to, we need to dig into it a little bit more if you, if you could check that number, if you could check that number because I was gonna, and then I, I wanted to know kind of what were you to number one. If, if I'm, I'm gonna assume that you probably have a, a high percentage of nurses that you're trying to recruit and retain different things like that. So I just want to know what were you proactively doing about that? So, if you can get those numbers to me, then we could talk offline about my other questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I Senator Payton, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you could look at page 70 with me on the tobacco prevention. Cessation program. I just want to make sure I'm understanding these figures from 23, 24, the actual. I mean I run down the first several lines there, that, those are expenses, it looks like. The 50 to prevention and cessation. 435,000 the nutrition and physical activity. That's the money that hit the target 5.5 basically million. But uh from what I'm looking at here, it looks like we spent 4.2 million. And expenses. To spend 5.5. That doesn't seem very efficient to me. It, it looks like, you know, if this money's coming in, we're supposed to use it for prevention and cessation. Uh, The money that hit the target only looks like. 5.5 million there. The rest of it's all expenses. I'm having trouble. Can you refer to the exact uh role that you're looking at 70, the far left column, uh, 23, 24, actual. Yes, sir. So you've got salaries, 1.5%, personal services, 500,000 operating expense, 1.150,000 professional fees, 2 million. Those are all expenses. Yes, and they total around 4.2 million. The two lines that say tobacco prevention, 5 million nutrition and physical activity, 435,000. That's the money that hit the target. So I mean Uh, it looks very inefficient to me that That we spent A Little over $4 million in order to spend. 5.5. So I'm Turn it over to our our CFO, uh, Miss Pickle, but. The 5, these are different fund centers in the tobacco program, so that's just one of the fund centers that was, that was. The 5 million, you have to consider also the 2 million above it. Yeah, I see what you're saying, but it's, it's one program. So that, I mean, it was about. 9.6 spent their total if I understand this correctly. All right, we have 10,000 comes in from the settlement. And so we established an agency, a program, an entity here. And their job is to spend that money on prevention and cessation. So I mean, yeah, I understand the expenses are, are there the cost of running the program, but that's. My argument is it's a very inefficient program if If 60% of the money gets to the target and 40% is expenses. I believe the 2 million and we can, we've got staff here to give you the detail of the professional fees are also prevention and cessation activities plus a lot of the salaries go towards our uh our tobacco quit line so we brought that in house several years ago and we have operators that man that line, so those are, uh, operators that man that line so the staff that we have, the salaries also reflects. Uh, some of that as well, and some of that is staff that goes to the schools and provides educational opportunities as well for on tobacco and vaping and that sort of thing. So it's, it's, it's. You have to look at it as program-wide, I guess is what I'm trying to say. The whole, not just to see if I was. Wrong in my interpretation sounds like the 2 million, how is it being spent? I'll refer to Mr. Jay Pickle. She can get some got to speak. I'd love to hear her speak. Hi, so the way the tobacco program works, it's broken down and our expenses are mandated differently in the legislation, so at the top part, it's what we call 604. And so we have to spend that in contract so that $2 million line that professional feed line is contracts that we do. So it could be, um, in our communication department it could be some other contracts that we do with, um, for professional work, but it is work that's done to promote our cessation program and then of course the operating. Expenses are mostly in-house for our operating supplies and salary infringes in there as well, but it should be looked at it, all of that work is done for prevention. There's not just one piece that's prevention. It's all prevention work within the whole program amount. OK, I appreciate your answer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Central Hammer, you recognize? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me, uh, pick up on that line of questioning first of all, the, you mentioned that it's mandated by legislation that this is the way it has to be spent, is that legislation. And the mandates that go with that legislation dictated to by the settlement, the terms of the settlement when it first happened or is that uh been? By our discretion. Some of it is in the settlement agreement and then some of it also, it was an initiated act in 2000 that went to the, for the people. So it's, it's pretty specific in there. All right, so if it went before the people then our ability. To modify it is gonna be very limited to whatever areas were not dictated to by the settlement or by. The vote of the people, is that correct? Y'all, I think this body has made some changes and tweaks here and there, but I think it's, it tries to stay in that same vein. OK. Um, Subject to traveling nurses, are you, is the department having to hire any traveling nurses or, or you, we're out from underneath all that. No, sir, we don't, we don't have any contract nurses at this time. OK. And then, um, I think, I think that's it. I may get back to you, but those are the two. Thank you, Mrs. Char. Uh, represented Painter, you drop off or did I bump you back on? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a question on page 62, uh, and maybe I'm not understanding this correctly. Um, Your conference and travel expenses were actual 320,000 and then you're asking for it, it looks like a budget increase of 400, a little over 400,000. Can you explain to me why such an increase? Or, or maybe if I'm reading it wrong. Under professional fees, yes, your commitment item, it's conference and travel expenses and 23, 24 is 320,000. And now you're asking, uh, for the next two bienniums, 761,000. So the request going into biennial for uh. For appropriations is continuing level. So what you're seeing in that first column is actual expenses, so that's what we expended out of that commitment item was the 320,000. So that can vary from year to year, um. And I'm trying to look if I've got the historical spending here and I don't, but, uh, so the appropriations were requested is the same, but the expenses in, in the fiscal year 24 was the 320,000. OK. All right. Thank you. Senator Chesterfield at the time, Mr. Chair. I believe you're the last one. I'd take your motion. Move executive rec. Have a motion for executive rec. Do you have a second? Second, all in favor. I. Pod OK, executive rep passes. Thank y'all for being here, Mr. Adams. I hope you realize that guy sitting next to you speaks our speak a lot and we thank all of you for participating, but uh. Keep that guy close to you. And tell the secretary we appreciate our apologies. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Mildrid, thank you. Next up we have the health department, Health services permit agency director Tracy Steele has sent somebody. I'm sure he's sent his best too so. Y'all will come up. If, as they're sitting down, uh, directors still, uh, retired. And so Miss Sandra Halliwell is the new executive director there. I believe we need to update our. Work here don't we? If oh well since you're the only new ones, please hit your microphone and identify yourself. My name is Sandra Halliwell. I am the new director of the Health Services Permit Agency. Since when? Since August 5th this year. OK, well, our staff needs to get that message. Like you Tracy Harris, assistant director of Health Services permit Agency. Thank you all for being here, uh. Ms. Hamilton, if you will present. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you'll move with me to page 95. You'll see the operations of the health service permit agency. They're responsible for issuing permit of approvals for nursing homes, residential care facilities, assisted living facilities, and home health agencies and hospice agencies. It's funded with general revenue and fees from certificate and need applications. The agency is requesting appropriation of approximately 532,000 in fiscal year 26 and 533,000 fiscal year 27. They're asking for general revenue of about 438,000 for each year of the biennium, which is the executive recommendation along with the discontinuation of one position in the associated salary and matching for that position. On page 96, you'll see their budget detail. And you'll see that the number of authorized positions for 25. Goes from 4 to the executive recommendation in each fiscal year coming to 3. That's a conclusion of my presentation, Mr. Chair. Thank you, uh, Senator Chesterfield, you're recognized. Good morning. Good morning ladies to Paradise Lost just so much. We are so glad you could be here today. Could you tell me? Could you tell me why the um The reduction in staff has the workload diminished? Well, it would be better't you, don't you answer that. Yes, ma'am. Don't you? We're gonna let Doctor No answer that. Like. Senator, um, they had 4 positions, and I think as with transformation happened, um, one of those positions has been vacant for quite a while and, uh, I think they filled it maybe 3 or 4 years ago and the person didn't stay very long. I think it's just, it's more of, it's just a downsize and not really needed to be honest with you. So they, you've been operating without that for a period of time. So this is not, uh, this has been a while backs been a while back No Mr. Ro Coach, uh, coach over there would appreciate that since he just insists on us getting rid of these positions. Uh, again, welcome and that's it for me, Mr. Chair. I'll have a motion at the proper time. Thank you, uh, Representative Painter, you recognize? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I kind of want to ask the same, similar question I asked again. So if you don't use that appropriate the money for the travel. Where does that go? So the last appropriation was a little excess of $400,000. I think this time around it's like $1,274 if you don't use that, then what happens to it? The appropriations we don't use, of course, it, it goes away, uh, any funding if it's SGR funding, then it gets under that carried forward to to carry forward. so you carry the XF. Like the last one of 400,000 in the 1274 and this one, you carry that over. It depends on what kind of funding it is it carries that we talked about a little while ago, the main department, I think that gets, that's probably, it depends on if it's SGR or federal, depending on, but a lot of that gets swept. They have language in their act to carry this forward. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Chesterfield. motion for executive re 2. Second, on in favor I. Post, executive direct passes. Thank you. All right, next up, uh, let me get my paper over here. I'm having a slide over my mic will work over there. Yeah, we got, uh, Department of Minority Health Commission. Um, Kenya Eddings. Is that correct, I believe. If you would just state your name and who you're with for the record, please, both of you. Good morning, Kenya Eddings, Arkansas Minority Health Commission. Good morning, Steve Frazier, accountant, Arkansas Minority Health Commission. Ms. Hamilton, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you all would turn with me to page 106 in your manual, you'll see the department appropriation summary for the minority Health Commission. They have 3 appropriations. There's only one that has changes. They have overall position count of 9. If you move across the page to the right, you'll see the executive recommendation is recommending a decrease of one position. Their first appropriations on page 107. It's a cash appropriation funding derived from the grants, donations, interest distributions, and reimbursements for expenses for providing any seminars or educational activities. Agency is requesting continuation of their appropriation amount of 25,949 for each year of the biennium, which is what the executive recommends. Moving to page 109, their second appropriation is their initiative. This is funded with the targeted state needs program account, which is tobacco settlement earnings distributions. The agency is requesting appropriation of 1.8 for both years of the biennium, which is the executive recommendation. This is gonna provide screening, monitoring, treatment of hypertension, stroke, and other disorders that are disproportionate. And critical to the state's minority population. You'll see the budget detail on page 110. They're authorized amount of 1.7 is not very much different from the executive recommendation of 1.8 for each fiscal year. On page 111, this is their operations appropriation, which is funded with general revenue. They utilize this appropriation to study issues related to the delivery of and access to my health services for minorities. They are requesting appropriation of 263,000. And general revenue funding of 262,000 for both years of the biennium. This is allowed by the agency. I'm sorry, the executive recommendation. As well as the discontinuation of the one position in the associated salary and match, and you'll see the reduction on page 112. You'll see they're authorized physicians is 3 moving across the page to the right, you'll see the executive recommendation is for reduction to 2 positions. That concludes my presentation, Mr. Chair. Thank you, uh, Ms. Edwards, do you have anything you'd like to add? Would you like to add anything to that conversation? I would just like to say on behalf of the entire team and our board of commissioners. We appreciate the opportunity to serve all minority Arkansans, and we don't turn anyone away we serve them every day and we appreciate the opportunity to continue to serve. Thank you. Rips of Kevin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for being here. I'm gonna ask about your fund balance too because I wanna make sure that we're able to use that in the most effective way. This is going to be page 110. And I know we have a lot of health specific needs for the minority population state of Arkansas. Are there any barriers that keep y'all from using this fund balance in a more effective way. Thank you for that question. The only barrier that we have seen over the past couple of years that we have um rectified at this point is that we've had um a staffing shortage for a couple of years and that has prohibited prohibited us from doing the much needed. Work around the state. Um, I can, I'm happy to report that in the last couple of months we are at full capacity now and so I don't see that um our work would be hindered in any way that it has been in the past couple of years. OK, so what are you actually able to do with this fund that makes an impact into the health issues that are faced. Sure, thank you for that question. So we've been doing a lot of work lately, um, as it relates to stroke, hypertension, awareness around the state and treatment and referrals uh for Individuals who have those conditions. Additionally, we're doing a lot of work in food insecurity and food deserts, and we hope to expand that using some of our fund balance, um, funding that's available. Um, we are also explaining our work in the maternal health space um and we hope to do more of that in the coming years, um, we're also doing lots of mini grants helping, um, community-based, faith-based organizations who are doing health related work helping them to do the much needed work that they do in there. Communities as well that's just a few of the things that we're doing. OK, in particular for me, two things that stand out as maternal health because that's a real problem in the state of Arkansas across the board, and also the food deserts because even if you would think in a Urban populated, there's still food deserts. So if you could get off line with me at some point and talk to me about your programs. I'd like to see if there's some ability that we have to kind of ramp those two things up because it is a priority for me and, you know, I'd appreciate if there's stuff that we can do that can advance more of these types of funds being used for those very much needed programs, happy to. Thank you. Thank you. Represent Pilke, can you recognize? Thank you, Chair. Uh, thank you for being here today. Uh, kind of going off, uh, Representative Kavanaugh's question. I was, I'm curious, do we For the amount of money that we're spending on the minority Health commission and we're appropriating from the tobacco settlement funds. I'm curious, have we seen any movement in our statistics to show an improvement in health? I mean, Are we going up nationally down? I mean, what? I, for the amount of money we're spitting on here, I, I sometimes feel that I don't, I feel like they were constantly told minority health is a problem and we need to prove it. And then I'm just not seeing any movement. Is there movement that I'm just not aware of, I'd kind of be curious to know more about that. Um, I think that there was some reporting, I don't know if it was um statewide. I'd have to, to dig into the details a little bit, but I know that the um the obesity rate is going down and I know that um tobacco use, um, as it relates to cigarettes, I think there was a report that that has been decreased as well. I think there is um there has been an uptick uptake in um e-cigarettes and vaping, but, um, smoking cigarettes, um, that has gone down and I'm Happy to dig in a little bit more for you and report back on that. Yeah, I would, I would appreciate that because I know nationally our obesity rate has fallen, so it's not just Arkansas, uh, and same with, uh, tobacco use as well, those are both national trends that I think we're just following behind in. But, uh, be happy to get offline, talk more about, about that. And then my final question is when it revolves around, um, Um, Pediatrics for minorities. That's something I think I don't hear enough about and obviously I think that's an area where we we suffer in. And so I was curious if you could kind of elaborate a little bit to me how we're using some of these funds to help minority children in Arkansas. Thank you for that question. So we have a uh summer camp for kids. It's geared towards 9 to 12 year olds. It's called Camp ICANN and that summer camps helps kids focus on healthy eating, physical activity. We do some social emotional skills. to help them to be the best version of themselves, um, it is a 3 day day camp, but here recently we have been exploring the idea of expanding that camp to not only 3 days, but 5 days and then also during the camp um throughout the school year so when um school is on spring break, maybe having a camp for the kids when they're out for summer break or a Christmas break having a camp for the kids so they can continuously focus on healthy eating, physical activity. social emotional skills throughout the year and not just summer with us. And that comes out of your operating expense or uh I think that comes out of our tobacco settlement funding. And I'll just, I'll just add some of the, um, events that they sponsor and their screening events and that sort of thing. Sometimes they're geared for all age groups, but sometimes they are specific to more family and, um, maybe have a higher population of young, young children or kids in general come to those events. So there's Different ways, but yes, that's another avenue. Thank you. Thank you for the. Representative Wooton you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, On your uh fund balance. Um, we. Your actual was 8 Your actual was 8098. And uh the budget shows 7.866. That's the difference of 200,000, is that interest that you made on that it causes the difference between the budget and the actual amount. Representative Wooten, uh, can you tell us what page you're on this they have several different funds 106. On the summary? OK. Yeah Shows a fun, fun balance of 88.098 an actual income, I'm assuming in uh 7.866 was budgeted. Next to the bottom line. That's 7.866 I believe is excess funding beyond what they have appropriations to spend. Because that fund balance plus the income that the, the fund source that they'll get during the fiscal year added to the fund balance and so that is the excess funding they have above appropriations. If I'm looking at the same thing you are. That's what that is. Let me ask you this just a little bit is that where the interest income shows up in that in that column or we're How much total? Um, how much total and in excess funds do you have? They fall in that column for the entire agency. So in reference to the interest, the only interest that comes back to the department are our trust funds and we only have a few of those, OK, so the others are earmarked through legislation for other uh items, my understanding is the other fund balances that are not in trust funds such as this particular fund balance that's invested by the Treasury and that money goes back into the general fund. I'm not sure exactly where it goes, but it doesn't come back to the department, so it's. Not a fun source for us even though go ahead do you show any interest income that you derive in the agency from funds that you have invested that the interest comes back to you, sir, but only a very few fund centers, the local grant trust fund how much that might be. Uh, I, I think we have it listed, uh, but. Uh, only in the local grant trust fund and the health building fund since those are trust funds we're allowed to invest that ourselves into CDs and then that interest money comes back to us we can get you the exact amount that we're earning would be helpful if you tell me and then also, we're working with DFA and Bureau of Leslative Research to have a column on item line item for interest income So what I would like to have, if it's permissible, Mr. Chairman, is to have what funds you have invested that you draw the interest on. Yes, sir, and I do believe that those that we draw the interest on, there is a line item. For that as a funding source. So you don't see it in most of our A, a budgets because we don't get that interest back. OK, well, that's, I understand that part of it. All right, thank, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Els. Senator Chesterfield, you recognize thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Um, Ms. Eddings, thank you for your work. Um, I know there are parts of the state where people. are distrustful of state government. And as a result of that, You have been able to communicate with those people when sometimes others cannot. But you agree with that? Yes, ma'am. And this is not just about African Americans, it's about all minorities. That is correct. And the state of Arkansas defines that as disabled veterans, ethnic minorities and women. So your program reaches out to all of those uh identified minority groups, is that correct? And one of the things that I used to admire so much because I've been around here a minute, was the fact that the healthy eating part. Especially for those young women who are pregnant. And um. You have been able through your through your program. To reach some of those individuals who don't necessarily have access to health care, but have been, you have been able to touch their lives by going across the state and I would just like for you to talk just a minute about some of the things that you have done. To help Uh, those individuals who otherwise would not have the help because they're not gonna trust Doctor No as much as they would trust you, is that right? That's correct. I love to see him blush. Go ahead, Eddings. I'm gonna leave. I'm gonna leave Mr. Gilmore. You're you're absolutely right and as you can as you were speaking, I can recall um just this past summer we were participating in a back to school health fair um in um South Little Rock and we were able to do health screenings for the entire family, kids, adults, um, and we ran across several pregnant women and I remember specifically speaking to a um pregnant young woman who relayed to me that she was struggling with her mental Health and so um as a result of that we were able to get her referred so that she could get some care, um, not only did she say that she was struggling with her mental health with that particular pregnancy, but she had 3 other pregnancies and she was, she struggled with her mental health. So being able to have those types of touch points, even if it's just one person, I feel like we make a difference um I can recall um another time we were in rural Arkansas and encountered um. A a white man actually and it he relayed to me that it was his first time ever seeing a doctor. I am not a doctor. Um, I can check blood pressure, blood sugars, and cholesterols, but he said to me that when he was 14 years old, he had to drop out of school and get a job to help support his family and that was the first time he had had his blood sugar, his cholesterol, or his blood pressure checked and he thanked us for being there it was um at one of the. Local food banks and he was able to not only get food but get some some health services and so those types of things are um what keeps us going um every day our mobile health unit is um ADA compliant. So those who are wheelchair bound, um, have access they can we can see them, we can help them in our mobile health unit, um, uh, we, we do a lot of referrals, um, uh, just, just last night. Yesterday we were at um the 3 M Factory that's located um in South Little Rock as well. They have a large uh male population and sometimes um men for whatever reason, do not like to um encounter the health care system and so we like to meet people where they are um they have 3 shifts at the 3M factory. We were able to go and service the employees not only at their morning shift, but we went to their 2nd shift. Which is from 5:30 to 9 o'clock just last night doing um health screenings and um there was one gentleman who had such a high blood pressure that I was there, I checked his blood pressure, um, had to call the nurse on duty and the nurse on duty had to go and get him some medical care and so just those types of touch points, um, not only help to benefit the state because if we can get people healthier, one person. Healthy, the community is healthy. The state is healthy. So I think that we are doing um a great service in that regard and it is around the state of Arkansas around the entire state, um, we are pleased that we have been able to touch all 75 counties in the last two fiscal years. Wonderful. Thank you. I have a motion at the proper time, Mr. Chair. Representative Beck, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I won't go back to the. $8 million but, but I will say when I, when you see that it's a flag, right? And, and then some numbers that I worked out last night is looking at your operating expenses, um, you're, you're, your request is 63% more than what you actually spent, and I'm not saying you should shorten that. I mean, trying to encourage you to spend that money. The other one which really concerns me is professional fees because I think that we've had. That's 25 238% I think if my math's right by the way, I'm on 110. I'm sorry, uh, page 110, but my, my point is, is that a lot of, a lot of agencies use that kind of as a promotion, you know, professional things for maybe some promotional type deals to get your get more participation in your programs and hopefully get some of the good things that you're doing out there so people know and they can actually participate in it um it's not really a question. I guess it's more of a suggestion, but. I do appreciate what you're doing, but I would, I would tell you to really get out there and let people know what you're doing. Shine your light, maybe that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Hammer, you. Thank Mr. Cher on page 110. Let me ask first of all, do you do anything with regards to reaching out to the marshallese population up in northwest Arkansas. We do, um, and I will say that, um um Senator, I'm sorry, Doctor Rick line, Dr. Sheldon Rickline, we've worked with him in the past and as a matter of fact, at our summit that we held just this past April, we were um able to honor Doctor Rickon for his work and also have the Marshallese um nurses and health care to come and present to those in attendance with us to talk about the good work that they are doing in our partnerships with them so that work. continues. OK, and I understand if I'm reading it right, you've got 6 positions that are. Under your umbrella, is that correct? Yes, sir. Could you tell me what those 6 positions are and what they do real quickly. Sure, so they, um, There's my position, oh sorry, thank you. We have a uh registered nurse. We have our accountant, our grants coordinator, our health program specialist, our human resources analyst and a fiscal support analyst and I will just back up and say Representative Hammer with the Marshallese population. Senator, sorry about that. Um, I will just say that we also support um a Marshallese radio station that Doctor Rick Lan hosts um on the 3rd Thursday of each month talking about health care access to the Marshallese population. OK, and so what based on that, would I need a little help understanding those, those individuals that you just mentioned that are that are there. How many of those actually get out in the field. We all do. OK. And, and with the balance that you have. With Have you entertained the idea and I, uh, you know, I kind of hesitate because I'm talking about growing positions, but have, have y'all had any discussions about possibly increasing the number of positions to put more people out in the field to where you can have that direct contact or or is it more that you partnership with entities elsewhere and, and you just provide the, the input to them for them to do it just help me understand. I'll, I'll start and then turn it back over to director Eddings. They, as she said, all their staff I mean, she's out on the weekends doing events and her and her staff they alternate doing different things on different days. Um, but they also, uh, have some programming contracts, grants, uh, with some community health workers that help augment some of those services as well. And that's, so that's kind of a dual effort there, but I don't know if you where's that in the budget, the, the, is that under. What categories that fall under as far as. Those expenses that would be related to that. Under our professional fees. That's part of professional fees. Yes, and we, we do, um, contract with Tri County Rural Health Network. Could you mic a little closer, sorry about that. We contract with Tri-county Rural Health Network and um we contract with 5 community health workers and they helped to supplement and augment the work that we do around the state. OK, but that's all paid for all your professional fees? Can I, can I add, it does come out of professional fees, but it also comes out of operating expenses depending on who we're contracting with and then there's also a line item there for screening, monitoring, treatment, and outreach, so it would come out of all three of those line items. OK. And I, and maybe there's tagging on to what representing. Uh, Kavanaugh and Beck were talking about. It just seems that when you look at the percentage of your budget and the carry-forward balance, not only that you have, but what you project to have. That maybe y'all might want to entertain. Because I, I think you are producing good works. I'll say that, OK. I, I just wonder if y'all ought to look at increasing in those areas, even if it meant spending down some of the excess appropriation so you can have a bigger impact than what you're having right now, or yeah. Go ahead. So, as she stated early on, she has had some staffing challenges and I think that's part of the reason that they didn't spend their full appropriation. I think that will be rectified going forward, um, so I think that will help and then I think, as she mentioned earlier, she has some thoughts and ideas around things she wants to do in addition to that. OK, all right. Maybe it'd be appropriate to come before the. and on that next time. All right, thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Collins you recognize. Thank you. Uh, and it may be just the way I'm, I'm looking at it, but I'm a little confused, still on this page 110, still on that 8 million. Is it excess appropriation or excess funding because it looks to me like it's, it's excess funding that keeps rolling forward year after year, that you don't have an appropriation to spend. And if that's the case, do you need an appropriation to spend the money? So as she said. She had some staffing challenges, and she wasn't able to use her full appropriation, and she does have a fun balance as well. So the, the $7 million is in our fund balance and it stays there and, and, and, and rolls forward, but I think when she does this, and when she doesn't spin it, it rolls from that fund balance as well. I don't know if that helps clear, but, but to your point, That is excess funding because it's in parentheses. And we only have so much appropriations to spend. And so if we were going to spend a lot of that fund balance, we would have to come back and ask for additional appropriations. OK. So what is the excess appropriation because that's excess funding that's 7.9 million. What's the excess appropriation. We do not have appropriation. So you would actually need more appropriation in order to spin that down. I think the first order of business is spin up to our allotted appropriation that y'all are giving us. And then we, if we want to spend some of the fund balance, which is the plan we would need to come back and ask for more appropriations to spend that once you know what you want to spend it on. Got it. Thank you. Representative Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just had a question you had mentioned earlier about you guys do the micro grants, um, and then some of your focus has been on food deserts. Has there been any requests or have you guys provided any grants for some of the mobile grocery stores that have become available throughout the state and have you been able to support those? Are you able to support those? Thank you for that question as a matter of fact, one of the um grantees who received a grant from us is a mobile grocery store. It's gonna be a mobile pop-up store. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Chesterfield, you executive Rick. We have a motion to have a second. So I got all in favor, say I. curious. All right, next up is, um, our two, Tobacco Settlement Commission. Miss Hamilton and Mr. Gilmore. You're up again. Anytime you're ready. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Moving to page 163, we're going to go to the tobacco Settlement Commission. This is their operations appropriation? We have talked about initiated Act 1 of 2000. funding comes from their investment earnings of the tobacco settlement program fund and fund accounts. They've got 4 programs that they monitor, the prevention and cessation program account, the targeted state needs program account, the biosciences Institute program account and the Medicaid expansion program account. The agency is requesting that they continue our appropriation of approximately 357,000 for both years of the biennium. That is the executive recommendation on page 164, you will see their budget detail. The professional fees line item that has been mentioned by a few members is 175,000 that was spent in 24 and that is for a report that is done by University of Central Arkansas to monitor and evaluate the 4 programs that I mentioned. That's the conclusion of our presentation, Mr. Chair. Gilmore everything, Dad. No, sir, ready to take questions. All right, ready for questions. All right, here we go. Representative Wootton, you're up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, On your funding sources, uh, we, I've asked several times, several agencies, and no one's been able to tell me maybe you all can. What is in inter I N T E R agency fund transfer those interagency transfer line items referred to um when we transfer that fund to another agency for so, you know, we have money in the health department we're going to give it to another agency for a particular projects. So if it's an inter-agency transfers from one agency to another of the health department, correct. OK. Alright, next question is the excess appropriation is uh 11. 0411 million. you've got one employee, what, what, how how is that money carried forward or why do we have? Is that for advertising or what, what is that for? So, so the commission operates solely off of the interest of the master settlement payment every year. And, and whatever that payment is, then that whatever that interest is goes into their, uh, fund balance, sometimes it's higher, sometimes it's a little lower that total 10 interest or is that interest on the money that you've gotten from the settlements. Operating expenses, funding all is interest off the settlement payments. Yes, sir. So that, so that is a that is a culmination of several years. Uh, sometimes it's, sometimes it's very minimal, sometimes it's a little higher, and it's built up over time. OK, so you got one employee at 41,000, is that the total? Compensation that that person receives, is that you, that's, that's a staff that is an employee of the commission that helps monitor the, uh, uh, UCA contract, um, works with the programs with the Department of Health. I mean, they, they manage and operate that commission. It's a small, you know, one person office. OK, so that's the one individual that you. I oversee them. Yes, sir. OK, alright, that answers that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Represent Kavanaugh you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And Matt with my conversations with you with the tobacco settlement. This is only the interest that we're earning. And this is the fun that is the most difficult. To really use. I guess is the best way to put it. This fund is, are we using it? Is this the fund that we're using for the Medicaid to kind of, is this. This is strictly the commission's fund and and they're operating, um, expenses, you know, they don't. The initiated act requires monitoring and evaluation project as Ms. Hamilton mentioned through UCA that we work with, um, that's, that's the largest expense for the commission that fund that you see there funds all that excess appropriation, as I told, uh, Representative Wooton, it goes up and down based on the interest and that sort of thing. Um, they don't get receive any general revenue, you know, so as long as we receive those payments, we are gonna need some, uh, some, somewhat of a fund balance there, but I don't know if that helps kind of answer your question or. Well, I guess if This shows your fund balance growing. It shows that you're 360,000 think, but you've got a fund balance of 11.4 million so that the commission doesn't need all this interest to be able to operate by far. I think that legislation that y'all ran a couple of years ago about the, you know, the fund balances on a three-year average, they are in excess of that, um. So you're correct. We don't, they don't, they don't need that much to operate now long term if we did have some years where they received no interest, you know, just investments were bad and so it would be nice to have some, uh, a cushion there, but they are above the three-year average. Yes, ma'am, to use this fund, does it require legislation, I guess is what I would ask it would require us to run some legislation that allow this funds to be used for something other than the commission that be focused, yes, ma'am. OK, thank you. Senator Ches feel you recognize executive Rick. I have a motion to have a second. I have a second. All in favor say aye. Motion carries. Thank y'all. Yeah. Thank you all for being here. Thank you again, Ms. Hamilton, for your. Work, uh, next up we have, uh, labor and licensing, uh, Katie Walding is gonna be. Our analyst and uh. We have a repeat performance, uh. From Secretary Besset or did I where did I see secretary there you are. OK. I, I just want to let you know, Mr. Secretary, we're gonna give you the additional points for returning. Thank you, sir. Just, just one minute before we get started I recognize center dismay. Thank you. uh, and members, this is, uh, for y'all there's actually going to be a robot or robotics presentation today in the rotunda from 1 to 3. If you get a chance, go by, I believe it's, uh, Cersei, uh, High School and then also Harding Academy. They'll both be there, uh, they would love for you to stop by and say hi and take a look at what they have going on. It's absolutely incredible. They're gonna let you drive, do whatever with the robots. And, and if you've not been to an event, go to an event, uh, and, and when you go to the, uh, Rotunda, you'll see why. But anyway, they'll be set up today, uh, 1 to 3, and I just wanted to make sure we put that as an announcement if you get a chance. I'd love to see you over there. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Dismay. Uh, before we start, uh, representing Fortner, did you have an announcement or you? OK, uh, we'll recognize you. Uh, I do have an announcement and thank you, Senator Disney, uh, Mountain Home High School is there as well, and I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge them. All right, it's getting sound interesting. Maybe we're gonna have a robot robot war over there. All right, thank you. All right, back to our business, uh. Well, uh, representative Dobby, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I can't let Cersei and Mountain Home take all the credit. Arkansas High Razorbacks will be there. Thank you. Does anybody else have one they want too much. I'd say go by there. There'd be some other ones besides that, I mean. All right, thank you all again for being here and uh Ms. Walden, if you will proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, members. Let's go ahead and I'm sorry, I got off my normal, go ahead and identify across the table first, please. Katie Walden Bureau of Legislative Research Fiscal Division. Darryl Bassett, uh, Secretary of Labor and Licensing. Tyler King agency controller. Steve Gunthorp, labor and licensing. Uh, Aaron Howard, the manufacturing commission director. Thanks for being here. Go ahead. Board Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today we will be reviewing the shared services appropriation and the division of labor for the Department of Labor. This request begins on page 168 of your manual, and while you're turning there, I just, I will just share that the mission of the Department of Labor is to foster, promote and develop the health, safety and welfare of wage earners of Arkansas by providing services and enforcing laws to improve working conditions and enhance their opportunities for safe and profitable employment. Their employment summary and the contract report of contracts over 50,000 awarded to minority owned businesses. They're all on page 168. The shared services appropriation summary is on page 169, and I'll just share with the committee that, um, the HVACC board was reviewed Tuesday already and so they already have an executive rec, but just to remind you, their budget is held flat at $723,000 annually. In addition, the Department of Labor and Licensing Shared Services appropriation is also in this section. And this shared services appropriation is requested at $3.9 million each year of the biennium, providing for 26 positions. This is the department's administration section, and that is funded with fund balances. There's shared services transfers from other boards and commissions, as well as its divisions. On page 172, they outlined the request for the shared services section. And as I mentioned before, it's $3.9 million for each year of the biennium. This request includes some adjustments to salaries and match based on budget projections, as well as they ask for an increase in operating expenses of $165,000 for each year of the biennium. This is to in incorporate a previously approved contract with the Arkansas Information Consortium contract. Um, Also known as the Information Network of Arkansas, and this is to allow the agency to utilize a single payee system for licensure fees, and this is to improve efficiency in the agency. They already came before Pierre in July of this year and received approval for this contract, so they're just building it into their appropriation bill. The executive recommendation provides for the agency request as well as the discontinuation of one position from the shared services appropriation with correspo Bonding salaries and matching. Moving to the division of labor, we're going to turn to page 229. Again, you have the same information, the state contracts of the division of labor over 50,000 awarded to minority owned businesses, a breakout of their employment summary and their annual reports. The total division summary is on page 230 of the manual, and you can see they have 6 appropriations, but I will note for the committee that Two of these have already been heard in the boards and commissions presentation. They are the boiler inspection and the Board of Electrical examiners, and those budgets are both flat except for the discontinuation of one position. So if it pleases the committee, I'll, I'll go over the budgets that have not been heard yet. The total appropriation for the division is about $6 million and they have 69 positions currently authorized. The first appropriation that I'll go over in greater detail begins on page 231. It is their state operations appropriation. This provides for the operations of the division. The total request for the agency. Is $2.8 million for each year of the biennium, and they state this is to make adjustments in salaries and matching and continue the same level of services as fiscal year 2025. The executive recommendation provides for this agency request, along with the discontinuation of two positions with associated salary and matching costs, so you'll see the executive recommendation is at $2.6 million for each year of the buying name and that is to lower for those two positions eliminated. We reviewed the boiler inspection board on Tuesday. So moving to page 235, you have the federal programs appropriation. This appropriation is 100% federally funded and it includes grant funding from OSHA for consultations, mine safety and health consultations and training and also training on occupational energy. Injuries and fatality surveys. They're requesting to continue their appropriation at $1.599 million for each year of the biennium and the executive recommendation provides for this request. The next appropriation is the Board of Electrical examiners. This board was already presented on Tuesday. So moving to page 239. This is the wage and hour appropriation. It is funded with cash fees. This is an appropriation that the division utilizes as a pass-through to disperse cash funds collected from employers when the division has determined that an employer owes compensation to an employee that results in a wage and hour dispute and investigation. So this is just a pass-through. And the division is requesting to continue this appropriation at $200,000 annually to provide for any claims, and the executive recommendation provides for the agency request. The last appropriation for the division of labor is on page 241. This is their seminar and conference expenses, cash appropriation, it's funded using cash funds. This provides for the cost of hosting conferences and seminars for industry participants throughout the state. It is funded with fees collected from from participants. And they request to continue this appropriation at $48,000 annually in the executive recommendation provides for this request. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right, any statement from y'all before we take. Questions? Just a brief statement, Mr. Chairman, if you allow me that indulgence, uh, we, uh, of course we're back again as we boomerang back again today. Uh, there were 4 issues that we needed to address uh to this body, uh, from, uh, last Tuesday. One was a cost methodology we got that out, I think that was Representative Wooden's question, hopefully that handout answers his questions or any other questions that were there. There were a number of. Questions with regard to the limits on uh recovery funds, how they were going to be used, how they were accumulated, uh, principally with bail bonds and manufactured homes, I have those directors available today if there were any additional questions, but we did send a handout in that regard as well. Uh, Senator Hammer had a question, Mr. Chairman, regarding Act 114. He would like to see an income, uh, column, uh, put in. There as we're required to do expenses, but he wanted an income column. I hope that uh handout satisfies him as well. Uh, Senator, uh, Representative Wooden, excuse me, also was asking about a total vacancies. We have 52 total vacancies, uh, in the agency. Mr. Chairman, those are just clearing up. So if we have any questions in those regards, I have some people here, if no questions, then we can begin. We appreciate you following up on that, uh, representative you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is of the analyst for the Bureau of Legislative Research, am I missing it or is this the only agency that shows theirs what I call central office operation budget. On page 232, the one where Where we referenced um 3234, the budget is at 34 positions. They had 32 filled is in the city state operations is this, is this the only agency that Shows This breakdown. I believe there are other agencies that also have operations appropriations, um, that shows they, they have certain positions dedicated to only the operations of the division. But is it primarily, um, uh, shared services, is that what this is? We're somewhat unique in that we have 20 different business areas, uh, 20 different, uh, boards and commissions that are reporting to us and so in that sense we are somewhat unique other than the, the health department. I don't, I don't understand why they are selected. To have their, uh, it would appear to me, and this is just me. I know we had a budget for our central office and then a budget for each individual agency which the Secretary pointed out, they overseeing. Why, why do we, why do we just specify them. To be one who is selected to show their shared services. Why don't the rest of them have to do that? You a minute Mr. Uh, Mr. Chairman, um, Representative Woo, you're, you're gonna see with these agencies and departments, we, we didn't see it with the boards and commissions because they don't have shared services, which is what we did before, um, but you're going to see it with the departments where they have a shared services appropriation, and they have an operations appropriations as we move into these hearings, you're going to see that that's common. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Representative lady when you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'm over here. Um, On page 230. Uh, just line 151 their federal programs, the expenditures for that. Can you expand on exactly what that is? Mhm. This is, these are our Ocean training uh programs, Mr. Ladyman, and then I'm gonna let the director of our division, uh, elaborate on those. Ralph Hudson, division of labor, uh, director, uh, Mr. Chairman, uh, We've got Occupational safety and health consultations, the federal grant. Mine safety and Health Administration is a federal grant? Bureau of Labor Statistics is a federal grant, and all three of those would be included in the in the in that programmatically that, that number. So that's implementing those federal programs. Yes, sir. OK. All right, uh. The seminar and conference expenses there is. Doubling. Why, why is that? The amount of money that you're gonna spend this year or. Yeah, so the 23, 24. Uh Now that's our wage and hour or let's see, well, you, you spent $22,000 you budgeted 48, I mean. Why why is that double what you need? I mean, do you not go to enough conferences? What kind of conferences are you talking about? You know, these are our conferences. These are our conferences, uh, uh, Representative Ladyman, and I think what you're seeing there is, uh, it's, it's, it's the cooperation that we're getting out of our corporations when we, these are conferences we're having around the state, Hot Springs, El Dorado, etc. What, uh, our expenditures kind of fluctuate depending upon whether or not we're getting cooperation from some of the businesses that defray those costs in the past we've had uh some of our major corporations are steel corporations. They, they footed the bill. And so when they foot the bill, we have to, we can spend less money. When we don't get those contributions coming in from these private industries and we don't, we can't foresee that, then obviously it's going to cost us more for those conferences and so I. I think that's what you're seeing reflected in those numbers, sir. OK. All right, thank you. Suit your hammer you recognize. I hate to ask this, but when, when did you give me the handout that you referenced? Was it emailed to me or? I'm gonna let BLR answer that I can answer that. Senator Hammer, we didn't get it to you yet. We have it. Um, we just have it distributed. We got it yesterday, Katie, I believe, yeah, yesterday actually it was this morning. And we have a copy in the back, we'll bring it to you right now. OK, thank you. It makes me feel better. I didn't lose my mind there. Thank you. That's OK unless you get a motion I kind of like to see that to ask a question. If We we're gonna let you look at All right, uh. Question, Mr. Chair, if it's OK. Where is that? Just taking a quick glance at this. Based on the uh. Based on the revenues that are coming in. The fees that are being charged. Do you anticipate that somewhere in the near future some of these may be able to. Reduce the fees that they're collecting from the members that are paying them. Absolutely, we have some that are just on the cusp, um, we had 4 that just fell out, and I, I don't know if I need to. revealed them publicly, but we had 4 that just fell out that are just below the threshold of Act 114, uh, and so, yes, sir, I believe that we're gonna have uh more right now we're, we're only dealing with 2, and that's architects and motor vehicle commission, but as I said, we had 4 that were just on the cusp. OK, and uh, you know, when we passed that legislation, we grabbed 3 years because our thought was there'd be the one year we'd go into the, we'd go into the, the full budget cycle like we're in right now then there would be the fiscal and it kind of give us a 3 year reaction time so that we didn't dip too low, um, but at the same time, we didn't let money accumulate too much cause that's, that's kind of what got above the radar screen in the first place was balances that some of these boards were carrying forward, do you? Now that this has been in effect for a little bit. Do you think 3 years is still a good average to look at, or could we cut that back to 2, or should we expand it to 4 or have you had enough time to even think about that? I'm always hesitant to. Have the legislature restrict operations any more than they are necessary, but to be frank with you, since you asked me a direct question, Senator, I think the 3 year, uh, expense, um, uh, threshold may be a little, uh, lenient. I think it could be possibly cut back to 2 years. I think that would reflect more of what I think this body is looking for, and that is the util utilization of the more efficient utilization of these fund balances. Uh, but that's again up to this body. Well, that's, I mean, that was the original intent of the legislation in the first place was to put as much money back into, you know, the, the individuals that are paying it as possible, so maybe between now and January, we can take a look at that and, and get into a discussion about that and get some feedback from these various groups. I guess the other question is what would be the rationale behind carrying such large fund balances? I, I know there's some things, you know, they'd like to do and maybe that includes, you know, building a building or office or things like. That, um, what would be the rationale of carrying such big balances out outside of something like that. Well, we've spoken with each of these directors and their boards individual individually with regard to their fund balances and there are a plethora of reasons that they have for maintaining these, these fund balances, of course, obviously we inherited, uh, these fund balances, uh, many of them, but, uh, they're they're multitude of reasons and we, you know, certainly be willing to share those, those, uh, Uh Those reasons with you, uh, I don't, I don't know where we go from there. I don't know whether that's answering your question or not. And I think that sets the stage for the conversation that we can have ongoing between now and January is to make sure that they have enough for what they need, but also at the same time they have good justifications for why they're carrying the balance as they are that outside of maybe a facility development or something tangible if it's just, you know, money sitting there. I'd like to get it back in the hands of the people paying it. Last question is, how is it for those that are able to, you know, they've met the 3. Year threshold they have access. How is that money actually getting back to the, to the members of the organizations that are paying the fee, is it a, uh, a suspension for one year or how is it that they're, they're letting that be returned. Well, we're going to return, we're going to reduce the fees, uh, based on their rotational basis so we have uh renewals in July, also in January, we're going to reduce those fees, uh, just physically reduce those fees. Has turned backs and uh, now the next cycle will be January and so that's what we're going to, that's how we're going to do that. Do you know a net total how much has been returned or would be returned right off the top of your head just combined all together, I have a rough number in my mind, but I would not want to say that in a public forum. I would have to go back and and get a specific number because I don't want to be vague or ambiguous in giving you that number, but I could offer it to you, uh, when we, when I get back to the office, a specific number. I just think it'd be a testimony that money's going back to the taxpayers. So that's, that's the reason I'd like to have that point well taken, Senator, and it is. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Sher. Representative La. Uh, move for approval of the executive rec. Nash for a second here but uh Represented back do you need question for you just one quick question. Yeah, so. You're, you're gonna reduce fees to to try to bring the balances down, but how will you then adjust. I mean, you had to to bring the balances down, you will have to have a negative revenue situation within those fees. So then at some point you'll run your balances down and how you're going to We take the fees back up a bit or something at that point, I mean, because you'll, you know, eventually you representative Beck, you're, you're exactly right because these are special revenue entities at some point when we've reduced the fund balances down to a 3-year average or a 2-year average or whatever this body wants us to use as a barometer at some point if we don't have an infusion of capital will have to increase rates when those rates when that increase comes, of course, is, is down the road, but your. is well taken at some point, we will exhaust those fund balances to that 3-year average, and then we'll have a conversation, we'll have to have a conversation with his body on how we remain solvent. All right, thank you. Thank you, Representative Beck. I have a motion uh for executive representative Ladyman. I have a second now. I have 2 on paper I post executive rec is passed. Thank you gentlemen for being here. Thank you, Mr. Katie if you'll continue, uh, we're gonna bring up workers' compensation commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Thank you. This is the last one of the day. Go ahead, Ms. Waller. Mr. Chairman, may I make one note for the committee's information. Um, I failed to mention it was requested that staff report general revenue turnbacks at the end of the fiscal year, and I failed to mention that from their operations appropriation, the division of labor did turn back $884,000 at the end of FY 24 from their general revenue allocation. So I just wanted to give that to the committee for their information and apologize. Thank you for your report. The last appropriate, oh, excuse me. Go ahead. If you will recognize yourself new ones new one at the table. Yes, sir. My name is Mark McGuire. I'm the CEO for the Workers' comp. Thank for being here, Ms. Walden. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The last appropriation for your review today is the workers' compensation Commission. It begins on page 264 of your manual. The workers' compensation Commission administers and enforces the Arkansas Workers' compensation law to ensure that all covered employers secure insurance coverage from commercial carriers or through self-insurance programs. They adjudicate work-related injury claims by employees against their employers or insurance carriers. You have the standard reporting information on page 264 with contracts over $50,000 awarded to minority-owned businesses, their employee breakout and mandatory publications. The Department appropriation summary is on page 265. And as I mentioned, they administer and force the and enforce the workers' compensation law to ensure that employers have good insurance coverage. They have 5 total appropriations, totaling $34.2 million each year. And they have 105 authorized positions. Beginning to break out of the appropriation requests. I will start on page 266. This is their refunds and claims appropriation for their death and permanent total disability trust fund. This appropriation is funded by premium tax revenues on workers' compensation premium policies, as well as investment revenues and fund balances. The total appropriation request is $21.5 million for each year of the biennium, and they state that this fund is closed, but there are still 1100 possible cases. With outstanding claims, and so they request to continue the same level of appropriation to pay any claims that may come forward or be adjudicated in the executive recommendation provides for this request. The next appropriation is on page 268. This is the workers' compensation administration appropriation. This is also funded by insurance premium taxes levied and interest earnings. This provides for all the operating expenses, salaries, and capital project funding for the commission's two state offices. The executive recommendation or the agency request to continue the same appropriation of $11.9 million and they also request to reallocate $1000 from professional fees to capital outlay. In each year, and this is to provide for an update of their law library holdings after regular sessions and the executive recommendation provides for this agency request. Moving to the second injury claims appropriation. This appropriation is made for the purpose of paying claims of permanently disabled persons. And funding is derived from premium tax revenues? This fund has also been closed. But there are still at the time of this presentation, there are still two open files with possible cases. And so the agency requests to continue this appropriation at $500,000 for each year of the biennium. And the executive provides for this agency request. Next you have on page 272, the seminar cash and treasury appropriation? This is funded by annual conference fees that the commission hosts for interested companies, attorneys, and individuals? They also make contributions to the Kids Chance scholarship program that assists the children of employees who have died as a result of a job-related accident. The agency requests to continue the appropriation at $140,000 for each year of the biennium and the executive recommendation provides for this request. Finally, on page 274, you have the building repair appropriation. This is funded from the workers' compensation Trust Fund, and it is for the construction improvement and upgrade of projects to maintain their two offices in the state. They request to continue the appropriation at $150,000 for each year of the biennium and the executive provides for this request. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. uh, any comment from you, Mr. Dwyer, OK, we're ready for questions, uh, Representative Kavanaugh, you recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank y'all for being here. Um, on the refunds, I think this is going to be on page 267, the Death and total disability trusts, the one that we're no longer paying claims out of. And you said you currently have 1100 of those possible claims. How do you determine what's a possible claim? Her cases. Those those claims are filed, um, As As injuries occur, those claims are filed with this trust fund, this trust fund enters into that claim and it has to be proven that they're going to be a party to that. So, as was mentioned earlier, this, this one is closed, however, we have about 1000 different claims that are out there. A lot of those are known. Which they're being paid each month. So most of those in that count are already known and we're already paying those monthly. What is that expenditure? Is it that's $12 million. It is actually It is actually greater than that, um, and And we have a a large fund balance in this fund. But that's almost a misnomer because as I said before, those claims have already been initiated and we actually have an $85 million unfunded liability based on those known claims. So at some point in the future, that large fund balance that we have will run out, um, as those claims are paid into the future and, and. Actually, in addition to that large fund balance, we will go into the negative $85 million. And so that's, that's our focus right now. That's on your projected that if through the life of how long you may pay that disability. It could be less, it could be more because depending on how long you have to actually fund that disability. OK. And how long have y'all projected that you'll have to fund that? So we got 79 million right now. So if you're thinking it's 85 million. How long are we thinking that this fund is going to last? We don't have a projection on how, how long that goes out because of all the factors that you mentioned earlier. OK. All right. Thank you. My co-chair, uh, Representative Cozar to recognize. So Mr. McGuire, you know, I heard you talking about you have active cases that you pay out every month and so I, I, you know, I've served on our homebuilders Workman's comp board for a while, back many years ago, and I know we had to keep a fund balance in that that that kept us. You know, where we were, we're self-insured, but so when you have, uh, an accident and that person is being paid month to month. That never stops until they die. Is that correct? Unless they get better. Correct, yes. So if they're, if it's a severe such as a head injury or something severe, they're going pretty well draw a check for their lifetime. And that's the only way it stops. I know the committee realized that, but that's kind of what it works. Thank you. Center hammer you recognize Thank you taking on uh Represent Kavanaugh's question, at what point do you sound the alarm bell that you're concerned that there may not be enough money in there. I'm just saying future legislative bodies. Need to know and what do we need to do to react in time so it doesn't become a last minute thing. And we, we perform, uh, actuarial studies every year to, to actually go through this various issue and, um, It, it's beyond right now beyond our Working lifetimes, if you will, but at some point, it will run out and, and all we can do at this point is keep track through those actuarial studies and when we see that we're getting close to that point of no return, that's when we sound the alarm. The other thing that we do in the meantime is we utilize all these three funds that we have, we utilize the ability to invest. And we minimize that unfunded liability. As an example, when the fund closed in 2019, we had somewhere around $130 million unfunded liability. Over the course of time with our investments and different things that we've done, we've reduced that to what you see now is the 85 million. So we're continuing to work on that to reduce that unfunded liability. I think about conversations around the retirement systems where, you know, we project out our unfunded liability and I mean, this is similar to that. So Reaction time. would be how long. Or can you even answer that question that when the alarm bell starts going off, you know, you, that's gonna be like 6 years before the actual occurrence or 10 years or how much lead time would there be? I think we'll be able just to follow up on that, uh, Senator, I think we'll be able to give you that kind of time frame that you're looking for. I serve on the, uh, retirement, uh, board. So I, I, I get what your question is, uh, what I can tell you is that beyond the actuarial studies, what we're doing. we're reviewing these numbers on a quarterly basis. We know now that it's going to project out far longer than we're those in this room are going to be around, but, uh, what we can do is just continue to monitor those, uh, we are on top of it. Uh, we're reviewing these numbers. We're looking at the actuarial studies, if we see a significant change in those numbers, then we'll, we'll be in, we'll be in front of this body. OK, a couple of questions, fraud, uh, what are you doing to, uh, detect and are you seeing a rise in the claims of fraud where people are receiving, uh, benefits, but you find out in reality they don't deserve them and talk about that real quick second if you would. We We do keep a close eye on that, um, we, we haven't detected, um, much of that, um, when we do detect it, we work with the insurance, uh, department to refer those cases for fraud. Um, a lot of, uh, I wouldn't say a lot, the, the very small number that we have detected are on the, um, for instance, a, uh, someone has incurred a death on the job and their children. Um, will. Have Payments if there's no no spouse, the children will have payments when those children go to college, then they are required to, uh, recertify every year that they are attending college, things like that. The instances where we've detected fraud have been in those instances rather than any, any claim that normally comes across. OK. And then the last question is, the physician, Uh, involvement in determination. Uh, whether the person's disability is, is legitimate and needs claims. The Do you, do you contract out those services, uh, or those doctors on staff, um, one of the things that I was made aware of is sometimes the length of time or disagreement with the doctors determination as to whether or not that person actually qualifies for disability or requalifies for disability because they've, they've got to go through a redetermination process if I understand the system right, the doctors that make those, are they, are they on staff or they're contracted out or what's that arrangement? Actually, it's neither, because in the case of workers' comp, the insurance carriers are the ones that really drive, drive the boat here, um. They are the ones that pay out the claims and they are the ones that refer the, the injured parties to the doctors and that's entirely on on the private side. So do you have any legal authority over evaluating the outcomes of those reassessments that those doctors make or where, where's your authority start and stop as far as looking, um, at the outcome that the doctor renders in any kind of an appeal process. Our authority lies in our adjudication division when a claim, um, is controverted, um, by one party or the other, then it become comes before our administrative law judges and they are the triers of fact there, everything is, is, uh, presented to them and they make a determination whether it's uh uh uh a normal payout of claims or whether it's a, uh, permanent disability, that sort of thing, and then it goes. Through that system, uh, it goes through. The adjudication division to make that determination. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Wooton you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. McGuire on, you have the largest division within the Labor Department and you have 105 authorized positions, you have 25 that are faking 18/2 years old. Can you share with this group what what those positions are made up of and why are they been vacant for 2.5 years and have you turned any in under the. The new legislation. Thank you, Representative. We're just debating on who's gonna give you the good news. um. As far as I believe there have been some worker comp, uh, positions turned in, uh, recently. Um, there are several within that, uh, 796 act, I believe, um, as far as the retention, I believe some of them were, uh, on hold just for. Not wanting to lose them, um, in case they were needed in the future. Um, Mark, I don't know if you can further explain us for. When he says if they're needed in the future, our, our claims, as you can imagine, fluctuate every year as they come in and we have traditionally wanted to retain a lot of the positions, for instance, administrative law judges and support staff for those law judges to be able to flex in case we get a large influx of claims that our current judges and staff can't handle. What, what was, what, what would qualify as a large influx, I mean, are you talking about a, a massive injury situation that were several people are hurt in a, in a particular situation, um. Our COVID epidemic if you will that that resulted in a large amount of claims that came in. So, so most of these 18 positions are administrative, I mean, uh, the judges judges and the rest are the support staff for those. um, How, how many of the 18 make that up or would you know? Are you referring to the judges? 3, I believe, 3. OK. So. It's a, it's a fluctuation in your daily task that you perform relative to investigation and, and judicial part of claims. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Ladyman you recognized? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'm, I'm confused, maybe it's just because I don't understand this, but you're closing two funds. So how are future funds paid for? You said you had 3 funds, so can you explain that? We have, um, what we would commonly refer to as our operating fund. Um, we have the death and uh. Death and and total uh disability fund and our second injury fund. The 2nd injury fund and the, uh, Death and permanent total disability fund, yes, have been closed. However, there's still. Pending active claims in that. Um, they're close to any new claims that come in, but we still have to maintain and take care of and pay the claims that were in that before it closed. So how are the new claims paid? The new claims are, are paid entirely by the employer or insurance carrier. OK. And you talked about not having enough funding in the future because you can't project. I understand that process, but, uh, I thought, I mean, there's no general fund funding here, I don't think, uh, so. Um, organs companies, the employers pay into that. That's analyzed annually and those fees fluctuate up and down depending on the number of cases. So wouldn't those fees in the future meet those needs? Uh, Ideally, but there's no way, no, there's no certain way of determining that, uh, Mr. Representative, we would hope that they would, but there's no way to be certain that they will. So this is a cushion in case they don't. Absolutely, sir. So we really don't know. I mean, the shortfall may not be as large as we're projecting or it may be more, we just don't know because it's you're looking forward, you're projecting, is that correct? That's correct, sir. All right. Thank you. I got a motion at the proper time. I've got Senator Chesterfield. Move executive rec, Mr. Chair, I have a most respectable. Would you like to second that? I have a second all in favor of executive rack. Say hi. Post Thank you gentlemen for being here. We appreciate that, Ms. Wald and, thank you for presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Thank you, Ms. I hope you realize and and have appreciations as I do for our analysts how well prepared they are and how efficient they are, so let's give them a hand. So next week, members, and I made myself a note we will not be having budget hearings next week. It is legislative council week. You can check your calendars, budget hearings will start back October 22nd. Anything else? That is it. We are adjourn.