Arkansas Independent Citizens Commission
Video
Transcript
Summary
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 3, 2026
The meeting began with confirmation of a quorum and approval of the November 14, 2025 minutes [2-4,7-13].
The Department of Finance presented the FY 2026 financial overview, noting a $7.15 billion general revenue, a $655 million surplus and strong reserves, while highlighting recent tax‑relief legislation that reduced individual and corporate rates [16-22].
Commissioners discussed the impact of tax cuts on the Constitutional Officers Fund, which is funded by a surcharge on revenue collections [21-22].
The commission reviewed its statutory duties, including setting salaries for constitutional officers, judges, and legislators, and noted limits such as a 15 % cap on salary changes and a required public‑comment period [52-54,70-73].
A motion was adopted to forego any stipend for commission meetings, continuing the historical practice [179-184,191-194].
Members examined salary comparison data, noting that Arkansas’ executive‑branch salaries are near the median for many states but lag behind for positions such as Secretary of State and financial officers [95-99,105-108,115-119].
The commission debated whether to obtain additional benchmark data before making recommendations, with several members requesting more information on specific offices [98-104,111-118].
Consensus emerged to apply a uniform 2 % salary increase to all constitutional officers and judicial positions, while maintaining the existing 95 % and 85 % ratios for Division A and Division B prosecutors respectively [282-290,300-307,320-324,362-364].
The motion for the 2 % increase and the prosecutor ratios was seconded and passed unanimously [322-327].
The commission decided that additional meetings may be needed to consider further data and to ratify any changes, proposing a second meeting in mid‑October and a third before two commissioners’ terms expire on November 5 [330-340,342-350,356-360].
The chair thanked participants and moved to adjourn the meeting, which was carried by a motion and second [366-367].
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 3, 2026
Speaker 2
0:15
is under the weather today and she is going to try to join us by phone Anabel are you on she's not on so if she's able to to come on later we'll we'll let you know excuse me so as I understand from TJ we do
have a quorum and so we have the right to go ahead
Speaker 5
0:48
and proceed we can do that we need to do that chair Annabelle Tut
Speaker 9
0:57
tommy May Clark Smith Larry Mcready robert whose song
JaN Zimmerman present rankwynn thank you OK, we
Speaker 19
1:28
do have a quarrel and so we can go ahead and proceed you have
Speaker 2
1:37
a a copy of the uhgenda in front of you well we'll try to be efficient with our time would remind everybody that
if you have an issue you'd like to talk about or when we're voting be sure and turn your microphone on and and we will go ahead and proceedgain I feel very inadequate to chair this meeting but Annabelle is like I said she's under the weather today and so she won't be with us but if she comes in later we will certainly acknowledge her
we had the minutes first of all declare a quorum we have the bennetts of our last meeting which was November 14th,2025. and so we need to approve those men's for everybody has had the opportunity to review those we will accept a motion at this time
Speaker 23
2:50
Mr Chairman I so move for the approval of the minutes from November
Speaker 2
2:59
14,2025. Thank youn. we have a motion we have a second2 thank you Larry. We we have a second any questions all in favor say aye aye any any any opposed any abstentions if not we will declare the minute's approved of of our
November 14,2025 meeting. the next item on the agenda would be the economic overview of state revenues and a budget by the department of finance Administration andy
Speaker 32
3:52
thank you recognizecogd yes sir thank you for the opportunity to give you a brief overview of the economic position of the states and or the state and its implications for your work here Arkansas closed the fiscal year 2026 on June30th of this year with net available general revenue of approximately7.15
billion This is an increase of approximately7% from the prior fiscal year. with the increasing collections in controlled spending, the state recognized a655 million dollars general revenue surplus the surplus was the fifth largest on record. Additionally, we continued to operate with strong reserves across the catastrophic reserve general revenue allotment reserve in the reserve funds set
aside sustaining a balanced budget framework for day to day operations while our reserves are quite strong it is important to note that reserves in previous years' surpluses are not available to fund current operations of the state government including salaries of the constitutional officers. These expenses may only be funded through existing fund balances in the constitutional officers fun consistent with the governor's priority to reduce waste,
increase efficiency and lower the overall tax burden on citizens of Arkansas. The governor signed additional tax relief legislation this past May The legislation reduced the top individual income tax rate from3.9 to3.7%. this reduction was retroactive to January1,2026. the top corporate rate will decline from4.1 % or will decline to4.1% on
January1,2027. and the remaining states sales tax on groceries which was 18h of a cent was eliminated beginning January 1 of 2026. the administration's efficiency program Aar forward is advancing a long term savings towards a goal of300 million by 2030 we've already identified approximately 127 million in savings across various sectors including technology and
procurement and facilities so moving to the 27 budget year the fiscal year 27 budget process built upon the framework with proposed state general revenue spending increase increasing by approximately 194.5 million or roughly3% while maintaining a balanced budget. The same process is currently underway for the next biennium prioritizing the needs of the department versus the cost to
the taxpayers the governor will present her balanced budget for the next biennium in early November. a point directly relevant to this commission as the funding of the constitutional officeficersund. I mentioned earlier this fund is supported by a 1% deduction of net general and special revenue collections. this surcharge structure means that when taxes are reduced and total collections decline, the
constitutional officefer fun experiences a proportional reduction as you set salaries for constitutional officers and members of the general assembly justices judges and prosecuting attorneys this link linkage between tax policy and fund capacity should remain central to the deliberations as a point of reference, the most recent average salary increase was 1.35% within the executive branch agencies with the current average salary of
approximately60,000 dollars. in summary, Arkansas finances are strong and resilient. We are delivering efficiencies and tax relief as priorities and while also acknowledging the direct re relationship between collections and the funds that support constitutional offices I appreciate your time this morning and I'll try to address any questions you may have
Speaker 37
8:21
all right thank you for that
exceptional report if we could just say ditto next year at
Speaker 2
8:40
the next year and the next year that would be really good I think we would take it but outstanding report and at this time I think we'd open up for any questions that anybody on the commission might have is there is there any
OK hearing none I guess I might ask a a couple of questions if if I might this was the the best financial year that we've had at at any
Speaker 42
9:17
point did you say that it was the fifth largest surplus that we had recorded we've had some that were larger but this is one of the best years
Speaker 2
9:31
and and the the dollars that we targeted last year for the budget how did we form
Speaker 42
9:47
general revenue we we budgeted in a way that allowed for the655 million dollars surplus so if we look at this our estimated expenditures were below our
forecast and then we exceeded
Speaker 2
10:09
than good ok again are there any questions Larry thanks Mrir.
Speaker 51
10:14
You mentioned a 1.35% increase was that for state employees was at the average increase for state
Speaker 42
10:22
employees across the board. That was the average increase in salaries for executive branch state employees all right thank you
Speaker 54
10:36
what was that what was the number the year before on that increase I don't have that with me but
Speaker 32
10:46
year over year it would have been skewed a little bit the prior year because we implemented a new pay plan and so it would have skewed
Speaker 46
10:55
that a little bit but I don't have the exact number in front of me OK. on that
Speaker 2
11:07
just for my information on that one point uh35% for the executive bra does the judges that we will be looking at for consideration today do you do you recall what those percent were what that percent was the year before do not I think when we get into evaluating increases
that we will be doing now. I would like to know what it was the our last last time so we'll we'll see if we can't get that information and have it available for our discussion later OK if
Speaker 46
11:57
it's if if it's acceptable to you, I can send that information to TJ Fowler and have him submit it to the committee
Speaker 1
12:11
OK like I said we're going to be having some discussion today so we're not going to have that information. I assume. I believe I have some of that information from
Speaker 63
12:23
my presentation last year ok so give me a minute and I can probably pull that out before we adjourn this meeting and before y'all start your deliberations that'll be fine and if you need more time we
Speaker 1
12:42
have our memory is not quite as good as jazz and and some of these other real young folks so with that said let's let's move forward with the agendas TJ I
Speaker 63
13:03
today a couple of years ago I'd given a presentation and this commission had determined that they wanted some version of that presentation year year in and
year out just as a refresher of our constitutional responsibilities and limitations. So here is this year's version of the presentation Section one is our constitutional requirements what is this commission required to do the primary duties of this commission are to review and adjust the salaries of the elected constitutional officers judiciary justices general assembly and it is also tasked with making recommendations for per diem and expenses for the general
assembly before each regular session which will be this upcoming year. you do have a couple limits on the things that you can do and those limits include you have to include the overall economic condition of the state which we just heard from Andy atdFNA you were required it requires that the salaries of judges be uniform throughout the state you cannot diminish the salaries of the judges or justices and
any salary revision up or down may not exceed 15% you're also required to have a public comment period after this meeting of not longer than45 days and then we will readjourn after that public comment period to review any public comments that we receive and then determine whether or
Speaker 70
14:33
not to ratify whatever numbers y'all outlay today section two and and this is everyone
Speaker 63
14:42
here has heard this before so I'll try and be quick.
the independentitizens Commission held its first meeting in 201014 they met over a dozen times in that first year to try and get salaries right.thing that first commission did is still on the website so I welcome anyone to go back and you can see the historical overview just like any other determination any handouts any public comments any resolutions are all there on the website for your review these are the items that the first commission reviewed and historically we we have tried to
look at all of these same items. I won't read them all they're all in your packets this is a new section this year we had had some questions about what this commission had done historically on the per diem expense and mileage reimbursements for the general assembly. So I've created a spreadsheet in your packet it's really been uniform. The first commission looked to the GSA guidelines and had no change
to that at our meeting in 2024 we added one extra step there because I believedFfa's financial management guide now has some guidance on per diems and mileage so what this commission did in its last review of these items will say if Arkansas's financial management guide has guidance let's use that how to the extent that guidance does not exist we will defer to the GSA and I'll recommend or I'll remind the commission that for the per diems the mileage and the expenses y'all are not
actually setting those things the legislature sets them. The letter we send is simply
Speaker 70
16:29
a recommendation Section4 is the historic salary revisions by this commission
Speaker 63
16:35
I've broken it down into three separate pages you've got the general assembly on page one I believe executive officers are page two and then the judiciary and the prosecutors are page3. 1 change I made this year I went
ahead and added the percentage increase that each one of those amounts amounted to for each year that it
Speaker 70
16:57
was made. I don't know if that's helpful or not but I figured more information would be
Speaker 73
17:12
better than less information and then the final section here and this y'all seen before is just an overview of the varioust
Speaker 63
17:21
offices and what they do and then some comparisons with surrounding states and I'll give my caveat that I give every year excluding judicial and prosecutorial positions there really isn't a 1 to 1 comparison with other states what our treasurer does may not be what the Texas treasurer does. In fact, Texas doesn't have a treasurer. they have a comptroller in some states the things that our auditor does our auditors do the treasurer does so same with Secretary of State
Sa with land commissioner it's not a 1 to 1 but at least it gives you a general idea of what other states are doing with their analogous positions so with that I've updated the slide for governor's salaries and I've updated the median and mean I think one theme you will see through all of these slides is that a handful of the surrounding states have had some pretty meaningful increases in the last year. I think most notably you'll see that Tennessee
Texas, Virginia all all had some pretty sizable increases especially when it came to their financial officers and their secretaries of state and I'll just scroll through each of those so you can see the various changes I also added a couple of states that weren't in previous models simply because I was able to find that data different states
Speaker 72
18:42
make it more difficult than others to find what they pay public officials
Speaker 70
18:57
we've got secretaries of state I believe the next one will be state financial officers and on this slide what I endeavored to do was find either treasurer auditor both or the analogous position in each state you'll see there are some states where they do have a treasurer and an auditor like we do but they may not pay them the same and so for example Mississippi and Florida and Tennessee you'll see two separate amounts for each of those positions
Speaker 63
19:27
final portion of your packet just has generally what each it's a very very highle overview of what each office doesgain I won't read through this it's largely unchanged from previous years other than those slides that talked about the numbers of appropriated positions and the amounts paid those physicians for example the attorney general's office some of their amounts changed and the number of appropriated positions same with tre as
Speaker 70
19:53
ur y and same with the auditor of state
and if anyone wants to review these that's sitting here I have a couple of printouts too I know I'm going through these quickly since we've done this multiple times I want to be efficient with time
Speaker 63
20:27
right and that brings me to the end of my presentation and to the point where you can ask me any questions you might have today thank you
Speaker 2
20:43
that is really really good information information that we need to make the appropriate decisions but you really have gone above and beyond here and I think it's very helpful for us and I thank you for that I guess at this time we probably ought to open up for any questions that you
know anybody might have at this time concerning that report. and I guess we're just well that's what I'll do right now if anybody has any questions concerning the report I think right now would be a good time to toss as TJ has already mentioned
we're not always looking at apples and apples and so I think we had to be very careful with that. Secondly I think that TJ I would like to identify any of our positions that we think are out of bounds with with where the the market is
so we can really focus on on those and then I think the others we want to certainly keep competitive but if there's any major adjustments that
Speaker 40
22:25
need to be made either now or at some point we need to go ahead and identify those. are you asking me if I think there are any that may
Speaker 1
22:49
let's say anything like a in excess of a 10%15% variance so I'm reluctant to say that
Speaker 89
22:54
something is out of bounds. I don't know that that's within my purview I can tell you what let me rephrase that then is
Speaker 19
23:02
acting chair and I look at those numbers if there is a what I consider a
Speaker 1
23:19
significant variance of 1515% or more I think we ought to understand if that variance is caused by the responsibilities of that one versus the the index we're comparing it to so I think probably the information that
Speaker 72
23:35
would be helpful with regard to that question may your median and
Speaker 63
23:40
your mean average compared to these other states you know I I think it's this commission's charge under the constitution to
review this information but review it in the totality of all the other information you receive the economic standing of the state as a whole what our positions do so so I wouldn't I don't think we just need to look at the mean and the average and the median and say well ok we want to be ranked here
Speaker 70
24:06
but I do think that's one item y'all should consider so with that in mind you know from as we go
Speaker 63
24:13
through these slides the governor's slide you know we we are really really close to the mean
average of all these surrounding states that I've identified but
Speaker 70
24:22
as you move through some of these others for example the attorney general you know we're we're very close to the median and we're a little bit further below the average I
Speaker 63
24:34
think you see a bigger discrepancy as you move towards secretaries of state and you move towards financial officers and I you know having worked in two financial officers' offices I can I can give a little bit of my perspective there I think modern treasuries modern
auditors in the last 10 to15 years that's been an increasingly technical role as states have moved their investments over to what I would call a modern portfolio broader range of fixed income investments and then you know auditor's office one of the main things we do is unclaimed property those systems have been modernized sore I think those offices when they were initially created especially in Arkansas it was really just to be the state's bank and the state's accountant and those roles have expanded in other states have
seen the same thing so again as you move into and secret of State I've never worked in that office. Michael has but I don't think that's being our turn to say elections business filings running a capitol running a capitalpitol police force and the security involved I think those things in every state have have grown so you'll see that Secretary of State we're a little further below the median and the mean and you'll see the same trend with financial
officers where the mean is the the average is 170,000 and the median's 154 and we're paying 105 the one place that I I didn't do as good a job and I hope to do better it's just harder to find that information as the land commissioner not every fewer states have a land commissioner or an analogous office as they do financial officer or secretary of state. I'd started compiling that but there wasn't enough information to
Speaker 72
26:16
make it meaningful so hopefully that helps answer your question as
Speaker 95
26:23
best I think I can it does anybody else have any questions concerning those the salary comparison sheet
Speaker 1
26:31
the various positions it looks like to me that there are maybe two or
Speaker 2
26:38
three positions that we would look at in which the variance is you know
Speaker 1
26:55
maybe greater than 20% and uhm I'm not using 20% as a a baseline or anything but I do think that one of our
Speaker 2
27:21
charges is to make sure that the positions that we're looking at are competitive for a lot of reasons but but our competitive again factoring in the
responsibilities that we have in that position versus you know those that we are comparing it to
Speaker 2
27:48
bank one of the things that I would do is ask that we each one of those
physicians that we're looking at that we have a side by side comparison that we for example we would I'll just use the secretary of state or the treasurer and and auditor that if we could if we could have a listing a column listing that side by side with a a column that would
list the average of the other states that that would be helpful to me in making decisions whether or not we're outside the the bounds of where we should be. I can definitely
Speaker 66
28:44
add something like that in the next presentation to the rest of the committee agree with that would you like to see that and
Speaker 2
28:53
is there anything else that we could take up TJ's time in getting him to do
you know how I always found that when I'm not real sure what to do is ask for a report
Speaker 98
29:20
think the one thing there are some positions that that clearly are not necessarily in line with some of the surrounding states what you're suggesting I think certainly would be helpful. I do think at at some point if
we are going to consider larger increases to bring those more in line. I do think as well you did with the governor in in maybe one or two other positions but to have a little better understanding of the role of those offices in Arkansas compared to some of those other states for me sitting here I can see the gap but I'd want to understand better the responsibility gap and what they're doing and and
certainly I think it's fair to say they're probably similar but I don't know to what to what extent and so before I know for me considering much larger increases to bring them in more more in line with our neighbors I'd want to understand the responsibilities and duties a little bit better great idea. I can
Speaker 72
30:25
actually speak to that with some level of knowledge you know I was at I was at the Arkansas treasury
Speaker 63
30:31
for seven years now I've been at the auditor's office for4 years through those programs we go to
national conferences the national association of state treasurers and they're really3 maybe4 depending on how you look at it main main items that those offices cover. you've got the investment of idle state funds you have the investment of retirement accounts and you have the administration of unclaimed property and all 50 states break it down a little bit differently as to which office covers which
there are offices out in the United States where one office covers all three and I say3 maybe4 in Arkansas you have public employees retirement and teachers retirement those are two separate and and some other states will separate it out where only the public employee's retirement will fall under the treasurer whereas the teachers will fall somewhere else. Most of those states were one office covers them all it's actually an appointed position
Speaker 70
31:35
or it's farmed out to some private
entity like a blackrock or someone
Speaker 63
31:42
like that for most of the states you see around here it's a lot like Arkansas there are some differences I'm trying to think of the ones that so in Arkansas neither the treasurer nor the auditor covers retirement programs. You have apers that covers public employee retirement and you have teachers retirement system that covers their retirement our treasury does all the investing for for the idle state funds within the treasury in addition to some other
programs other states may not do they do59. they administer that program they also deal with and this is getting a little on the weeds they deal with turnback funds so there's a lot of county taxes that are collected in those county taxes are remitted to the treasury but then some percentage goes back to the city's counties and municipalities they also deal with the
Speaker 70
32:30
sort of day to day in and out banking debits and credits in their cash management group so that that is some additional things that not other
not every treasury you see on here may do from the auditor's perspective in Ar k an s as the
Speaker 63
32:47
two largest things we do are we act as the check printing well it's a check and a balance and I'm gonna use the word check two different ways it's a check and a balance against the treasury so every single warrant that's what the Aransas constitution calls any payment from the state. They don't call it a check they call it a warrant. Any warrant that's issued by any agency in the state we either print the physical check or we administer
the payment of the ACH fund. the other side of our house well actually we have two other sides of the house we have an accounting payroll department and we handle the payroll for every single office that y'all are dealing with here
Speaker 70
33:25
today so we handle all the general assemblies payroll we handle all the judiciary's payroll. we also deal with
Speaker 63
33:32
expenses in addition to payroll for the judiciary and for and for the prosecutors and then the largest swath of our office is the unclaimed property
Speaker 70
33:43
sector so so now I'm telling you what you do what we do your question was how does that compare to everyone else and the answer is pretty similar for all the states you see on this board with some exceptions I'm trying to think of the ones that I
Speaker 63
34:00
really know like for example I know Missouri's treasure handles unclaimed property whereas their auditor doesn't their auditor does something totally different it's actually more like legislative audit here where they're going in and auditing the different offices in the
Speaker 98
34:18
helpful at all or it is but you're my limited understanding I don't know that
Speaker 74
34:23
I could repeat it back to you so so theirro was helpful let me give you the condensed version of those
Speaker 63
34:29
four items that treasurers comptrollers or auditors may handle. there will be some variation between all of the states where it may not be 1 to 1 but it's the same basic topics that they're all handling
now what would be most helpful to you is if I could get you here's exactly what Nebraska does and
Speaker 70
34:49
here's exactly what Oklahoma does I can't get that for you today but I'll be sure to
Speaker 39
34:56
include that in my next presentation the next time we do this OK Larry thank you good
Speaker 2
35:03
information and uhtea he said you couldn't get that for us now but you'd have the next presentation it's are you talking about the next
Speaker 40
35:13
presentation that we have in a few weeks are you talking about next year well that's up to this commission if this
Speaker 72
35:21
commission decides that they need that information before they can make
Speaker 63
35:25
a decision and y'all want to meet one more time before you make the decision and then meet a third time in order to actually ratify it that is well within this commission's purview. so so that's up to you right now my understanding and the way it's historically been done is that a decision has been made at this meeting and then there's been a
Speaker 72
35:44
second meeting in order to ratify that obviously I can't have you that information by this meeting so if if we
Speaker 2
35:52
deem that we need that information which I think Larry is expressing a want I'm not trying to put words in your mouth I personally would like to to have that and fill
better prepared to make these recommendations you're saying that
Speaker 72
36:21
would require a third meeting yes sir that would require that we come back in order
Speaker 63
36:26
for y'all to make the initial decision as to what changes if any y'all want to make the compensation and at that point we would publish that decision and
Speaker 107
36:33
we'd have to come back a third time after a public comment period in order to
Speaker 23
36:38
ratify that decision, OK Mr Chairman I think that it's necessary for us to have another meeting because this is overwhelming
information and we want to get
Speaker 2
36:49
it right thank you Missimmmer and and I I think it's a compliment to you that we have
Speaker 1
36:56
overwhelming amount of really good information that will help us make not just the decision but the right decision not only for this go around but for those of the future and this you've done
Speaker 2
37:10
a great job in providing us a lot of
meaningful information and to digest it and make a good recommendation we'd like to have that meeting. Thank you sir. I do
Speaker 72
37:22
from an administrative standpoint I would think I have to point out two things. One, there is a time limit placed on
Speaker 63
37:30
when you have to get your per diem reports in so the per diem report to the legislature if we do two meetings we might be beyond the time limit for that so that might need to occur even if we wait for for what I would call the
salary decisions to the constitution limits the terms that the commissioners can have and we have two commissioners that are going to roll off in very early November. so if y'all have a if y'all break this down to three meetings the timing of this will most likely require that y'all make a decision as to what those salaries are then two commissioners roll off we have to wait for two more appointments, both of them from the governor appointments from the governor aren't always exactly in time and so you could get yourself
into a position where you don't have enough commissioners. well I guess you'd have enough with two but you'd have to have everyone else here and you'd have
Speaker 107
38:28
two brand new commissioners that weren't part of the initial
Speaker 2
38:34
decision that would then have to ratify that decision. well I'm not sure what our real chairman would would think about this but it seemed like to me
Speaker 1
38:43
if we deem this appropriate yet we have this little bit of a hurdle that we
Speaker 2
38:51
tried to resolve that hurdle meaning have another meeting but have it quick Couldn't
Speaker 2
39:08
this and you deem it's appropriate to have that other meeting not only appropriate but but needed and we don't want to create a conflict of delay
we would like to have that meeting in relatively short order to we give you the time you need to get it but also don't let us create a problem timewise and if if I could make
Speaker 63
39:43
the thing to do is identify any positions where this information, this additional information would be helpful. I presume that that isn't every single position on here
it sounds to me that it probably is limited to secretaries of state auditors treasurers
Speaker 107
40:01
and analogous financial positions with yeah that's what it is for me I I don't want
Speaker 98
40:07
to speak for all the commissioners but then I might recommend that
Speaker 63
40:13
three and then y'all could have a second meeting on those three positions that way you're moving forward with everything else and and if we do get into some sort of time crunch or appointment crunch with those three at least we've taken care of the per diem we've taken care of the
Speaker 107
40:29
judiciary and the prosecutors we've taken care of the general assembly and we've taken care of
Speaker 2
40:45
you know don't mess up would I I would say let's go ahead and and move to
Speaker 1
40:51
the agenda and it it made me be thinking about some timelines there if you might yes sir. OK so
Speaker 2
41:03
we're we're gonna move past that particular item number E or section E on the agenda but we're going to come back with this some final recommendations on that so thexx item on the agenda is consideration of stipend for each independ citizen's commission meeting historically would would say the time that I've been on here and I think going back that most
of us have agreed that we're not interested in any type of stipend for for this group is that correct if if someone feels differently then you know we'll be glad to do
Speaker 19
41:44
it that's kind of awkward saying that if anybody fails you want something however that that really doesn't create a problem for me so I I I do suggest that my feeling is
that we forego the stipend as we have historically
Speaker 23
42:19
I'd like to make a motion that we act as a commission as we have in past years and forego any stipend for our independence thank you Mrs Zimmermann do we have a second
Speaker 2
42:37
motion in a second any discussion all in favor of the recommendation to forego any any type of so order next item me if
Speaker 125
42:54
I may aaron Lowry from the attorney general's office because there are two commissioners on the phone and to comply with foia I would suggest that maybe you ask them to do a voice vote so they can identify themselves and then make their vote
on the commission or on the motion rather OKok you're
Speaker 2
43:22
ok if you agree with the emotion identify yourself and and verbalize your vote is that what you're asking? Yes
Speaker 19
43:52
Clark smith I agree with the most OK rank apparently is absence of Clark has
Speaker 2
44:10
so the next item on the agenda would be to consideration of the amounts to be paid to members of the general assembly number one per diem and number two reimbursement for expenses and number3 reimbursement for mileage as required pursuant to Article 19 Section31. and so this let's begin
Speaker 91
44:41
with the how how have we handledg and in the past TJ there's
Speaker 63
45:00
this commission's inception and generally it has been following the GSA guidelines the first letter said we recommend you follow the
GSA guidelines and then the four subsequent letters literally said no change to our previous recommendation the recommendation this commission made in 2024 was slightly altered from that it init it stated first that you would like to see if the state's financial management guide published by DFfa had any guidance and if so follow that guidance. However, if no such guidance existed, it
Speaker 1
45:43
as as we see and the the history of the per diem and the mileage recommendations there have been no changes in the recommendations over
Speaker 2
46:00
those that four year period and so with that with that said and TJ I assume
Speaker 1
46:07
you don't have any information that would cause us to reconsider a portion
Speaker 2
46:14
of of what is in front of us I do not know sir. OK, can we have a motion for a recommendation on the in increase relative to the per diem and mileage Mr Chairman, I so move. We have a a motion that no changes being recommended going forward for for this reporting period
Speaker 19
46:44
recommended going forward for for this reporting period.cond we have a second Larry any other observations that need to be made by any of the members on the
Speaker 2
47:06
telephone hearing on all those in favor of no change sayy aye any anyone that favors making a change for larson
all right thank you so so we're we're good to go on that OK, the somebodybody won't sayfra did you want to say something? No I was just was just gonna say Tommy I'mmoli now. All right. I didn't punch my a deal like it should a while ago but I
Speaker 91
47:44
swore that well I appreciate I appreciate it when we got you
down ok so so the next item that we're going
Speaker 63
48:17
completedg I believe the next item will be h andhA would be your constitutional officers meaning the executive branch constitutional officers've gone ahead and pulled that
Speaker 91
48:27
slide up ok thank you TJ so we have completed through item g on her report
Speaker 2
48:34
agendas and we're going to item H is that right? Yes sir and and I should probably bring
Speaker 63
48:51
sections there has been one letter that is provided in your packet provided by the treasurer of state we a couple months before this meeting we send out a request to every single office with the courts the prosecutors, every executive branch office and both both the house and the senate and we just ask hey do you have any input? this is a letter we received in
Speaker 107
49:12
response to our request. It was the only executive branch response we received
Speaker 1
49:27
so there's no specific request here just a general letter to the to the
Speaker 2
49:34
board to look at that's my understanding yes ok all of you have this in your packet thank you very much so now we move we move forward with the review the commission review of salary adjustments
and on the slide that TJ is put forth up here by the way again great job we really like a lot of information and you sure giving us the permit on constitutional officers is that the is that the slide for all of those is a slide yes sir this is all7
Speaker 2
50:30
Arkansas. OK, so we're looking for adjustments but we're looking for salary adjustments is that correct? Yes sir. OK so you know we've we've already said that we wanted a little additional information and so if we're going to be making a recommendation it's going to be without having
Speaker 1
51:01
seen that but we could make the recommendation and then make adjustments if we see necessaryertainly you
Speaker 72
51:08
could do that you know another option I guess it would be to take these
Speaker 70
51:13
either one by one or you could batch out the the three that Commissioner Mcreadty had questions about that that's totally up to up to the commission how you want to address that say that one more time yes sir
Speaker 63
51:31
you could and and this is not the entire universe of options but these are the options I see you could go one by one on each of these offices you could batch them all together but obviously that would not address Commissioner McCready's earlier concern you could batch out the three offices that did give Commissionermcrey a concern that would be the Secretary of State, the treasurer and the auditor and
Speaker 89
51:54
so then you could you could address the governor lieutenant governor attorney general and land commissioner together I
Speaker 142
52:02
think'd like that. What about you Larry? that's fine with me yes I thought we were going to
Speaker 69
52:17
address the secretary of state treasurer, auditor and land commissioner.
Speaker 142
52:21
say again it was my understanding that we were going to have further discussion regarding the Secretary of State, the treasurer, the auditor and the land commissioner and again
Speaker 63
52:32
please don't take any of my recommendations as what y'all should or have to do this is completely y'all can address this in any way you want I I can tell you that in the past in my three years of doing this initially y'all would take all the executive officers together and then it was either last year or the year before y'all felt it more prudent to do them individually because y'all started to acknowledge that there may be some differences in the pay scales and those things so however you want to do it if you want to go down the list one by one if you want to
Speaker 2
53:13
bottom4 completely up to this commission I'm thinking that at our last year you know we felt like that that we had made adjustments pretty much across the board
that was fairly close to market and we we don't know that and we're going to you know take another another look at that. I think what I would suggest we do But TJ you correct me if I'm if you've got a a different a different idea but I don't want to get in trouble with our chairman. I think Iu I would be OKok
instead of deferring that right now that we go ahead and we make adjustments with the information that we have and then when we get this additional information we could we could make that change if needed and that would take a little bit of
Speaker 18
54:25
pressure I think off of everything and and and I probably should clarify and
Speaker 63
54:35
here. historically what this commission has done is it has set salaries and it has met some period of time later and it has ratified that decision. This commission is under no obligation to ratify that decision when it comes back and meets if new information is received I think the constitu tion suspects that would be because of public comment but I could certainly have the information that Commissionermcready has asked for so if the commission did want to set those salaries based
on the information as now and then I would presentmit that additional information at the next meeting y'all would be perfectly within your power to say ok we're going to ratify the judiciary, the prosecutors, the general assembly and the top three but we're not going to ratify these we're going to submit another salary recommendation for these other four you would have to come back and meet a third time but it would only be for those items that you did not ratify we're we're we're having to come
Speaker 72
55:38
you are if you decide to do it that way now you don't necessarily have to if
Speaker 63
55:43
y'all set if you if you set salaries for everyone now understanding that there may be some additional information that
Speaker 72
55:48
could change your mind if it doesn't change your mind at the next one then at that point you
Speaker 23
55:55
would not have to meet a third time so given what you've just stated would it be prudent for us to consider all of the constitutional officers together and table that for our next meeting that is completely your decision
Speaker 98
56:22
take that to mean what TJ was suggesting I I think it's wise to do that because I do think that as we see today getting everybody together two more times in a relatively short period of time can be difficult to do so I I think it would
be prudent to that. I don't don't it doesn't preclude us from if we have new information that we receive at the next meeting where we would otherwise ratify all of them we can still we can we can make a shift in our thinking then if it's warranted and if that's what the the will of the commission is to do so I think it's smart to do that and so that that's the way I think is the
Speaker 162
57:05
most prudent way to proceed so do I understand what you're saying is that
Speaker 2
57:15
right now go ahead and make a recommendation on those and we're still
Speaker 18
57:23
going to come back are you still saying come back for our meeting that's special additional meeting well
Speaker 98
57:30
what I'm saying is we have to come back no matter what to ratify to ratify and I think if we have information that we get in that period where we come back to ratify where we may not
want to ratify a few of the the offices then we have the ability not to ratify those and and to adjust what those are, notice them up and then we'd have to come back a third time at that point we come in my in my understanding that correctly in terms of our our noticing requirements if if we made changes at that second meeting that's correct if you make changes
Speaker 125
58:08
whether that's based on public comment or additional information you'd have to come back the third time to ratify just those that that you made changes to
Speaker 72
58:21
TJ don't look at me say something I want to try and summarize what I'm hearing from everyone. it sounds like the consensus
Speaker 63
58:32
from the commissioners at this point is let's go down this list maybe either one by one or with the batch of the top three and the bottom4 make decisions based on the information we have understanding that I've been charged with bringing you additional information that will be provided in the interim during the public comment period OK I
Speaker 98
58:53
thank you Larry cannell and and with that'll just give my comments now and and from my point of view I'm I'm fine with considering all of the offices as one I heard the report of how the state is doing financially. I think it's great I also keep in mind the in what I do think is relevant is the increase that the other state employees had received in their salaries. I think that gives us a good benchmark
and so the good news of of how the state is doing financially is is well received and I think that's great for me personally I weighed against you know on my drive down here I had to stop and fill up for gas it's a lot of money other prices are up so I do think we need to keep in mind the overall economic conditions in the state and how it's going to be received by the citizens of the state as we consider salary increases so my sense is in in what I'm supportive of is an increase
in the range or in the scope of what the rest of the state employees received that's what I am supportive of it doesn't have to be exactly 1.35% but in that range is something that I'm comfortable doing I think much beyond it at this point is getting outside of my comfort level I do notice for the judicial and prosecutorial positions. I know some of them are here I'm I'm certainly sensitive to that because that's how I earn my living as well. but a note in the last
you know two years or so we have made an effort to to sort of maybe bring those positions more in line to what the competitors are and so that's why I'm in favor of of considering all of them together and in an increase to make sure we're keeping up with the cost of living
Speaker 162
1:00:45
and make sure it's consistent with how other state employees have been treated and I may if I
Speaker 63
1:00:52
may jump in here just to give a little more color there I did I do have the socialcial Security C coA data and the latest inflation data if
that would be helpful there you know nationally so it looks like in 2027 the projected socialcial Security cost of living adjustment for 2027 is going to be between3.5 and3.6% and the socialcial Security cost of living adjustment co for 2026 is 2.8%. say that last one again. Yes sir, the Socialcurity cost of living adjustment for 2026 is 2.8%.
Speaker 72
1:01:31
Obviously that's what the federal government sees for socialcial Security
Speaker 2
1:01:40
benefits that they married with that information you aren would y'all like to make a specific recommendation on the on thegrass I have one question
Speaker 23
1:01:52
of TJ and in my notes I wrote down that the increases for the constitutional officers comes from a second fund. Am I interpreting that
Speaker 72
1:02:02
correctly? Yes and I wish Andy were still here. he's the expert on that but
Speaker 63
1:02:11
all of the salaries for the constitutional officers and their offices the payments for their offices appropriations they all come out of a separate fund called
Speaker 72
1:02:21
the Constitutional officeficers Fund it's part of the what it's the SCS it's
Speaker 63
1:02:27
essentially it's like a one pointsomethingcent haircut off the top of general revenue
that goes and pays for this fund that's it's been that way since the revenue stabilization Act of 2015 somewhere in that
Speaker 72
1:02:40
don't quote me on that year but that's just the way it it the budget mechanism
Speaker 107
1:02:58
works and y'all's deliberation you know that's shell's deliberation but turn on the mmis for the deliberation.
Speaker 172
1:03:05
Say again don't want likes for deliberation he just wants our
Speaker 162
1:03:12
microphones on as we as we have these conversations. I'm sorry ok
Speaker 2
1:03:22
so why don't we go ahead and and make a motion. I've heard that you know the number1.5 to2%. either one of you have a
preference there personally I'm thinking that probably the 2% range is is appropriate. I made a you know a few phone calls ahead of time but you know what what what I'm seeing in the banking industry they they are doing numbers in the 2 to3% range. Can I ask one question of TJ and
Speaker 51
1:04:06
I don't know if you'll know it or maybe Andy is the one of it. How was the 1.3.5% increase for state
Speaker 72
1:04:15
employees arrived at. I can't tell you his exact methodology but I can tell you
Speaker 63
1:04:20
i've asked that question of DFA in past years to provide this information and the way it works for executive branch employees is the governor essentially announces a range based on your performance review so if you get a certain performance review you're allowed up to a certain percentage and I don't know what
those percentages were last year. I think it was3 or4%3% if you got the top review 1% if you were in a middle review and zero if you were anything lower than that as I when I gave that date in last year's always gave you the caveativ the different agency heads the authority to get those raises doesn't mean those raises are given and oftentimes there are other in addition to the cola you have some merit and some other things so I suspect the way that that thefa reached that was they took the average
of what executive branch employees actually received on the cola only not on the merit or any bonus as well which all that all that to say it's
Speaker 2
1:05:20
exact sum so whatever number that we come up with whatever percent we come up with we're saying that's there's going to be some higher there's going to be some lower and we would expect the average to be in that
in that range hearing that I
Speaker 97
1:05:44
know I'm I'm comfortable with 2% then hearing that there was a that one.35 there was
Speaker 98
1:05:50
not a methodology that's an average of a of a larger range I'm I'm certainly comfortable with 2% as am we
Speaker 2
1:06:01
have a a motion that the adjustment would be 2%.
all in favor say aye if we voted on
Speaker 19
1:06:23
it twice thank you clarksmith thank you that the recommendation of 2% is a recommendation all in favor sayy aye again ok thank you rank.ext item
Speaker 2
1:06:43
thank you rank. Got you. OK the next group that we're going to be looking at is the the Arkansas legislature and general assembly you see above in front of you you see
Speaker 2
1:07:21
I'm assuming those brackets don't mean negative so around the percentage you know bankers tend to look at brackets in the negatives endpoint so no sir
Speaker 51
1:07:42
Mr Chapman for clarity but my view was to consider the salary adjustments as a block for all the positions so if
Speaker 98
1:07:52
if others want to go through them category by category that's
Speaker 175
1:07:56
fine you're you're saying for all the category tog on the all
Speaker 98
1:08:01
those categories on the agenda a throughg my rationale would apply across the board. that's totally permissible if that's what the commission wants to do I
Speaker 72
1:08:13
think historically you'll at at at minimum y'all broken them down by the three branches of
Speaker 63
1:08:23
government and for the judiciary they may may be some even better reason to do that because the ask from the prosecutor's office hasn't always, although the percent may end up with the exact same result they generally ask and I can pull it up but the prosecutor's division A prosecutors are generally just set at 95% of what the circuit judges receive and then the divisionb prosecutors are set at 85% of the division A pro se cu t or s I can't believe I remembered that but again2%
Speaker 98
1:08:55
may effectuate the same thing it'll be real close and and certainly I I'm I'm in in favor of keeping those percentages as they are. I think that's consistent with what the request
Speaker 93
1:09:06
was and I'm certainly comfortable with that so my only point would be if you I think if you batch
Speaker 70
1:09:11
everyone at 2% it may not exactly you might actually alter those figures a little bit that's
Speaker 98
1:09:15
a fair point and I wasn't suggesting we modify that if and so we may need to break them down a little bit more it was to of the judicial positions would be 2% and then the prosecuting
attorneys their salaries remain based on that existing percentage of the the ones above them so so TJ what do you need
Speaker 41
1:09:39
I don't think I need anything. I think I hear CommissionermcCready
Speaker 63
1:09:49
and I don't know if that was a motion but I believe what he is saying is he's making a motion that every single position under your
Speaker 107
1:09:59
purview minus the prosecutorial positions receive a 2% increase and the prosecutorial positions remain at their historical percentages which would be the division A prosecutors received 95% of what the new circuit judges salary would be and the division B prose cu t or s receive 85% of the the new salary for the division A prosecutors that's exactly what I wanted and
Speaker 98
1:10:23
that's why TJ was a better student in law school with me
and so that's what I I will make my motion
Speaker 2
1:10:34
as you've heard the motion I don't plan to repeat it but we we have it got the motion we have a second simmermanagett any questions all in favor say aye any oppose
that that was an I right ok frankly that
Speaker 2
1:11:14
item ofinner we're going to look at the the judge the the circuit court and the court of appeals differ
Speaker 63
1:11:31
my understanding is that the motion that y'all just passed covered the circuit every judicial position at 2% my understanding is is the motion as it was presented just took care of all of item h through
Speaker 2
1:12:01
excuse me now we're down to item number and that's any new business that needs to come before the group. or any old business that we need to consider Larry I want to thank you and andjan for praying for helping get through this agenda I'll be glad when our chairman returns
and that will be at our next meeting and now we have to decide what is the next meeting date based
Speaker 91
1:12:41
on these discussions that we've had TJ yes sir and the only
Speaker 63
1:12:46
limitations on that are that it must be a reasonable period not more than45 days. However, I will remind the commission that we will have two commissioners that roll off on November5th I believe is the date and so I think it would be prudent
to set this somewhere halfway between now and November5th that way if y'all do end up making changes based on any new information provided we still have time to have a third meeting prior to the two current commissioners rolling off excuse historically y'all have met on a Friday. there's no requirement that that occur so you know any day that y'all agree to halfway between now
Speaker 2
1:13:28
and November5th right now we're on the second o c to ber 2nd
we want to have two meetings in between now and November5th. before our the two members roll off and is everybody had a chance to look at their calendars
annabelle's still not on is she? No sir. OK. so so we any conflicts that anybody has I would I would think that maybe if we were just looking at at Friday's you know to get everything together TJ how old do you
Speaker 41
1:14:27
need to I'll move as fast as I need to move y'all y'all set your date
Speaker 63
1:14:51
wouldoctober6th be too early? wouldoctober6th be too early?ixth I think that might be pushing the bounds of what is
Speaker 195
1:15:00
a reasonable time period what day did you say I just ask aboutoctober the6th but if that's impossible that would only be two
Speaker 37
1:15:06
business days I think I think that the 12th or the 13th I think the week of the 12th, you
Speaker 72
1:15:13
know anywhere between the 12th and the 16th that gives a full week of publication think Monday and Tuesday is what I would like to
Speaker 2
1:15:22
look at. one of those either the 1elth or the 19th. Columbus Day of 13th in is
Speaker 19
1:15:33
Tuesday, February 13th October I mean October and I don't think the
Speaker 70
1:15:40
12th is a state holiday so y'all could do that as well. The capitalol will be open about
Speaker 2
1:15:47
our commission what do y'all prefer?12th is great
th is fine with me. OK22 like the tel let's seeron those that are on the phone is that a good day for you? the 12th. it's good So you're saying that come to come to littlet up to meet on the 1 sir yeah I'm I'm the
Speaker 37
1:16:25
the 12fth and the 19th I could I was thinking more so maybe around the sometime after the night you know my schedule kind of clears. Yeah we're
Speaker 206
1:16:38
going to have to do it before then. Could we possibly do it by phone again as we are now? yes OK anybody else
Speaker 2
1:17:07
and let's restate TJ what the agenda will will look like and what we need to be thinking of
Speaker 63
1:17:13
between now and then the agenda will any public comment that we receive between now and that meeting will be presented anyone who wants to make a public comment at that meeting we'll have the opportunity to do so from the public. I will present the
information that has been requested by the commission and at that point y'all will have the opportunity to vote to either ratify or modify
Speaker 70
1:17:36
any of the salary recommendations y'all have made at this meeting and could we repeat
Speaker 2
1:17:42
what the recommendations have been made at this meeting. The recommendations that have been made
Speaker 107
1:17:49
and that will be published are that all offices under the commission's purview are to
receive a 2% salary increase with the exception of Division A prosecutors which are to receive 95% of the updated salary for circuit judges and division B prosecutor Division B prosecutors which are to receive 85% of the revised salary for Division A prosecutors. So
Speaker 1
1:18:17
the percent stay the same the only adjustment is the 2%. for for
Speaker 39
1:18:24
basically across the board with adjustments that will be
made for some of these positions yes
Speaker 2
1:18:39
sir OK anything else that needs to come before the committee again I want to thank all of you for being here and for your participation and we'll look forward to our our next meeting and being able to get some of the work done for the state. thank you very much. we're
I moved the commission adjourn we have a motion to adjourn from there second
Agenda
No agenda available.
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Speaker 1
Speaker 2
Speaker 5
Speaker 9
Speaker 19
Speaker 23
Speaker 32
Speaker 37
Speaker 42
Speaker 48
Speaker 51
Speaker 54
Speaker 46
Speaker 63
Speaker 66
Speaker 68
Speaker 70
Speaker 73
Speaker 72
Speaker 40
Speaker 89
Speaker 95
Speaker 96
Speaker 97
Speaker 98
Speaker 74
Speaker 39
Speaker 107
Speaker 87
Speaker 20
Speaker 119
Speaker 125
Speaker 131
Speaker 134
Speaker 91
Speaker 147
Speaker 142
Speaker 69
Speaker 18
Speaker 161
Speaker 114
Speaker 162
Speaker 153
Speaker 172
Speaker 100
Speaker 50
Speaker 175
Speaker 93
Speaker 41
Speaker 86
Speaker 195
Speaker 202
Speaker 206
Speaker 122