Arkansas Legislative Council (ALC)
Video
Transcript
47 documents
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 7, 2026
all right the chair sees a quorum i need a
motion to approve the minutes from our last meeting all right motion do i have a second all right all those in favor say aye motion passes all right ladies and gentlemen first of all before we start the agenda i'm going to recognize representative Whitaker point of privilege you're
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
3:35
on thank you madam chair just very briefly
I just want to take this opportunity to welcome my niece miss Julia Rainey who has begun working for the state of Arkansas and this is her first legislative council meeting I'd like to welcome her to the meeting thank you madam chair if she
would stand up we'd like to recognize her where is she welcome to the
Speaker 9
3:58
welcome to a council thank you and then I'd like to
represent recognize a new member representative in it if you would stand please so that we can see you welcome And then I have Senator Kim Hammer, who
has a citation for some public service of the highest level. If you would present your citation.
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
4:43
Thank you, Madam Chair. With the Chair's permission, can I ask Sophie Kennedy, Brendan Redman, and Hunter Taylor to come on the inside to be presented
Speaker 18
5:06
their citations in front of the table? Members, I thank
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
5:14
you for the opportunity to stand before you this morning and recognize
these three young adults. They are members of Representative Andy Davis, who cannot be here, his district, and my district, from the Lake Norrell area. The reason he's standing before you today is because this past summer, while out at their home on Lake Norrell, a gentleman fell over 20 feet from his ladder, and in medical firms, he face-planted, had heavy head lacerations and head injuries, also other severe injuries, and were it not for the actions of these three young adults,
that man would have died. Doug was the responder for the Lake and Oral Fire Department, of which Ronnie is the chief of the Lake and Oral Fire Department, and before they had the opportunity to get there, these three individuals were rendering life-saving techniques. None of them had been trained as far as first responders, EMT. They just saw a person in need and stepped in to help out. And they worked with Doug, who was the only one able to respond at the time, in order to get what we would say in the ambulance world, the gentleman package, ready to go.
Sophie here commandeered a boat, and as a result of that, they were able, the gentleman was very large, they were able to get him onto the boat and get him across the lake to the only place that Medclite could land. And the gentleman is alive today because of the actions of these three of the leadership of these men and the adults. And so we wanted to recognize him with citations on behalf of Representative Andy Davis and myself as Senator of their district. And again, this is Sophie Kennedy.
Sophie, if you would, raise your hand. This is Brendan Redmond. Brendan, would you raise your hand, please? And this is Hunter Taylor. Hunter, if you'd raise your hand. And all the family,
Speaker 20
7:09
if you all would, please stand in the back. It becomes part of the day. And with that, would
you express your appreciation? We appreciate you being here today, and Senator Hammer,
Thank you for bringing these people before us. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to start our meeting. We are going to the reports of the standing subcommittees. We have
Speaker 27
8:15
administrative rules with Representative Dan Sullivan. You are recognized to present the report.
The subcommittee met
Speaker 27
8:26
on Wednesday November 13th, the subcommittee reviewed and filed
the quarterly reports that were submitted by the Division of Community Corrections and another Division of Community Corrections and the Parole Board in accordance with Act 1258 of 2015. All rules were reviewed and approved. I move to adopt this risk report. All right, ladies and
gentlemen of the committee, you've heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed. Motion is adopted. All right, going on down to item four,
representative josh miller with game and fish state police thank you madam
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
9:11
chair the game and fish state police oversight committee met wednesday october 30th at the henry gray hurricane lake wildlife management area in bald knob we heard testimony and discussed a few items one of which was the current and future conditions of our green tree reservoirs and the bottoms there the flood damage and and so forth
what it's doing to our forest we also discussed the economic impact waterfowl hunting has on our state and across the country we discussed some rules and regulations that were adopted by the game
Speaker 33
9:55
of fish commission had a good meeting we were well educated and
i moved for adoption of this All right, you've heard the motion. All those
in favor, say aye. All those opposed. All right, the motion passes. All right, moving on down to Item 5, Higher Education, Representative David Whitaker.
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
10:19
Thank you, Madam Chair. The Higher Education Subcommittee met Wednesday November 13th at 11 a.m. in Mac B Little Rock. Subcommittee's agenda was to hear input from public two-year and four-year higher education institutions regarding the productivity funding formula's impact. From a system president, the chancellors from various two-year and four-year institutions, both system-based and independent, information and suggestions shared with
the subcommittee included possibly set aside institution with similar goals, can excel in a category but need more students, have a database three or four year review of the formula, that the 2% cap serves as a guardrail. Some institutions have gained funding, others have lost funding. Some will do better in the future, but it will take time to see results of many of these changes. On behalf of myself and Senator Davis, I move adoption of the report. All right, ladies
and gentlemen, you've heard the motion. All those in favor say
aye all those opposed motion carries all right number seven litigation reports oversight
representative lanny fight you're recognized thank you madam chair the
Chair
Unverified
11:35
litigation reports oversight subcommittee met thursday november 14th 2019 at 2 30. the subcommittee reviewed eight litigation cases involving the department of labor seeking labor wages collection on behalf of workers who were owed compensation from the
former employers. The subcommittee reviewed one settlement involving a civil matter filed by Amber Ashley, a former UAMS employee against the University of Arkansas and UAMS. The parties agreed on a total settlement of $85,000. With no further business, the subcommittee adjourned at 3 p.m. Madam Chair, I move for adoption of this report all right ladies and
gentlemen you've heard the motion all those in favor say aye all those opposed motion passes all right
ladies and gentlemen that puts us down at number a the peer review committee and there will be a motion after the chair representative vault to explains what has happened in
the committee representative vault you're recognized The PEERS subcommittee met on Tuesday, November
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
12:43
the 12th. The subcommittee approved two items, a rainy day fund transfer to the Department of Agriculture and a rainy day fund transfer to the Department of Commerce, Arkansas Rehabilitation Services.
The subcommittee reviewed several items, including a cash fund appropriation increase request, a budget clarification transfer request, miscellaneous federal grant appropriation request, and various reports assigned to the subcommittee. The subcommittee held one item listed in the report under Section D, Item 1. This item is a miscellaneous federal grant appropriation request for the Department of Health. Questions regarding this request have since been answered. I move adoption of the report, which includes removing Item D1 from the Department of Health.
All right, thank you. We have Senator Hickey that would like to make a motion. Madam Chair, I don't
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
13:45
know if it needs to be a motion or if it just needs to be pulled by the chairs. I just request that we would pull the item that relates to the Buffalo River that's under the Department of Ag and vote on that separate after we get a couple of quick questions answered. You're going to
have to put it in form of a motion.
So moved. So moved. All right. Thank you. all those in favor say aye all those opposed all right yeah we're going to go ahead with the rest of
the report uh chairman if you would make a motion for that i move adoption of the report which
Speaker 49
14:26
include is that what you want me to do again ma'am i'm sorry which does not include
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
14:31
which does not include d1 the department of health yes ma'am
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
14:39
okay all right and d1 and d1 that's what i thought
i just wanted to make sure ma'am thank you all right all right you've heard the motion all those in favor say aye all those opposed all right those two have been removed all right But, okay, all right, Senator Hickey, we're going to let you go first.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
15:15
You're on. Push your button again. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. My question as it relates to this is whenever we had originally done this, there was a letter that was presented to ALC, actually through the chairs, I believe yourself and Representative Wardlaw, and the letter itself said that these funds, that
there was two issues, and I thought that this was going to get corrected, that the including but not limited to language that we talked about but in addition to that the letter that was presented said the Buffalo River Conservation Committee and its subcommittees will identify projects and distribute the funds I don't know how that they're going to distribute the funds because we do not have an appropriation for that this letter did not be was not changed and this is what we're actually voting on so if somebody could come forward to I believe
Secretary Wes Ward is here today and Jake Bleed, if you would come forward please. If you'll state your names for the record.
Speaker 64
16:54
I'm trying not to break anything while I'm here. Secretary Westwar, Arkansas Department of Agriculture. Jake Bleed, DFA Office of Budget. All right, Senator Hickey. Thank you, gentlemen, and
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
17:03
I think you may have heard, but I'll do
it again. If you want to start with the first part, I guess, on the appropriation, because the letter that you presented us, which is what I would say would govern what would have to happen, actually says that you're going to give the money to them and they're going to distribute it. How do you plan to make that happen since there's not an appropriation for them?
Because under my understanding, and I think I'd talk to you about this, even though it may have been a month ago, Mr. Ward, is that we were going to change that so that the agriculture department may be the ones that is going to have to disperse it. but that
Speaker 69
17:43
didn't happen. It didn't appear like. Yes, sir, and I can speak to the general aspects of that, and Jake may have to speak to the more technical components of the appropriation, but the way that we looked at it and the frequently asked questions
that we put together on this topic regarding the distribution of funds, so that funding would come to the department and sit in a cash fund with us, So it would require the Department of Agriculture to actually distribute the funds. How we envision that working is that money would come over, sit in that fund. We would, the four-member Buffalo River Conservation Committee, in coordination with the governor and legislators, would establish that subcommittee or subcommittees. They would identify the priorities.
They would come back to the four-member Buffalo River Conservation Committee. We would look at that funding, that $1 million funding, and then it would ultimately still be the department of agriculture that has to actually distribute those funds so it's not it's not sending money directly to a subcommittee and they do whatever they want it's it's still they're coming up with their rankings or priorities of what they would like to see happen within within that area of the buffalo river and then submitting that to the four member committee department of agriculture still has the authority to distribute
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
18:58
those funds and i think that's the way it would have to be done however that is not the way it's written so while we're working on the second question madam chair could we have staff to see since that is their intention and recommendation if there's some type of motion that we can do to say that the department of agriculture will actually distribute it because it specifically says here the buffalo river conservation committee and its subcommittees will distribute it so it's not it's pretty plain language to me so however we need to
correct that part if we can and the other part with the including but not limited to i know that we talked about that also and i'm not saying you you're going to do this but the way it's written you could buy pink flamingos if you wanted to it's if this body's going to come down here and provide oversight uh i don't know why in the world that we would write things that say including but not limited to the following because then that opens it up to everything so from my opinion the legislature is not doing its job if we leave that in there so if you'd speak to that i'd appreciate
Speaker 63
20:02
it yes sir uh regarding the including but not
Speaker 69
20:05
limited to you uh the intent uh that we were going for with this and from the governor as well is that it's it's not a little rock directed prescriptive approach to what what is going to happen within within the watershed in the buffalo river area uh so when say including but not limited to you you know we're putting it putting those uh those ideas back to the subcommittees and the people actually within within that area the actual local stakeholders to determine what what they think the priorities are and how that
money needs to be spent we still have the final approval authority on how the funds are distributed but we're not coming in and telling them exactly how they're going to use the money we want them to come up with the solutions come up with with the projects and we've identified several areas where where that could potentially happen uh so that that's how i would i would answer the including but not limited to you yeah i think we still have uh we still have the authority from the department to make sure that that doesn't doesn't go to some contrary uh project or something that doesn't need to be funded outside of the parameters of what the governor and we're intending
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
21:07
to accomplish with it right it's just i think whenever we come in here to review that that
that's actually a uh item that the legislature would do as to where the money's going to go and it's almost like to me that you're trying to legislate through this committee so and we'll
Speaker 69
21:24
be honest i've struggled with that yes sir in a large fashion if i if i can make one last point i think uh uh in conversations that that i've had with other legislators and with senator ervin uh i think that's why they wanted to have the the committee oversight uh for the buffalo river conservation committee to actually do some reporting back to uh senator ervin's committee
as well as the house and senate agriculture committee so both of those committees having some uh some oversight and purview of of what's going on
Speaker 68
21:50
with the committee and what actions are being taken and uh and hopefully that would give the additional oversight to the legislature hopefully
Speaker 75
22:01
you think it will or will you're the one that wrote it this way so yes sir
Speaker 69
22:07
well and i would say to you you know we with the governor's executive order we owe a uh an annual report to him uh so i'm very comfortable
with how the how the language is written i think it it has a lot of oversight to the governor and with a legislative oversight through the committees, I think that there is oversight of how this will progress forward and how the money will be spent. Okay. I can't speak
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
22:30
for the rest of the committee, but since
we have you live streamed and recorded with that, I may be okay with that if we can get this other part corrected. So I think somebody's given me what I need to do to make that happen. Motion to review.
Okay. Madam Chair, whenever we can, I'll have a – I guess, I don't know if
it would be a motion or a substitute motion. I guess it would be a substitute motion, Ms. Garrity. It's a
motion. It's a motion. And if you'll hold
that, we have two people that would like to ask questions of the secretary on this issue. Thank you, ma'am. All right. Senator Rice,
you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got two things. One
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
23:10
is from Senator Irvin. Contact me and told me she wasn't going to be able to be here today.
And as she expressed in peer subcommittee, she wanted me to state her thanks for her and area legislators that you and the health department and other ones she named in subcommittee. Thank you for coming up to public meetings where she was very encouraged with the public that had input after we had her discussion last month in peer. So I wanted to state that, and I appreciate you doing that also. And I will say I've got the utmost highest esteem for you.
And as I've stated in committee, it's not just this instance. It's looking down the road that concerns me. And what concerned me was after Senator Hickey asked last month that these things be looked at and changed, I don't believe, I didn't ask him directly. He can comment if he wants to. I don't think anybody contacted him about we're not going to or we're going to. Last month, there was no oversight for a legislative committee
because it wasn't done until Senator Irvin asked and this body agreed that this be held. So it's in those things that it's concerned with the not limited to. I ask you or anybody, Jake or anybody, and Senator Irvin brought up and you address that there may be some federal monies that can be matched with this. I'm not trying to block that, but is that not limited to critical for that to happen?
And the other thing is the subcommittees. They haven't been picked yet. Yet in the language, it says the subcommittees can distribute the money. And as I expressed, for balance on the subcommittees, and you and i agree there needs to be some balance on there it wasn't in the original language of what it defines who will be on the subcommittee so all of this stuff we're doing is is relevant what the legislature is supposed to be doing in oversight and that's not critical to you or
or the executive branch either one it's just what we should be doing so it still concerns me that the language hadn't been made the subcommittees hadn't been made and I believe Senator Hammer asking committee so what we're doing is or somebody asking committee is we're going to agree to a million dollars and hope y'all do everything you said you work for somebody I work for the people and that's what I'm trying to to be careful on that can you address with us that do
Do we need to hold this another month to make sure that this stuff comes on through? Will the subcommittees be known by next month? Can
Speaker 74
26:13
you answer that? So I think they will be. What we've been doing and working
Speaker 69
26:18
with legislators from within the watershed area, as well as the governor, is identifying those individuals. And so they have been and continue to work on that. They have not been notified that they would be on a subcommittee, but they're working to make sure the appropriate and correct individuals would be on that subcommittee.
So my perspective would be that I don't think that there would be a need to hold the funding, but we could very easily, the Buffalo River Conservation Committee or myself individually, could report back to Senator Irvin's committee or House and Senate Ag Committee or to ALC on as we progress, you know here's the members of the subcommittee whatever action we would y'all would deem appropriate we'd
Speaker 68
27:00
be happy to provide that information as we as we progress forward and again
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
27:06
as I stated in some committee it's not you
where you sit now I'm looking years down the road we're doing something that somebody's going to come back in and I've seen it happen since I've been here we come back and say well we did it before all we got to do is do a rule change because it's already been done before and if we're going to we're going agree to things where committees are not even in effect yet and you don't know whether they're stacked or balanced and we're agreeing to money that that's what concerns me I don't feel like
we're doing our job so madam chair I'm gonna sit here a minute and I may have other comment I may not thank you all right
thank you representative Wooten you're recognized for a question oh
something's happened can you oh all right go ahead okay
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
27:59
thank you madam chairman uh mr secretary i have y'all had constituent
contact with the people up there i believe i understood that to be correct and so so exactly how how is it going to function from this point
forward I mean it there seems like to me there's a lot of uncertainty relative to what the projects will be who will come up with them
and we keep talking about subcommittee and and what will the flow be yes sir so we we
Speaker 69
28:37
have had several contacts in that area to include the two public meetings that we had uh one in marshall and one in jasper a lot of uh input from the from the local stakeholders there that showed up and
participated in that uh individually from an ag department perspective we've we've reached out to farm bureau cattlemen's poultry federation all the ag organizations uh usda organizations as well here's what we're doing here's what's going on uh for their membership to to be aware of that as well. So trying very hard to keep everybody informed of where we are and what we're doing and why we're doing it, how I see the process working forward. And maybe this will help answer some of our Senator Rice questions too. So I think part of, with the governor creating the
executive order and naming that four-member Buffalo River Conservation Committee, four cabinet secretaries, myself, Department of Health, Energy Environment, and Parks Heritage and Tourism, we have to be accountable and so it's it's it's up to us those four cabinet members and and our boss to the governor and identifying and helping to identify with legislators and local stakeholders the appropriate members of the subcommittee so moving forward how we see that happening is
letting that subcommittee or subcommittees plural with local stakeholders within the area as we identify that through the governor and through legislators and and others of making sure that that is appropriately situated then they start working to identify what's important for that area so it didn't let a rock's hand you're going to spend it on an rcpp or usda program it's letting those those individuals say here's here's what we're working on here's what we're trying to accomplish but we don't have enough funding if we could use some of it for this this is what we would like to to do so those sub that subcommittee or subcommittees uh will meet
and we can provide input and guidance to them as they need it on the available programs that we already have within state government or how we could potentially put something together to to meet a particular need within the area they would submit those proposals back to the four member buffalo river conservation committee and then we would try to allocate funds from that one million dollars to meet those needs we've heard from several people that a million dollars isn't going to cover it that there's a lot of needs or there's people already thinking about projects and
and and things within the area that it could be used for but we're going to do our best to take that funding make sure it's used on the highest priorities and hopefully be able to leverage that funding with other federal programs whether that's a in particular for agriculture would be a regional conservation partnership program or joint chiefs program other things that we can can help people within that area accomplish the things that they think are important for them
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
31:31
follow up yes who who will establish the rules relative to how the subcommittees will
function and how many of how many subcommittees will you have so
Speaker 62
31:42
we we want so what we're going to do right now
Speaker 69
31:45
we're going to establish one subcommittee that subcommittee will be will be identified through the governor through legislators on who needs to be on that and then they can decide you know we need a we need a different subcommittee on agriculture or we need a different subcommittee on tourism or we need a different subcommittee letting them decide what additional subcommittees if any that they that they think are important so i hope that answers the questions of how how
that will be set up but as far as rules on how they move forward so it didn't again not being prescriptive on on what they have to do and what they have to identify but we would ask for them to submit back to the buffalo river conservation committee within a certain period of time working together with them saying how much time do you need to identify your priorities is it 90 days is 120 days give them a date and say by this date please submit your recommendations and priorities back to us so we can move forward on trying to get those funded so there's still a lot of
uncertainties there's still work to be done yes sir i i wouldn't say uncertainty in a negative tone but uh there there are things that we've got to work out uh and our intent is to work that out with those identified local stakeholders and legislators within
the area to make sure that it's done the right way thank you madam chairman all right thank you all right next on our On the queue is seat five, Representative Sleip.
Speaker 101
33:16
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Secretary, I want to thank you
Speaker 102
33:20
and Secretary Hurst coming up to the Marshall and Jasper in District 83, where the majority of the Buffalo River sits in. and I just wanted you to know prior to the meeting when the folks were getting ready we had to go out and hide all the pitchforks and torches because it was going to be some ugly meetings. But with your staff there and transparency of these folks getting to see their government at work
that when we left and what I've received from the constituents in Newton and Searsha County has been positive because now they see that this is not a land grab this is something that is useful and much needed uh some that uh the people that i've uh nominated to be on the subcommittees uh are the good folks and senator irving and as uh you know they are ready to go to work because they do know it's it's not necessarily a hog farm that's doing it but there's many other issues
on that river that lays in the state and not on the federal lands that needs to be addressed. And I'd like to see that to be done. And working with Senator Irving and moving the oversight over on public health, I feel as that will be a good way to make sure those monies are diligently spent and onto the proper projects. Don't you agree?
Speaker 101
34:51
Yes, sir. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right.
And Senator Hammer, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Madam
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
35:06
Chair. You have access to the $1 million until June of 2022, is that correct, based on where the money is coming from? The funding,
Speaker 104
35:16
so the request before the ALC this morning is actually two parts. One is to transfer the funds from the Rainy Day Fund. once that transfer is complete those funds would carry over and then the appropriation that's being
requested that would indeed expire at the end of the fiscal
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
35:32
year. Okay and then the other money that's been committed or mentioned is it on a deadline as far as when it would go away if this is not acted on today? The rainy day funds would carry forward. But I'm talking about the money from the conservatory or from other federal grants that are mentioned are they on a are they time sensitive i have not heard
Speaker 68
35:52
any time deadline with with the private donations no sir okay and then the last thing is
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
35:57
have you identified any of the four members that are going to be on subcommittee
or have you already reached out to anybody that's committed to be willing to serve on the four on the
Speaker 69
36:08
subcommittee so we so that's been a concerted effort with the legislators within the area we have not identified we have not reached out to them directly uh to ask them to be on the subcommittee but there's i'm working with the governor and the legislators identifying who the appropriate personnel are and i know that there there have been some names mentioned uh we haven't contacted them because we wanted to make sure that everybody was comfortable with with who they were before they were invited to participate but they are
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
36:33
all people from the local community that have
vested interest in the project correct thank you all
right representative tosh you're recognized for question uh thank you madam chair that's representative ladyman
Chair
Unverified
36:53
all right our apologies i am a house chair of public health and i co-chaired the meeting with uh senator urban in the area and the turnout there was great i'm not i don't have a question uh i just wanted to
add some information to this and what representative slade said uh was accurate the turnout was great the enthusiasm was great the people there thought that we were there to tell them what to do and senator urban and i informed them that we were there to listen to them and that's what we did and uh think about this we've got two major industries in that water basin agriculture and recreation that are important not only to that water basin in that area but
to our state brings a lot of people into arkansas we also have a national treasure there that we need to protect so i think this is a good move to try to meet all of those three requirements and to move that forward and there are issues in that in those communities that were formed back in the 60s, 70s, when that river basin was designated as a national resource. And those issues need to be addressed. They're festering in those communities. So we need to
protect the river. We need to protect our economy. And we need to help the local people there work together to improve that area. I think this is a major step in doing that. There were people in that audience that came to me and to Senator Urban and talked to us about being on these subcommittees. But folks, this is a work in progress. This needs to be done right and to do it right, it takes time. But there are people in that local community that want to be a part of this and want to help this and want to feel like their problems are being
solved. So I don't know the steps that need to be taken, but this needs to be moved forward. it does not need to be delayed i agree with senator hickey the language is a language is specific and it needs to be corrected but this needs to be moved on
that's all the comments i had all right thank you representative slate you're
Speaker 102
39:16
recognized for question thank you madam chair i'm going to withdraw representative ladyman
answer to everything that i need to know all right
thank you any other questions from the committee all right we're going back to a motion for
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
39:39
uh from senator hickey thank you senator bledsoe okay members i have a motion to
review item b1 with the understanding that the understanding that the department of agriculture will be the the entity to distribute the funds and not the buffalo river conservation committee or any of its subcommittees and also
we're going to have an understanding that the disbursement of the funds will be totally transparent and thoroughly vetted per secretary ward's comments which i see a nod of his head which we'll note in here also so with that that'll be my motion madam chair all right ladies and
gentlemen you have heard the motion all those in faith all right
we have a question uh representative payton you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair this is
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
40:24
discussion on the motion i would hope but uh members colleagues uh i just want to tell you i was at one of the meetings and
and there was a huge turnout at marshall i know there was another meeting in jasper that must have been a totally different atmosphere than what i experienced in marshall much of my district is involves the buffalo river watershed and i've had emails from landowners and i talked to landowners there at that meeting and i didn't find any that were in favor of this at all you've all heard of a cure in search of a problem and and i think this is a million dollars in search of a cure that's in search of a problem uh that we were told over and over how it's voluntary for these
landowners to apply for grants and i didn't find any landowners with their handout that are looking for grants at all and it's not voluntary for the taxpayers that are shelling out the million dollars we're establishing a bureaucracy that's going to go forward beyond the next beyond this million dollars into the next budget and the next fiscal session and and more millions are going to have to be allocated to it over the years, and this will be established in that bureaucracy.
And again, I have not found the problem. I've not found the landowners that are standing there with their hand out for these grants. The budget process is all about priorities, and we're told over and over again during that budget process how we don't have the money for this or for that, and we're setting priorities. but then it seems like the rainy day fund comes in here during the interim and and uh you know we had a big surplus and we got a million or two dollars burning a hole in our pocket and so we're
going to start a new bureaucracy that's going to be funded in the future and that's going to put more restraints on our budget so i'm voting against it and i
recommend you do too thank you madam chair all right thank you ladies and gentlemen you have heard oh all right wait just a second we may not get to the motion just a minute all right representative I'm sorry senator Davis you're recognized for a question thank you is
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
42:35
this discussion as well I mean his was more of a comment he
was speaking against the motion there's a motion on the floor are you
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
42:43
speaking to the motion yes I am all right you're recognized well I would just like to say that you know our meeting in Jasper was you know much like the meeting in Marshall but through follow-up conversations with people there and with quorum courts and city leaders in the different cities across Newton County, people are cautiously optimistic about this. And it's more, it's about more than just the landowners looking for grants or handouts. We know that they're not, but it's about these municipalities in these counties where the federal government and state government owns
most of the land in the county. They're not getting tax dollars back because the federal government and the state are not paying tax dollars for all the land that they own. So they don't have money to do things like upgrade their sewage. And you have sewage overflow in Jasper that's going into the Buffalo River. Marble Falls doesn't have the money and they can't tax their residents enough to pay to fix their water issues. So this is about municipalities that need help in these counties along the watershed that don't have the tax base to do it and the federal
government and state government owning most of the land there and they're not able to support it and make these upgrades that they need and so I would say you know no county no residents of any county in the state of Arkansas distrust government more than people in Newton County and for good reason because for 40 years federal government has been giving it to them pretty well but they are cautiously optimistic moving forward you know looking to be put on these committees to give their input and hope to see upgrades and some of the sewage and water issues that they're having across Newton County and other places of the watershed.
So I would say that, you know, Secretary Ward came in very humble and transparent and really talked to the people, and it was really good meetings, and these people are looking forward to moving forward on these issues and getting a say on what their communities really truly need. So I'm in favor of this. I think that if we continue communication and work well together with residents that live in these areas, that this could be a really good thing for these
communities. all right thank you for that representative love you're recognized thank
Speaker 117
44:50
you madam chair we're back on the million dollars I just needed some clarification because we've been talking about this for several months now I do believe in ALC but Jake no secretary Ward what I ask you now what are
these million-dollar grants for again I'm sorry but representative love we have a motion on the floor okay but it's kind of past time to ask questions of okay
Speaker 117
45:21
well I just need clarification for that I mean if we're going to be voting on that because I mean other than that I guess I'm with Representative Payton so
well hold on just a minute All right, okay, let's let Senator
Hickey answer that. How about that? All right, thank you. Go ahead, Senator Hickey.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
45:52
Do your... You should be on. I am now. Okay. Representative Love, since this is part of the motion, this would probably be the appropriate because the motion of course was to review the thing with some other contingencies but within that motion to review it the way that the governor and the Department of Agriculture had it written is that that it would be for voluntary best management practices for farmers and landowners improvements to wastewater and septic systems for cities and counties within the watershed and
reduction of sediment runoff from unpaved roads within the watershed so that would that is the way that it was presented to the subcommittee in this letter. In addition, as you've already heard, we were going to make sure that Department of Agriculture was dispersing those funds instead of the subcommittee because that's the way it would be appropriated and would have to be done, quite frankly. And then also that there would be some stipulations with the way that Secretary Ward had brought
up that public health and other stakeholders and everything would be everybody would be involved so that everything would be out in the open and totally transparent so that that is all inclusive within that
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
47:13
cities correct it says cities and counties
within the watershed okay all right thank you all right thank you uh senator hickey just for clarification would you just state your motion
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
47:25
again yes ma'am okay in addition to what it was
the actual motion is this motion to review item b1 with the understanding that the department of agriculture will be the entity to distribute the funds and not the buffalo river conservation committee or any of its subcommittees and then also that we would have an understanding that the disbursement of the funds will be totally transparent and totally vetted per Secretary Ward's comments. All right, thank
you. All right, members of the committee.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
47:57
Motion to approve on that. All right. Not motion to review, it's a motion
to approve. Thank you, Ms. Garrity. All right, ladies and gentlemen, you have heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? The ayes have it. thank you very much let's oh and but on d1 uh if you will look this was representative vault's motion the clarification is that her motion was to remove
the hold on d1 and that does not really take a motion so we are we are good with that we are removing the hold. Thank you very much. Going on
to the next item, policymaking, that is item E9. Senator Linda Chesterfield.
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
49:02
Thank you, Madam Chair. The policymaking subcommittee
met on Wednesday, November 13th, where
we were to hear from Senator Jane English, her recommendation from the standing committees to enter into a consulting services agreement with APA, consulting contingent, consulting. Instead we had a motion from Senator Bledsoe that said we would authorize the Bureau of Legislative Research to enter negotiations with Shulls and Associates for a consulting Services Agreement incorporating the terms and conditions of RFP number BLR19003 and Shul's
proposal in response to the RFP with the full legislative council having final approval of the contract to approve the Consultant Services Agreement with APA Consulting Contingent upon approval by the House and Senate Education Committees of the use of both Shul's and associates and APA consulting to provide education adequacy consulting services to the committees under the RFP. This is the first time that a subcommittee has decided to substitute its will
for that of a standing committee, two standing committees that are charged with determining adequacy and further telling that standing committee that you will either do it our way or there will be no way. I
move the recommendation of the education standing committees. Second. All right.
All right. Senator Dishmayne, you're recognized. I'm sorry, I hit the button. There we go.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
51:03
Okay, do it again. Sorry. Try it now. All right, thank you. I thought that would wake everyone
up this morning. It did. So what is it? I guess if I can ask the chair of the education, I guess the Senate Education Committee. So Senator English, I guess, would be the best person to ask,
what is the recommendation that came out of the Education Committee for us to be voting on per the
motion of Senator Chesterfield? All right. Senator English, you're recognized. What's
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
51:32
the question again? So my understanding is Senator Chesterfield read the report from the policymaking subcommittee and then made a motion that was not related to the policymaking subcommittee but related to the action of the education committee and what their recommendation was, which my understanding there's some disagreement there.
So my question is what is it that we would be voting on if we were to vote in favor and opposition of her
Senator Jane English
Unverified
51:57
motion that she just made? You would basically be voting to allow both consulting companies. That
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
52:03
is not the question. Oh. The subcommittee on education, the standing committees on education made a motion to accept APA only. That is what the committee did. Now, and that is what I am moving. Now, what the new motion is from the policymaking subcommittee is to do both of them,
which would add an additional almost $500,000 to the cost of the consulting services. And I know that the irony is supposed to be that Linda Chesterfield will make a motion to do what she feels is incorrect by moving this policy committee recommendation. It can be moved by somebody else, but I will not be complicit in a subcommittee telling a standing committee what it is supposed to do. All right. What was your motion? Would you stay? My motion was to accept the recommendation of the Standing Committees on Education.
And Senator Elliott, you have seconded the motion. All right,
Senator Ballinger, we are coming to you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I
Speaker 145
53:16
just make a substitute motion to adopt the report of the policymaking subcommittee.
That's appropriate. Do I have a second? All right. I have a second.
All right. All right. We're going back to Senator Chesterfield to debate the substitute motion. The substitute motion was
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
53:44
indeed the recommendation of the policy-making committee. But what we are doing now is establishing what I consider a very dangerous precedent. Subcommittees can now substitute their will for standing committee recommendations.
That has never happened before. Now, if a standing committee that has done all of the work, be it public health, be it state agencies, be it education, be it insurance and commerce, if we come to policy making with a recommendation, that committee can then say, oh, we don't like it. We think we'll do it this way instead. And that's in essence what has happened. You have usurped the authority of a standing committee. And I think it is wrong. I think it sends a dangerous message
throughout this legislature that a group of people who have not even heard the recommendations would substitute their will for individuals who sat through hours of testimony and made a decision and sent it to the policy committee to either vote it up or vote it down and not substitute its will for that of the education committee. That is why I made the motion. That is why I'm in opposition to this motion by Senator Ballinger. I think it is wrong. I think we need to consider that if you do it now, if you chair a committee and you send
it to policy they don't have to accept what you say they can say we know better than you even though you sit through it all and you will do what we say as a subcommittee not a standing committee a subcommittee and I think it's a dangerous precedent and I would ask you to vote no
on this motion all right senator Ballinger you're recognized thank
Speaker 150
55:31
you madam chair we have a process here of checks and balances that go throughout.
Speaker 145
55:37
I appreciate the fact that we actually had some debate
in policymaking, but it's not a rubber stamp committee. We don't always get the way we want. I've chaired committees and things, there was will of the committee, it wasn't the will of the full body. Those kind of things do happen on occasion. So in this case, what happened is there was a compromise, an idea that was presented, that came to the policymaking committee, and before policymaking decides to spend the funds, They say, let's present and go forward with this compromise. The procedures wasn't thwarted.
Nothing was done. It was outside. I mean, it happens. Anybody who's been here any length of time knows that sometimes your stuff, when it goes to another committee, gets changed around. That's part of what happens. So the question is, you know, is it the will of this body? and probably most people know about it but there was a presentation that came out of a very contentious fight within education to to choose one consultant over another consultant a lot of people appreciated that what the other consultant could contribute to the process and so they brought
that idea of doing both to the policy making subcommittee and we chose that route to fund both rather than just funding one if that's what we're going to do and so now the question presented to us is do we want more information or do we want less information do we want two ideas or do we want one idea presented when it comes to spending over two billion dollars of the state's money of taxpayers money so that's basically the question that was the the report issue that was the will of the policymaking subcommittee you know presented to alc to decide whether or not we're going that
route or not? Senator Elliott, you're on the queue. Do you have a question or you're going to make
Senator Joyce Elliott
Unverified
57:32
a statement? I am debating the motion, Madam Chair. All right. Well, I would like to start by suggesting to you that we don't have a compromise. What we have is an imposition. I serve on the education committee we did indeed Senator Ballinger's right we
had a very contentious meeting but we met twice to consider which of these two consultants we would recommend to do our study and after all that contention and after all that discussion as is normal we finally chose one and then we did the proper thing and refer that to the ALC policy committee so they could do carry out their function the function by the way is not to change what the
standing committee had debated and decided on but rather to determine if this if it's going to be funded if they are going to recommend what the standing committee decided if they're going to recommend it to this body or not to this body the purpose of the ALC is not to have further debate for the purposes of change is substantively changing what has been sent to them but that's exactly what we did and to suggest that those of us who sat here through all those hours
to make a decision do our job that somehow people who had not who are not even on the Education Committee not even here and that's not in a pejorative sense it was not their responsibility to have to make that decision that was our responsibility on the Education Committee we did our job and then we sent it to the AOC committee and the job of the AOC was frankly thwarted to suggest that rather than have this one consultant it's always best to have more
information but nobody presented anything to suggest that the consultant that we accepted would not give us the information that we needed and there is something odd about wanting to spend twice the money with no rationale other than just to say more information is better information how do you even know you're not going to just get redundant information how do you know you're going get more information if you have
a scoop of vanilla ice cream and you keep on
scooping vanilla ice cream you get more ice cream but it's the same thing and we are supposed to be efficient efficient curators of
the taxpayers money and one of the things that's required by us in adequacy is that we make sure we spend the taxpayers money efficiently as a part of adequacy and we're going to do this without rationale other than something anybody could say it's better
to have more information than some information if you could convince me that somehow we're going to be more informed or this makes more sense maybe I could vote for this motion but it didn't happen in policy and it's not going to happen here and the last thing I will say to this body the group that we finally chose is one that has been doing this kind of work for well over 20
years the one that we are trying to add to this to spend another half million dollars basically is a group
that just put itself together that has never done this kind of work as a body never but somehow we think we're going to get more from them and that we ought to spend double the money I just don't know
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
1:01:36
in whose financial world that makes sense all right thank you representative Miller you're recognized
thank you madam chair I want to speak to and for and in favor of Senator Ballinger's motion, make a couple of points here. Number one, what we just heard from the chair of the policymaking subcommittee was a loud complaint about the policymaking subcommittee thwarting the will of another committee. Meanwhile, the chair of the policymaking subcommittee
gives a report that thwarts and makes a motion that is not reflective of the will of the committee she chairs i just want to point that out and i say that with all due respect senator chesterfield because i do like you but another thing is i just listened to senator elliott who i have a lot of respect for make these remarks about our committees and it's not our job to make changes
or debate or whatever and I'm going to ask this question to the members in legislative council if we're not here to debate and look at and possibly change or do whatever then why in god's name are we here because we're just wasting a lot of time on the government's dime if we're not down here to look at stuff and make changes or do what we think is necessary it's the process
it's how it works i can't even spell adequacy so i'm not trying to sway anybody on that but we have process and the process has been followed out and the majority has ruled and I would appreciate a yes vote on Senator Ballinger's motion all right
thank you Senator Hammer recognized thank you madam chair I may
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
1:03:42
have missed it but was there anywhere that referenced the amount of the money that
we're talking about I don't see it in the report could somebody or am I just missing it how much the
contracts for it should be in your packet I remember seeing it maybe it was some Marty Garrity will give you that information instead of us having to go
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:04:14
through all of that center hammer the contract for APA is for six hundred and fifty nine thousand five hundred and eighty and the
contract with Schulz and associate is for four hundred ninety nine thousand two hundred and thirty six dollars
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
1:04:33
follow-up question to Marty madam chair yes thank you I remember sitting through some of those meetings was there was there not an original amount for one of the contracts of like nine hundred and $150,000 or something
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:04:50
Under the original the initial RFP that was issued out by the Education Committee's
APA submitted a proposal for $900,000 I can't remember the exact amount All right, thank you all right All right senator bond Well, and
Senator Will Bond
Unverified
1:05:16
just to be clear, I think technically what the policymaking committee does, as long as I've been on it, is when the education committee makes a recommendation, you vote it up and down.
The change, you vote it up or down. The change in the policymaking subcommittee action is that the policymaking subcommittee has said now to this body and to the education committees, you have to hire two consultants or no consultants. and the policymaking committee did not hear the presentations of either of the consultants. And so we're substituting the argument on the two sides of this argument as the policymaking committee is dictating that a consultant be hired that we never heard from.
We have no idea if they're qualified or not. That's the problem with the process. The point that I made in the policymaking subcommittee was, look, we can approve this first contract that the education committee recommended, And then if the Education Committee wants to recommend that we approve the other one, then we can do that. But it's the Education Committee's decision whether to recommend approval of these different entities, not the Policymaking Committee to tell the Education Committee they have to hire two groups, neither one of which the Policymaking Committee has ever heard from.
That's the problem with the process, in my
opinion. Thank you. All right. Senator Ingram,
you're recognized. well it says here you're on but uh oh wait
a minute something happened go ahead push your button again yeah there
Senator Keith Ingram
Unverified
1:07:04
you go uh i think uh representative cozard is chairman of the of the house side of education is that
correct I'm sorry I said representative Cozart is chairman yes yes I would like to hear from him this process went through I know it's been a bumpy road to get there but as chairman of education were you comfortable with the process and is this something that that you you were comfortable with the original what came through your committee and your recommendation
yeah I'm sorry there you
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
1:07:54
go senator this was quite a long and lengthy process as you know I think we talked about it we went through one bid for APA originally and that got throughout because of some concern with some people about a lot of things I guess mostly fear of numbers of how much it could cost and I'm just gonna be blatantly honest here that was kind of what the first one was so we ended up
redoing the RFP and made it a little more friendly I guess and so we had two bids on that um shuls and apa we went through that process kind of had a different type of vote situation on it uh house voted for it senate failed it because they had not enough members in the room that day to pass it came back senate passed it so we had a vote for apa and um that was to me was the best presentation that's why i voted for it uh others think the
other one made it so it's it's just a different of opinion but we did hear both consultants present their plan on what they were going to do and how they were going to do it and you know I know there were some thought the first time we had a nine hundred something dollar bid that that was a lot of money and why are we gonna spend that much money and now we're gonna be at 1.1 and I mean I'm being a conservative I have real hard time spending that much money on anything but I know a consultant is something we really need to do for
adequacy is something that has to be done it's been almost 15 years since the last one was done so we need to do something I'll give you my personal opinion about two it's going to be a lot of work they're going to be working separately they're going to come up with a plan each one of them and then the Education Committee has got to sit down and go through these plans and pick and choose and that's what will happen it'll be pick and choose and I don't like picking and choosing I'd rather take a consultant's ideas and see if we could work those out so we're going to be having to go through two it's gonna be
a lot of work I'm up for it I mean I'll do it I'll do whatever we need to do this was not my idea you know this was not my idea to do this but I'm not going to risk losing an opportunity to get a study by saying no I mean I really I I'm really having a hard time with this. Like I said, it's hard for me to spend another half a million dollars. But anyway, this could fail in education when it goes back because that's where the real truth will be.
All right. Thank you. I'm going to go to Representative Payton, and then we're going to go back to Ballinger and Senator Chesterfield. So Representative Payton, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I don't know
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:10:50
who can answer this question, maybe staff or any of the chairs, but is it mandatory that there be a study done is what is the time frame on getting this study done could
Speaker 173
1:11:01
somebody answer that please uh marty garrity
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:11:07
represent payton there it is not mandatory that a study be done uh under the rfp the study must be
completed by december of 2020 uh under the rfp yes okay gotcha
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:11:18
so there's no there's nothing that compels us to do a study but there was an RFP put out that would require it by what date December of 2020 the education committees put out an RFP
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:11:31
for consultants to submit proposals thank you thank you madam chair all right senator Ballinger thank you madam chair I mean I just
Speaker 145
1:11:46
wanted to address some of the concerns I mean we are talking about spending over two billion dollars of the our citizens our constituents money you know spending additional 400,000 on top of the 600,000 that the the the consultant that everybody else wanted and getting in ideas and and frankly you know people talk about this being a new group they are they they're a new group together however they're you know one of the foremost experts on on educational finance is one of the guys one of the foremost experts on on education reform from the University of Arkansas is on
other University of Arkansas professors on it these people are not novices these people have been living and breathing and swimming in this issue and and I can't see it being a negative thing to get some of their ideas on along with with what was originally presented especially since you know ultimately this body ought to be concerned about whether or not the legislature has has authority to make the decision and to set adequacy that's what the court says well if all we have is a consultant with one opinion that comes back and that opinion comes
back to say you know you need to spend you know two billion dollars more on education which is is you know pretty extraordinary but if you look at the history of this group saying 200 million dollars on more on education is pretty par for the course maybe 500 million dollars more on education then all of a sudden we're put into a little bit of an awkward position where if we don't do it, then does that create a problem for Lakeview? Are we doing adequacy? We've at least put the evidence out there that we're not, and we're kind of tying our hands to have that debate.
Now, I don't know. The second group may come back and say we need to spend more, and if that's the case, we may need to spend more on education. But at least having that more information, and especially a group that's talking about doing reforms, it's a little bit outside the box, I can't see that not being a really good investment of $400,000 for our state and for the legislature. That's
why I'd ask for a good vote. All right, thank you. All right,
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:13:51
Senator Chesterfield. Madam Chair, I didn't realize that I was being loud when I was entering into discussion of this matter.
I am passionate about what I say, and it's nice to know that people like me anyway. but let me say this been around here for a minute to substitute your wheel for that of the committee a standing committee that has done its due diligence and heard both sides and then for my conservative friends to say well what's wrong with adding another half million dollars to the process so that we can hear from a group that none of them even heard present
If it is a done deal, it is a done deal, and we will have to live with that. But please know that it is an unusual circumstance for a subcommittee to dictate to a standing committee what it will or will not do. And let me say what I find also rather egregious, if you don't do it our way, you cannot have any adequacy study at all. We're on education, been on education for quite a while.
But many of you are on standing committees, and I'm going to say this to you, if policy sets this as its precedence, and you need to go to policy to get money approved, which is our responsibility to either vote up your request or vote it down. will for yours without hearing a scintilla of testimony. You're setting a very bad precedent.
And to be conservative, we said that $700,000 was too much. And so Augenblick changed its bid. And now we're saying, well, in order to hear from a group that none of these people very much, there were maybe three or four of us on that whole committee who had even heard the testimony, It's not a problem for the people of this state to add another $499,000 to the cost. And we have also heard the pejorative that Augenblick somehow suggests more money.
If you're looking at education funding today, we have it some instances where we have one and a half principals who are approved under the current matrix. There's no such thing as a half a person. So the other half is being picked up by local school districts across this state. We have never looked at the safety issue as a part of adequacy. So we do need that to happen. And I would hate for those of us who are afraid that if we don't vote for this motion that
we're not going to get anything to vote for what they know to be absolutely wrong. Thank
you, Madam Chair. senator dishman you're recognized thank you madam
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:16:58
chair and and really so i guess i probably apply to the last uh couple of sentences of uh
senator chesterfield's prior statements um you know i did have the chance to attend the majority not all of the education committees where these consultants were debated and and one thing if you were not there uh and i think it's coming out in this
meeting came out in the policy uh making subcommittee meeting there is a lot of contention surrounding these consultants. I have a lot of concern that even if we do hire a consultant, if we've hired one with this much distrust, this much concern, this much inner fighting, for a lack of a better way to put it, it's going to be very difficult for us to wholly accept the outcome that that consultant brings before us or even parts of it because I think it's always going to be done with or looked at with a view of concern.
and so with that you know my recommendation to the the you know to this committee is to vote no not on just this motion but also the the initial
motion by Senator Chesterfield thank you all right representative dots you recognized
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
1:18:13
thank you madam chair I just wanted to point out that if this motion by Senator Ballinger passes this is not the final step in the process the education committees will have the opportunity
to continue to vet this and then bring it back before policy making as well as full ALC next month or in the future. So this is not the final step in the process, but the process has been followed back and forth. There was a vote to end policy making, an up and down vote to approve just one consultant and that failed. So, it's not like we didn't have robust debate,
and we're continuing to have robust debate about this, which is a good thing for all concerned. So, I just speak in favor of Senator Ballinger's motion and would
encourage a good vote. All right, thank you. We're going now to Senator Elliott and
Senator Joyce Elliott
Unverified
1:19:13
then to Senator Hammer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Miller, I know the minute somebody says they like you, I know what's coming. I like you. No, it's not bad at all, but I do want to be clear that I don't expect any committee
to meet and not have robust discussion and robust debate, so that's not what I said. What I said was it is not in the purview of the policy committee to have a debate on whether or not they were going to change what was sent to them um and and especially with this motion where it's not we're going to change just so substantially that you know you have to do this or you get
nothing so i just wanted to clear that up because you and i can always have robust debate no matter what the committee is um but i the the big concern for me is some things that that i've been said that I guess the kind way to say is erroneous because I've been through this process and I know that when we have used consultants and they come in and make recommendations and all of us knows, every one of us knows by now, I think, that it's recommendations. For example, I bet everybody in here who's been here more
who is not a freshman can think of a consultant who made a recommendation to us and that's what it was. We did some of what they said. we did none of what they said and sometimes we fired them so for us to say we are not going to hire somebody because they are going to make recommendations that are of a high dollar amount and keep in mind we are saying this we don't know this and when we if we were to go ahead with the
with um the committee's recommendation not the one that's on the table now it it would be an error to think that whatever these people bring back we have to do we didn't do it right now the consultancy work we're working under right now we didn't do much of what they said we should do but we take the best of it look at what's best for us here but we are asking for expert guidance not expert dictation and that's what we are
we're looking to do to get that kind of guidance and I hope we will defeat this motion and and I respect the will of the Education Committee and vote yes on Senator Chesterfield's original motion because to to send this back to the Education Committee when we made a decision and say either you do it our way or no way it's just not the way we ought to be operating.
Speaker 154
1:22:02
Thank you Madam Chair. All right thank
you. Senator Hammer you're recognized. Thank you Madam
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
1:22:09
Chair. I'd like permission to ask Marty a question on on rules please. All right Marty you heard a lot of discussion in the room today did policy committee function outside of what they're authorized to do as the
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:22:29
rules exist now policymaking made a decision which it recommends to the full
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
1:22:35
legislative council may ask representative Cozart a question madam chair for purpose of
information yes but let's go quickly represent Cozart did both consultants that
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
1:22:45
are before us, APA and Schultz and associate make presentations before the committee, the education committee? Yes, they did. There seems to be a discussion in the room about the conservative values of the finances that we're talking about appropriate and why, what was the difference that Schultz and associates whose bid, if I understand and look at it right,
came in less than APA that's being recommended in one of the motions why what were the what were the major differences that Shules and Associates were not chosen if they were the lesser of the two consultants my best opinion on that was
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
1:23:29
experience lack of it'd be the first time they had actually done a a large one like that the other company had done quite a few all right thank you thank you madam
chair all right uh we have one more on the queue uh representative
Representative Dan M. Douglas
Unverified
1:23:52
douglas thank you madam chair and uh throughout this whole discussion representative ballinger i think in his motion uh asked to approve the original motion that came out of the policy making committee and I've never heard that motion read. If it's permissible, may I read that original motion that was passed out of the policy-making committee?
You're asking Senator Ballinger to read?
Representative Dan M. Douglas
Unverified
1:24:20
I have it here. Is that all right, Senator, that I read that motion? The motion that was passed out of the policy-making committee reads, to authorize the Bureau of Legislative Research to enter into negotiation with Shulls and Associates for a consulting services agreement incorporating the terms and conditions of RFP number BLR-19003
and Shull's proposal in response to the RFP with the full legislative council having approval on the contract. second part to approve the consulting services agreement with apa consulting contingented upon approval by the house and senate education committees of use of both shills and associates and apa consulting to provide education adequacy consulting services to the committees under the
RFP, and that the Bureau of Legislative Research shall not be authorized to enter into either of these contracts unless approval of both contracts is agreed upon by the House and Senate Education Committees. Okay? That's a mouthful, I know, and especially with me reading it. But my feeling on this is after a contract is brokered by BLR, it would go back to education committees.
Both contracts would go back, and they have the right to review the contracts and the education committees. So they will still have a say in it as the committee and make sure both those contracts are agreeable. and you know I'll be honest I've said in committees before I've never heard usually we choose between one consultant or the other you know we don't say hey let's send both of them did the education committees
think hey that might be an option to send both of them forward you know this would allow that latitude I feel like for them to take a look at that and say to Senator Ballinger's point let's get all the information we could okay but i just want that entire motion read to where we
knew what we were talking about thank you thank you all right
uh representative birch you're recognized uh-oh push the button again okay
all right try it again we're having a little
Speaker 78
1:27:31
trouble getting you on the there okay all
Speaker 190
1:27:35
right now thank you madam chair sorry for the technical difficulties I just had a question of Ms. Garrity
Representative LeAnne Burch
Unverified
1:27:40
with regard to the comments that were just made.
All right. In the event that that scenario all happened, there were negotiations that were entered into by BLR with both the consultants, and then that came back to education. Even if Education Committee was to approve that, would we not be then looking at one further year down the road because of the timeline that is on this RFP? We've contacted both consultants, and both
Speaker 161
1:28:11
are aware that the initial terms, or the terms in the RFP,
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:28:16
would remain the same and would not be changed.
So both of them understand that the work would need to
Representative LeAnne Burch
Unverified
1:28:28
be completed by December of 2020. Follow-up, Madam Chair? Yes. that even though they would understand that, we would be putting them and the state of Arkansas under such a time crunch as was not initially contemplated when... I know we're still talking about crunching them now several months down the road, depending on when education might actually move on the contemplated action.
I can't speak to that. all right thank you all right uh senator hester i make a motion for immediate consideration all right it's a proper motion all those in favor say aye all those opposed all right the ayes have it we're going to immediate consideration uh senator ballinger would you state again your substitute motion a motion is to adopt the
Speaker 144
1:29:26
report of the policymaking subcommittee as
read by representative douglas all right thank you all right ladies and
gentlemen you have heard the
substitution uh i'm sorry all right a division of the body three hands all
right three hands all right I need some clarification, Senator Chesterfield.
Did you want a roll call with division of the body? Okay. All right. Well, you didn't say roll call, so we were just wondering. All right. We're going to start with the Senate, and this is a roll call. and the
vote would be yes if you want the substitute motion and no if you do not. So call the roll. It's on Senator Ballinger's motion. Senator Ballinger?
Speaker 199
1:30:35
Aye. Senator Byron? No. Senator Caldwell? Senator Caldwell? Senator Cooper? first alternate. Senator Cheatham. Senator Chesterfield. Senator Clark. Senator
Speaker 199
1:31:14
Garner. Yes. Senator Davis. Yes. Senator Dismayne. Senator Senator Eads? Senator Elliott? Senator English? Senator Flippo? Senator Flowers? Senator
Senator Hammer? Senator Hendren? Senator Hendren? Senator Hester? Senator Hickey? Senator
Speaker 203
1:32:00
Ingram? Senator Urban? First alternate?
Speaker 199
1:32:06
Senator Sturge? Senator Johnson?
Senator Mallett Senator Raper Senator Sample Senator Stubblefield Senator Teague Senator
Speaker 146
1:32:48
Teague Senator Wallace Senator Wallace Senator Rice.
Ladies and gentlemen, the motion has failed. All right, Senator Chesterfield, we're going back to your original
motion. Yes. Senator Ballinger. Three hands.
We need three hands. All right.
This time we're going to start with the House. Call the roll. All right, we need Senator Chesterfield. What was the original motion? I believe, Senator Chesterfield, your original motion was to adopt the recommendation from the Education Committee. Is that correct?
all right ladies and gentlemen you've heard the original motion let's
Speaker 203
1:34:48
call the roll representative Bragg first alternate representative Dalby
Representative Dahlby. Representative Birch.
Speaker 185
1:35:23
Representative Cozart. Representative
Speaker 203
1:35:28
Davis. Representative Davis.
Representative Deffenbaugh. Representative Douglas. Representative Eubanks. Representative Eubanks. Representative Deborah Ferguson. First alternate, Representative Hodges. Representative Kenneth Ferguson.
Representative Fielding, Representative Fielding. First alternate, Representative Watson. Second alternate, Representative Bentley. Representative Charlene Fite. First alternate, Representative Johnson.
Second alternate, Representative Lundstrom, Representative Lanny Fite, Representative Goffrey, Representative Jean, Representative Love, Representative Love, Representative Representative Love.
Representative Lowry. First alternate, Representative Scott. Representative Magnair. Representative Miller. Representative Murdoch. First alternate, Representative Hallowell, Representative Payton,
Representative Richie, Representative Richie.
Speaker 203
1:37:55
Richmond. Representative Rushing. First alternate, Representative Warren. Representative Shepard. Representative Smith.
Representative Sullivan. Representative Vaught. Representative Whitaker. Representative Womack. Representative Wooden. Representative Dotson.
all right ladies and gentlemen the motion has passed I'm sorry I'm sorry sorry I was doing you a favor no the motion has failed we're going on to the next item thank you very much all right We're going to review, that's item E-10, ladies and gentlemen, Senator Scott Flippo.
Speaker 239
1:40:10
Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, if you thought that adequacy finding formula was controversial, just right to you, here's the review subcommittee report. review subcommittee met on tuesday november 12th reviewed methods of finance and alternative delivery construction project discretionary grants and contracts no items were held and i move adoption
of the report all right thank you uh we have a motion on the floor to adopt all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed motion is adopted all right going down to number
11. Representative Jim Wooten, you're recognized. You're going to have to push
your button. I passed
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
1:41:09
it. There we go. Madam Chairman, the personnel subcommittee met Tuesday, November the 12th, 2019 and reviewed the reports and requests listed in the report
today. And I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have any concerning the report. Otherwise, I move
for adoption. All right, ladies and gentlemen, you've heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, motion is adopted. All right, moving on down to um number 13 uh representative ron mcnair for
Chair
Unverified
1:41:47
highway thank you madam chair highway commission review and advisory subcommittee met on wednesday november 13th the subcommittee reviewed reviewed
reports from the department of transportation regarding progress of each public road construction project of 10 million dollars or more as required by code and the annual expenditure of revenues from the additional wholesale sales tax on fuel also required by code i move adoption of
the report all right we have a question representative sullivan you're recognized
Speaker 27
1:42:26
thank you madam chair i had a question for someone on this report about the open space concept and how they protect how information is protected in an open office all right is someone here
Speaker 243
1:42:52
there's someone here if they can answer
that it is someone okay good someone from the transportation department all right if
Speaker 245
1:43:01
If you'd state your name, please. Gil Rogers, Governmental Relations Officer for
Speaker 246
1:43:13
the Arkansas Department of Transportation. All right. And you,
sir? Patrick Patton, CFO, Department of
Speaker 27
1:43:19
Transportation. All right. Your question? Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, in the Commerce Building, and I think in the Rockefeller Building, we have the open office concept with various people sharing a workspace.
Speaker 245
1:43:31
Is that accurate? I believe you may be referring to the report from the Department of Transformation. Yes. This is the
Speaker 248
1:43:42
Transportation Department. Okay. Yeah, I'm sorry. It is Transformation. Okay. Wrong folks? Sorry. It's all right. Is there something here from Transformation that can do
Speaker 50
1:43:58
that? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Good job, guys. All right.
You're recognized. State your name for the
Speaker 252
1:44:14
record, please. Secretary Amy Fetcher, Department of Transformation and Shared Services. All
Speaker 27
1:44:19
right. You're recognized. Yes, if we have open concepts with multiple people sharing a workspace, can you give me some confidence that that proprietary information and confidential information remains that way? Do we have a plan in place to
Speaker 252
1:44:34
ensure that? Certainly. I know that the Secretary of Commerce is working with each one of the entities that's going into that building, and there's different ways.
If there's any information that needs to be locked, they're having access to that. Also, in each cube, they have access. Every employee has access to what they call shared spaces, which are rooms they can go in if they need to make a confidential phone call. There's hearing rooms. There's white noise that drowns out the noise from other open desk areas. Okay, thank you. I'd be interested in
Speaker 25
1:45:14
talking with you afterwards and getting more detailed information on that, but not right now.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
1:45:33
Wooden. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Secretary, this goes back to our last meeting. All that furniture that's not going to be used by those agencies is going to marketing and redistribution. Is that correct?
Yes, sir. Okay. Do you have a dollar? Will you receive a dollar amount of how much we realize in income from the sale of those items? Yes, we could after the fact. Well, I realize after the fact. You think we're saving any money by getting rid of all that furniture and all that Gola's desk? I don't believe the
Speaker 252
1:46:17
intent is to get rid of all of that furniture.
It would first be made available to other state entities. We have a lot of state agencies that are operating with very old inventory, and so it would be a way
Speaker 259
1:46:33
they could refresh their existing furniture and send their older furniture to
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
1:46:41
M&R. Some of the agencies that are going to be in there are confidential agencies relative to their function, and they're going to be put in cubicles
where they'll be next to other people who can have access perhaps to that information as
Speaker 252
1:47:04
I was saying is that point been made yes sir as as I was saying they will have access to rooms where they can have confidential discussions or phone calls this model that we're going to in the build outs will save the state money on square footage because we're going to be using less square footage and it's also what many of the corporate companies
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
1:47:26
are going to these days is there any way to determine the exact savings to those agencies or to the new agency we can
Speaker 252
1:47:36
after the fact when we have the exact square footage that each one will be using we can compare that to what they were before yes can
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
1:47:44
you will you see that this committee gets that information certainly thank you madam
Chair
Unverified
1:47:53
chair thank you madam i have a motion on transportation not transformation yes yes go go
right ahead state your motion i just i
Chair
Unverified
1:48:03
move the adoption of my report all right on transportation
subcommittee yes uh ladies and gentlemen you've heard the motion all those in favor say aye all those opposed no all right Okay. Go down to number 15, Occupational License and Review. Senator Ingram was going to give that report.
So, Senator Ingram. Okay. You're recognized. We couldn't see you.
Senator Keith Ingram
Unverified
1:48:39
That might be a good thing.
I'm just thankful that education didn't have five people respond to the RFPs. The Occupational Licensing Review Subcommittee met Tuesday, November 12th to receive reports on occupational authorizations from the Arkansas State Board of Acupuncture. There were a few sticky moments there during their testimony, and the Arkansas Fire Protection Licensing
Board. In addition, the subcommittee heard presentations on the background of the red tape reduction task force, as well as possible recommendations that the subcommittee could make regarding the occupational authorization as they are reviewed. I would move adoption of this report.
All right, you've heard the motion. All those in favor, say aye. all those opposed all right motion passes all right going down to g number six
we have five reports and the only one that needs a motion is okay one through five did you did you say all right
all those in favor say aye all those opposed all right ladies and
gentlemen without objection we will back
all right senator ballinger you wanted to pull one
Speaker 150
1:50:26
out yes madam chair if on item 14 if we can pull that out
Speaker 145
1:50:31
of the of the reports and basically what i'd like to do g14 i'd like to actually have some discussion on items d and f or at least pull them out and not review them at this time all right
let's pull them out and not review
Speaker 145
1:50:47
them today okay so let's so items in fact let's let's narrow it down just to items 14 d and f should
be pulled from the report all right ladies and gentlemen of the committee you have heard the request we will pull out 14 d and f and hold those for another time but other than unless there are any other questions or objections uh need a motion to uh adopt those Yes, Senator Chesterfield.
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:51:17
Thank you. I guess I'm looking at my
agenda and I'm trying to find, are we talking about the Arkansas
Health Insurance? What are we talking about? We're talking about on the page four of your agenda, the number 14,
yes, on the back of three. Okay. Well, I don't have
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:51:41
that. Let me see. The last page, in other words. And so we're holding out what?
D and F. I think you're on
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:51:55
the wrong page. Are you talking about Southern Arkansas University? Yeah. And the University of Arkansas system? Yes, D and F.
May I ask why? All right. Senator Ballinger, if you would like to respond to that. So we had Act
Speaker 266
1:52:13
184, last legislative session that dealt with freedom of information on college campuses. One of the things that they
Speaker 145
1:52:19
had to do was to develop policies consistent with the act that we passed.
And I would like to commend most of the universities did a great job of doing that in different various forms. But these two policies, I felt like there were some things that looked like they were very still inconsistent with the act, the law that was passed. and I'd like to have a chance to sit down and visit with those universities and see if maybe we can't modify their policy to be consistent
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:52:46
with the act we passed. So they did submit
Speaker 150
1:52:50
to you policy statements? They submitted, well actually they submitted it to the chairs of ALC.
I actually didn't have a chance to review it until today. Once you
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:52:59
passed that motion, it became the property of the body, did it not, rather than just yours personally? yes absolutely so the question i
Speaker 150
1:53:07
mean if you want to go ahead and review those in spite of my request to go in and pull it i'm just trying to
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:53:14
find out what they did not do so that i can make an informed decision as to what you want to do it is certainly your right as a senator to hold anything with the will of the body i don't question that at all i just want to know what
you found particularly egregious about these two systems that we could not approve them today Well,
Speaker 150
1:53:33
I'd be happy to go over some of those details if the body chooses, and if you want me to go over some of the details. Give me two. Just give me two. Sure. Okay. Well, hold on one second. Let me pull up a couple of them real quick. So this would be with the UA systems, and this is pretty consistent, actually, with Southern Arkansas as well. but there is you know basically a situation where it deals with speech on
campus and then it says that you can put in reasonable time place and manner restrictions but then it uses the language it says to be defined by each campus well that's not up to the campus to decide what is reasonable time place and the question of reasonableness is a universal question it shouldn't be something that is given to the campus to decide what those limitations are now you know I'm I've always said from the very beginning that we need
Speaker 145
1:54:23
to make sure we allow the university to do the university business and educate kids and so I mean I get the reason why we need to have
Speaker 150
1:54:30
reasonable time place and manner restrictions however including
that language basically undo does and that's just one example of several things that the other universities did a great job of adopting our law and and being consistent with it I feel like the U of A in southern Arkansas didn't
Speaker 145
1:54:44
do a very good job of doing that and and if we want to have that debate here we can or we you know I could have the opportunity to sit down and visit with them and then come back and we
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:54:56
can review it next time ALC meets. I'm fine with that. Madam Chair, is there anybody here from that system?
I guess not. So I will defer then to my colleague, Senator. All right, here we go. There
Speaker 269
1:55:08
is someone here. Would you come forward, please? Thank you. If you'd
Speaker 275
1:55:32
state your name for the record, and... Melissa Rust, University of Arkansas System.
Speaker 277
1:55:37
Ben Beaumont, University of Arkansas System.
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:55:42
All right. Could you tell me what you did in response to the act that
Speaker 275
1:55:48
was passed by Senator Ballinger? Senator Chesterfield, I'll start out and my colleague may want to add to it since he was involved with our general counsel's office specifically. We were very involved in assisting Senator Ballinger and other members of the General Assembly during the legislative session when this particular piece of
legislation was being considered. After the legislation was passed our general Council's Office worked to develop a template policy that could be provided to all the campuses of the University of Arkansas system. They also had a training session for our campuses as well. They also provided a list of frequently asked questions that were provided to the campuses and then worked
with each campus in order to make sure that their policies and procedures, anything, any policies that they might have on campus were consistent with the Act. We also had a couple of University Board of Trustee policies that needed to be amended as a result of Act 184, and so both of those policies were amended and brought before our board. All of the information that I've just outlined to you was submitted along with the letter to the Bureau and to the Chairman to
show the University of Arkansas systems compliance with Act 184 everything that we are aware of is that our policy is is entirely consistent with all the requirements of Act 184 all right thank you I have no objection to Senator Ballinger
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
1:57:23
wanting to hold I just do remember the conversation in education and one of the things that I have taught for over 33 years is your rights and where mine began and I want us to make sure that as we go about this business
of free speech that it does not and I said this to Senator Ballinger if I recall in education they do not get to disrupt the learning on campus as they exercise their free speech and I remember that and he said he agreed with that so I'm going to not I'm not going to oppose this but I do not want our colleges and universities to have what they are doing this for the education of our children disrupted by some individuals with their own agendas
because their rights end where our students right to learn begins and with that madam chair I will yield
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
1:58:26
thank you thank you representative Jean you're recognized thank you mr. chair my guess I'm speaking up southern Arkansas University because that's the college that I represent and that's where I I graduated from, and my question is for Ms. Garrity. This is just a report, is that correct? That is correct. And without us adopting it,
is there any ramifications? There is not. This
committee could hold the report for the next meeting. Okay, all right. Well,
if Senator Ballinger needs any help getting with Southern Arkansas University, I'll be happy to help him, thank you. And I mean, honestly, I've had a chance to meet
Speaker 150
1:59:02
the folks down on Southern Arkansas, good folks down there, and I appreciate it. And let me say, University of Arkansas' system was side-by-side and really helped work. You know, a little iron sharpening iron and putting the form back together.
And I am thoroughly convinced that we'll be able to get something worked out. And I wish we would have communicated before today and you guys wouldn't have had to deal with it. So my guess
is by the time we come back in ALC, we'll have no issues. All right. Thank you. You've heard the motion. The motion is to put 14D and F on the agenda for next month. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed.
Motion passes. All right, ladies and gentlemen, without not seeing any new business, we are adjourned. Thank you.
Agenda
A. Call to Order.
B. Roll Call.
C. Approval of the Minutes of the Last Meeting, October 18, 2019.
D. Report of the Executive Subcommittee — Rep. Jeff Wardlaw, Sen. Cecile Bledsoe, Co-Chairs.
E. Reports of Standing Subcommittees:
F. Reports of Interim or Special Committees:
G. Review of Communications:
H. New Business
I. Adjournment
Documents
Speakers
Senator Cecile Bledsoe Chair
Unverified
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
Speaker 9
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
Speaker 18
Speaker 20
Speaker 27
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
Speaker 33
Chair
Unverified
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
Speaker 49
Speaker 51
Speaker 64
Speaker 69
Speaker 63
Speaker 68
Speaker 70
Speaker 75
Senator Terry Rice
Unverified
Speaker 74
Representative Jim Wooten
Unverified
Speaker 62
Speaker 101
Speaker 102
Speaker 104
Senator Linda Chesterfield
Unverified
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
Speaker 117
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Senator Jane English
Unverified
Speaker 145
Speaker 150
Senator Joyce Elliott
Unverified
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
Senator Will Bond
Unverified
Senator Keith Ingram
Unverified
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
Speaker 173
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
Speaker 154
Representative Dan M. Douglas
Unverified
Speaker 78
Speaker 190
Representative LeAnne Burch
Unverified
Speaker 161
Speaker 144
Speaker 199
Speaker 203
Speaker 146
Speaker 185
Speaker 220
Speaker 233
Speaker 239
Speaker 243
Speaker 245
Speaker 246
Speaker 248
Speaker 50
Speaker 252
Speaker 25
Speaker 259
Speaker 265
Speaker 266
Speaker 269
Speaker 275
Speaker 277