ALC-Personnel

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. If you'll take your seat, we're gonna get started. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, committee members. Uh, we're gonna take an item out of order. Real quick, we have a supplemental agenda item on your desk. This is a request, uh, from the public defender commission for some positions. Um, the supplemental part is because the request came in late. So the committee will need to vote to suspend the rules to take this item up, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Uh, so, uh, take a motion to suspend, have a motion to do a second. You gonna have a second, any discussion on favor say aye, all opposed. Mr. Wardlaw, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In order to stay consistent throughout the week. Earlier in the week, we held the money for a decision to be made Friday and full council. I'd like to proceed with the same motion on this item since it is tied to those funding mechanisms. That's a proper motion. To have a second in discussion all in favor say aye. All pose none, and with that being said, uh, before we get to, uh, the start of the. Business on the agenda. I'll go to my co-chair, Senator, no comments from my, my co-chair. So that being said, Tony will take up item B. All right, Ms. Sherman, I B is a request from the Commissioner of State lands, uh, for entities that are exempt from the classics, uh, when match is added to this. And do I have a, have a motion in a second. I have a 2nd, all in favor say aye. All opposed. The, the eyes have it, motion passes. I C was pulled, so let's go to item D. Chairman, I D is a swap pool request from ASUBB. They're requesting to surrender 5 positions in return for 2 computer support technicians, a dean of students, and a public information specialist, the computer support techs are needed to, uh, due to increased enrollment, the dean of students and the public information specialist are requested to better align the job titles with the job duties, the Department of Education has recommended the requested swap of positions. Any discussion from members, uh, and I'm working with one eye. Senator Sutherland then you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Is there someone here to speak on that, the ladies at the table, ready to speak on that? I, my question is, have they, did the university do any kind of a study to see where costs could be cut to make up and they can pay for those positions without Asking for additional positions. What efforts did they make to handle that internally? So I have to call higher ed to the table if anybody from higher ed. If you'd state your name for the record and organization you're with and you'll be recognized. Nick Fuller of the division of Higher Education and Senator Sullivan, do you want to restate your question? Yes, I'm looking at the um, Item D. And I'm wondering, they're asking for More positions. And I'm wondering what studies were done or what efforts were made. To save money. So that they did not have to come back to the legislature and ask for additional money. No, none of the positions that hired institutions have are funded from state funds directly. They, they don't receive funds for positions. So it's, it's uh this is from the surrender pools they are giving up 3 positions. In order to get the 3 news. OK, so it's just that it's a wash then is what you're saying is this increased cost with the line items, maximums for the new positions are higher, but those will come from revenues that the institution already has. They, they would not be able to, to tie that to state funding that they would need to come after. So. There's no responsibility or obligation. At the university level for them to try and make efforts to uh Provide savings equal to the increase they're asking for. Yeah I believe they they are trying to to reduce costs and what the surrendering of the three rather than asking for just 3 additional positions and Let's hear a former speaker, so to speak more directly to the specific ASU positions. And Mr. Speaker, if you'll. State your name and your position for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Shane Broadway, ASU system, uh, Senator Sullivan, yes, that is, uh, uh, a consideration in these positions that we're giving up. We're surrendering positions that we don't use. And so we need new positions for what we do use, but there will not be a new cost. That was one thing I cost incurred costs for these positions. The line item may change the land out of Max will change, but what is actually paid will not. be an additional cost. That makes sense, Tony. Yeah, it does. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator, and thank you, Mr. Broadway. Yeah, so do I have uh any more discussion? Seeing none of emotion. Have a motion in a second. All in favor say aye. Uh, his habits and no nays. OK. Next item on the agenda, please. Chair, we are moving on to item E. This is a request from the Department of Agriculture for 6 MFG positions. The positions and appropriation were reviewed by Pierre on Monday. Personnel is tasked with reviewing the titles attached to the requested positions. The agency is requesting 5 archaeologists and 1 admin analyst to assist the Arkansas Natural Resources Conservation Service to review cultural resources requests. Oium has recommended the requested titles discussion. To see motion. Have a motion, have a second, oh. I'm sorry, Senator Gil Senator Gilmore. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, do we have someone from the department here? I'm just curious as to what exactly these 5 archaeologists will be doing in the room. doesn't I'm sure they can send me an email before Friday. OK. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. No see, no. Senator Sullivan or. OK, Senator Dee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And, and this may be an email on Friday as well, but, uh, just to confirm on this federal grant program, would this, would this be an addition to the state budget? For the department or is this the supplemental on the side added in. I just want to confirm how that, how that process works. Are you asking about the miscellaneous federal grant process. I'm not the right person to speak to this, but essentially when an agency receives money from the federal government, that they didn't know was coming on the front end. They have to go through a process with the Office of Budget and Pier. They say, we, we've received this, we're going to receive this federal funding. We need appropriation in order to spend that funding that we're receiving. So Pierre takes care of that and they take care of giving them the positions. And the personnel looks at the titles that are associated with the positions they receive. Does that answer your question it does. So if Repeat it back, this would not be. If this is approved, this would not be increasing their overall yearly budget. Am I saying that the right way? I'm gonna let Kevin Anderson, my boss, answered that question properly. Thank you, Mr. Anderson. If you would state your name and your position for the record, please. Yes, sir. Kevin Anderson, Bureau of Legislative Research, uh, it, yeah, this is, this would be federal money. It would not increase their general revenue, but it will, if they want to continue with it the next year, which they, which they will, you will see it in their budget manual under under federal appropriation. So yes, it will go into their budget, but it will be federal appropriation. OK, I think that's clear. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Thank you, Mr. Anderson. OK, seeing no further discussion to have a motion, have a motion. In the second all in favor say aye. All opposed? Seeing none, motion passes. OK, down to item F. Mr. Chairman, I F is an approval request from office personnel management to approve salary increases over the maximum of the grade for 4 employees who received changes to their performance evaluations after the implementation of merit for FY 24. OPM has recommended the approval of the increased salaries. This item requires approval rather than review. In discussion Now I see a motion? They have a motion in a second. All in favor say aye, all opposed seeing none motion passes. Mr. Chairman, I G is also an approval request from the Secretary of State's office to approve the hiring of Ms. Jenny Brooks, who's the wife of Representative Keith Brooks and a regular position of administrative assistant. This item also requires approval rather than. Any discussions seeing none, uh, I don't really like Keith Brooks, but, uh, if, uh, do I have a motion, have a motion in a second. I'll favor say aye, all oppose seeing non-motion passes. All right, Mr. Chairman, that was the last of the actionable items, items H through in or reports that require no action. One thing I do want to note that item H is a report of a reduction in force at the military department due to the elimination of the Youth Challenge program. Also item N is That report was over 200 pages by itself. So we don't have that in your packet. It's on the web for you to review if you want to look at it. We also have one copy over here at the back desk if anybody needs to look at it today. Any discussion seeing none, uh, yes. Representative Brown. Representative Brown, you recognize. I'm just curious why they eliminated the Youth Challenge program. Can we talk about that or is it not appropriate here. Wood is here if he wants to come to the table, but uh, the federal funds have been pulled from that, uh. Already and there's a number of significant challenges with that program, so, uh. Mr. Wood and General Cox, if you'd like to come to the table and, and, uh. To address representative Brown. If you would, uh, state your name and your position for the record and former state representative and Colonel judge advocate and, uh, Mr. Wood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Jeff Wood, Department of the Military. Mr. Chairman Breer, General Bradley Cox, Deputy. Representative Brown, to answer your question, it basically came down to our inability to recruit and retain our cadre. Those are the staff members we have that are there 24 hours a day. They look after the kids and just we were unable to, uh, hire those positions and keep them on and, uh, and that that's really the short of it, which, uh, the shorties there led to other issues because we didn't have enough cadre. It led to disciplinary issues and a lack of discipline and some other stuff there, so that's, that's kind of the, a summary of why we ended up closing the program. Well, thank you for that explanation. I'm just surprised. I thought it was a successful program or that's what my impression anyway. Yes, and I hate to see it shut down because I know it's served more than Arkansas children. Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, it was, it was a tough decision, but just given the fact that we couldn't guarantee the safety of the program and the students that were there do the, to the cadre shortage, it was the right decision. It, but it definitely was a tough decision. Thank you. And I get to send her Chesterfield just a second, but, uh, One of the challenges in coming from a guy that used to be secretary of the military that dealt with the youth challenge program. You know, you're looking at it, at a cost of $338,000 per student and the return on the investment plus, you, you have to look at it is not the Department of the military that is the subject matter experts to dealing with children, uh, that have, uh, uh, might have some issues that that's more in, in my opinion, uh, a DHS responsibility. They're the experts in dealing with uh. Uh, issues that our youth, uh, have. That's one of the reasons why we transferred under my administration, the civilian, the adjudicated program CTEP to DHS, uh, because, uh, we, we're just not. geared to handle programs such as that. So, uh, with that being said, I'll recognize my, my friend Senator Chesterfield. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Always good to see my former colleague, um, I've called you Jeff forever. Do you mind if I do that? All right. Could you tell me please, since it's shut down, and the general has made clear that we're talking about transferring the responsibility to DHS. Are these children going into the into the juvenile system or are they going back to regular classes, alternative schools are we tracking where they are going to be. I can't hear you because everybody else over there is talking. Yeah, I'm just a teacher who knows? I think, uh, Representative Barry was referring to the CTEP program that got transferred, uh, the youth challenge program, uh, strictly voluntary program, um, it was, uh, NGB designed it. It wasn't supposed to be a diversionary program at all. It was just for a certain, uh, a certain, uh, category of youth. And so, um, there's not really anything else out there that kind of serves this, uh, this kind of, uh, uh, youth that are out there. So, um, not exactly, that's one of the discussions we have, not exactly sure What's gonna happen to the kids, but the kids here were voluntary. They weren't court-ordered or anything like that. So we don't have any reason then to keep a record of where they went, or are we considering that a necessity or non-necessity of the program is, uh, that we do do a post residential phase for a year. And so even though we're closing the program down now, that's why 4 of the casework managers are staying on for an entire year. So the, the 36 kids we had graduate last June. We'll continue to get services for an entire year. checked on, they'll get mentored, and they'll follow up with them. That's good to know. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Senator, and, uh, Uh, Jeff, if you would, uh, we still have the opportunity to send children out of state to other youth challenge programs, is that correct? Uh, yes, sir. Um, I think I believe it's Mississippi, uh, our neighboring state doesn't have a residency requirement. I believe every other state around us does have a residency requirement, but there's several states, uh, Kentucky, and I believe Georgia don't have a, uh, a requirement. And when we, we shut the program down, we'd have some kids that were going to come to the next class and we've been successful on getting Uh, the majority of those 27, we were able to get into the Kentucky program, and then we had 8 go to Louisiana because they waived the, uh, the residency requirement to help us get those kids into a class. OK, thank you, Mr. Wood. And, uh, Representative Springer, you recognized? Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Is it possible for us to have a report as to what happens to those kids at the end of June 2025, so one of the things, uh, the, uh, department is gonna come before children aging and youth and and given a an entire presentation on this, uh, September 23rd, I believe it is, and be able to answer any of the members' questions. Thank you. Yes. OK, thank you. Gentleman, you're excused. Thank you. Any other business before the committee, Senator Davis, anything? Ladies and gentlemen, you those paying attention, do you have any, anything for the business, seeing none, then we're adjourned.