House State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (15)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1950
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1950”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1130
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1130”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1457
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1457”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1584
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1584”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1665
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1665”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1754
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1754”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1756
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1756”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1800
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1800”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1819
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1819”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1878
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1878”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1895
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1895”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB422
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB422”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB446
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB446”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB803
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB803”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB807
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB807”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
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 4, 2026
Speaker 1
0:00
requests that we provide for the division of youth services the same options that the military department state militia Department of Community Correction and the Department of Correction have in Arkansas code section 1910 204 you find these other divisions of government listed and what we're
asking is that the division of youth services also be added to that and with the permission of the chair I'd like to allow mr. Ron Angel the director of DYS asked to present welcome mr. angel go ahead and identify yourself into
the microphone for the record yes ma'am my name is Ron angel
Speaker 6
1:01
I'm the director of the division of youth services thank you for allowing me to be in here with a
great man in my opinion one of the best legislators all of you are good but he's one of the best legislators I've dealt with not always in a happy way but he's always there for the for the benefit of the people of the state of Arkansas what what I'm what this bill actually does is the there's an exemption allowed for Department of Corrections and Department of Community Corrections and also certain elements of the military against claims filed before the claims Commission for acts of youth that are sent to us when we release them we have
no direct control over these youth and their behavior what we do is we do the we possibly can to rehabilitate them but kids are very impulsive and when we release them there's we're never sure that they're not they're going to be crime-free for the rest of their life so we're asking for an exemption for acts committed by these youth while they're not in our custody as far as going to claims Commission and that's basically it's a very simple request committee
members do you have any questions reps represent miller okay we have no one signed up to speak for or against this bill which if you're in the audience there's a sign up sheet over here if you want to speak for against any bill today you need to sign up represent Miller I'll recognize you for that motion motion is to do pass all those in favor aye all those opposed nay congratulations
representative Wilkins you passed your bill thank
Speaker 11
2:56
you madam chair thank you committee appreciate you very we'll see you in the near future it appears from the
Chair
Unverified
3:05
agenda thank you representative Ballinger you're recognized for 1457 is that what you're
Representative Bob Ballinger
Unverified
3:11
presenting today yes madam chair and thank you very much 1457 is just a bill that allows the Secretary of State to appoint somebody that it's if the Secretary of State he
chairs the Board of Elections State Board of Elections Commissioners and if he is not available then as it is now then a member of the board would be a would be appointed well this allows it to either be a member of a board of the board or an employee of the office of Secretary of State it would be appointed to that which is similar to several other agencies and boards that he sits on and I'd be happy to take any questions any questions from the committee members was
Speaker 18
3:47
there an amendment on that oh yes I'm sorry I guess I
Speaker 21
3:55
should have ran the amendment first yes well let's start
Speaker 22
4:08
over I guess I have an amendment to this deal that we ought to run oh
added a Senate co-sponsor that's correct okay representative Hobbs move do pass on the amendment all those in favor aye all opposed all right now representative Miller I'll recognize you for a motion do pass as amended nod your head sounds good representative Miller moves do pass
Speaker 23
4:30
as amended all those in favor aye all those opposed nay representative Ballinger you've passed your bill thank you
Speaker 7
4:38
madam chair and committee representative Perry if you're in the room we're jumping around a bit today because everyone's running as you can see we have a full calendar represent Perry
Chair
Unverified
5:02
you're recognized for 1950 Thank You madam
chairman committee members house bill 1950 this is
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
5:08
the third session that I've represented the professional engineers and surveyors this bill is I'm trying to get to it real quick it is a it's a cleanup bill that changes a couple of words it actually uh it defines the license reinstatement fees examination fees and penalties to comply with the the other the other professional destinations
Speaker 30
5:42
that's it I'll take any questions committee members do you
have any questions representative Kerr motion to the proper time okay no one from the audience is signed up to speak for against this bill representative Nichols
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
6:06
you have a question yes ma'am it seems that some of these bills that like that senator Malone's responsible for it seemed like a lot of them came through with a
particular amount of their fees in the statute I don't see that here other than giving them the authority to establish their fees and that's that's perfectly proper and everything but I was just wondering if this is maybe the chair would know is my memory faulty on this or exactly
Speaker 22
6:41
what's your question is this a Senator Malone?
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
6:45
Well, it appears to be, but it seems like some of these
other bills that came through, they actually had the amount of their fee listed in the
Speaker 22
6:55
statute. Actually, I think you're right. I think several did. Is that a question? Well, it's an inquiry of
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
7:00
the chair. And I don't know if
Speaker 22
7:03
it's mandated that they do have to have it in there
or not. That would be my answer to that. I have seen it both ways. Okay. Well, I have no
Speaker 19
7:11
problem. Perry do you have a thought on that
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
7:15
the when I was working with Steve Harrelson
which is the director of the professional association the fee structure is not changing so it's they're gonna keep the fee structure based on this on the law and I can get an excellent answer for you man I have
Speaker 39
7:32
no problem with the bill representative Hobbs thank
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
7:35
you thank you madam chair representative Perry I know the bill already states it deems necessary within in the guidelines of the state of
Arkansas do you happen to know what the guidelines of the state of Arkansas are I do not
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
7:49
Steve Harrelson is not here with me today but if I need to return and bring him I'll be
chair any further questions I'll recognize representative curve for that motion motion do pass madam chairman the motion is do pass all those in favor aye all those opposed nay representative Perry you passed your bill thank you
Speaker 23
8:18
committing chair and madam chair okay several of these have said they can't
present today one just texted and said he's pulling up to the Capitol I'm gonna go ahead then and run 1665 at the bottom of the first page madam chair you are
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
8:56
recognized to present your bail thank you mr.
Speaker 22
9:00
chairman I would like to bring
two people to the table with me if that's appropriate to testify on the bill
Speaker 59
9:07
gentlemen if you would please identify yourself and who you represent my name is Josh Curtis I'm with the Commissioner of State
Josh Curtis
Unverified
9:17
lands office I'm Cory Cox with the land commissioner's office thank
Speaker 11
9:27
you all right we have a hard copy I was trying to open it on the electronic this is one of
Speaker 23
9:33
those land commissioner bills that gives a unique opportunity to the
citizens of the state wait am I on the right bill I've got two of these don't I I'm on the right bill it's an adoptive making sure it's an adoptive program thank you very much it's to establish an adoptive program adopt a document program please excuse me it's pretty straightforward if you guys have read it I'm gonna let Josh explain a little bit more about it
Speaker 62
10:07
Okay, when when we when Commissioner Thurston came into office He recognized that there's a lot of documents a lot of important documents that are missing from his office During the research on those We just want to clarify Some statutes that say that we are in charge of these documents They belong to the Commissioner of State lands office and this is just to clarify that we have possession and if they were taken from the office by a proper procedure we just would like for them to
be returned as well or do you have anything to add to that
Josh Curtis
Unverified
10:47
Josh is right we're just trying to make sure that we establish who owns the documents that they do belong to the state unless they were given away through normal procedures and then the adopt a document program is something we're actually stealing from Texas I know we don't want to admit that because Texas is Texas but we we found that Texas has a really good program in
which companies that are looking to get a benefit on their taxes will donate money to their land commissioner's office which then allows them to take that money that was donated and clean and preserve their old maps I don't know if you've been to our office or not but we've got a lot of really cool old documents down in our office including field notes from the Louisiana purchase
we have been working to have those cleaned and in the process we've been getting grants to do that but we would like to be able to have folks that are interested in this whether it is a company like in Texas where like Southwest Airlines and several other big companies have donated money and they do get a tax write-off or individuals that are just interested in these documents can donate to make sure that the state takes care of these these resources and
that we preserve the past for future generations absolutely I wish
Speaker 4
12:27
they could preserve us mr. chairman questions from the committee
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
12:34
okay I have a motion at the proper time do we have any questions from the committee represent a clamor and seeing none anyone in the audience speak for the bill or against the bill he wants without that I'll take your motion rest in clever as
you recognize me I want to encourage everyone at the table and in the room to
go down and look at those wonderful documents from the Louisiana purchase some of
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
13:03
them they're amazing motion do pass
have a motion do pass all in favor say aye oh no thank you madam chair you passed your bill
representative fines has pulled up to the Capitol at this time You're recognized for 1584.
Speaker 7
13:40
Representative Hobbs, you had a question? Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a request. Since we
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
13:47
are skipping around on the agenda, could you give us just a moment to pull the bills up? Exactly. Before they begin presenting? Good suggestion. Yes, I will. That's 1584.
Speaker 7
14:38
okay has everyone found it represent finds
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
14:43
you're recognized thank you madam chair it's good to be back with you in state agencies I've missed you guys this bill 1584 is a bill that real basic is straightforward as it is this this piece of legislation initiated back with my good friend former Representative Bob Mathis, many years ago when he started the, promoted this ID cards for minors.
We amended it last year to include, to raise the ages and also allow a grandparent or an older sibling to help you get those to promote the usage of these cards. And then sometime last winter, summer, it was brought to my attention that we needed to be able to get multiple cards. In this case, it was a divorced couple that apparently this became not necessarily a contention in the divorce, but Dad wouldn't share with Mom the card, so to speak, the ID card.
So what we did, we thought a simple fix would be to go back and amend the bill to include that you could get up to three cards. Of course, at cost. We're not giving them. They're sold for $5 apiece. But the reason for this amendment is to allow both parents and a grandparent or whoever to have access and also have a card. So pretty straightforward
bill. I'd appreciate a favorable vote, and I'd be happy to answer
any questions. Representative Clemmer. Welcome back to your committee, I thought, your old committee.
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
16:14
Did you all retire my seat down here on the
Speaker 94
16:16
end? I see nobody sitting there. I don't know. It was like when you walked in, I thought, where
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
16:22
is there? There he is. Did we quit doing this? No, no, no. We did not quit doing it. It's just basically a way that both parents can have a card for their child so we don't have to get them, apparently, so they don't have to share. No, we haven't quit doing it. It's just an amendment to that
Speaker 96
16:38
process. All right. Thank you very much. Representative Walker.
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
16:44
Thank you, Madam Chairman. get can you give me some understanding of what the purpose of the identification card is somewhere along the way I'm lost the purpose yeah well the purpose was was to have have this this knowledge
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
17:00
enough in a form or not knowledge but this information in a form for your children to promote safety stability so that you could have a current photo current information of the child in case it was ever needed for you any any emergency or any other types of
situation about I don't have the original act but it happens sometime during represent former representative Mathis his tenure here in the
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
17:26
capital so it's something that's useful but not required exactly nothing mandatory about it so that people who can afford to pay five dollars can be identified and those who can't won't so is there some way that the state has for saying to it that people of no means may be able to obtain
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
17:52
identification that's something that we could explore going forward but it's not addressed in
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
18:05
this bill Is there any thing that indicates the possibility of a criminal penalty for one not having one, especially for the older people? Well, this is just for
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
18:15
minors. I don't think there's any. I don't think we want to criminalize not having one of these. I understand.
I guess it would raise a lot of revenue for
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
18:27
the state if we did. but I'm sure I'm sure there's no interest in raising more revenue from for the state at this time any other
questions from committee members represent Dodson you have a motion motion do pass all those in favor all
those opposed congratulations representative vines you passed your bill
Speaker 4
19:06
thank you madam chair committee I appreciate all right is representative I'm strong
in the room I did not see him representative Neal representative Bell were you running the bill for senator Lindsay sir Pierce okay wrong
Speaker 4
19:23
one then the next one up will go with representative
Lampkin thank you madam chairman hang on two seconds 1130 is the bill I think there's a fiscal impact statement are we able to get it up on our tablets all right representative Lampkin recognize thank
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
20:13
you good morning committee this is an amended version of the early bill I went ahead it had it amended as a member's own amendment and in gross so we just do this one time this is basically the same deal the only thing is I amended it to just allow colleges and universities the option of purchasing an automobile at the same price from a local dealer it's pretty straightforward that this is a constituents request bill and he actually think would like to have the
opportunity to sell vehicles to UAM because he's such a supporter of the university and does in and he's on the board of visitors and this and that and I understand that several other colleges are interested too but it's an option thing that they may if they can secure it at the same price and over in section two it says if the director awards a state contract a college university may elect not to participate and can and can demonstrate to the straight procurement but it can procure passenger vehicles from another source at the same price as
the vet passenger motor vehicles and trucks procured under the state so that that's that's really all it does and of the fiscal impact statement says they can see it as possibly having a negative fiscal impact as it could decrease the level of competition in bidding by state vehicle contracts that's the main reason we just limited I just redid it to just do to just allow the college university to do that at this
time and and that's basically my bill the amendment is engrossed for those of you that are asking and you see
Speaker 4
21:53
the fiscal impact representative Nichols you had a
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
21:57
question I believe last time the FNA was here to speak against your bill what's their
Speaker 121
22:01
position now they're here to speak against it again okay representative Lampkin has several people here to speak
against the bill today signed up to speak against it representative Bell did you have a question madam chair I'm not
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
22:17
here to speak against the bill but I have some pretty strong questions about it as
well when I look at this many of our county governments are able to buy under state
bid as well so many people and if we start allowing people to come out of this pool I think it has a very negative effect on our ability to negotiate state procurement contracts when we can't guarantee what that everybody in the state's gonna be purchasing under that under that contract I'm curious how you feel like it's gonna impact that ability to attract good state bids overall when we can't keep all of our institutions in that bid
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
22:56
I don't deny that it might as I
said I was asked to run the bill and and and go there and and I'm not qualified to make that just you know to make that determination as to how much I think the DNF and
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
23:16
I has some comments on that representative bill thank you
Speaker 93
23:22
I'll reserve my question the rest of my
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
23:24
questions for them then thank you madam chair representative Walker thank you madam chair I understand the position you're in and
empathize with you and I think that their position about open
bidding is in the public interest and it
certainly is against would be against public policy to allow some people to have advance notice of what a cost is and then to come behind the bidders who have the low bid and then give a lower bid I understand you understand that too the concern that I had about what you said was that this was an altruistic board member who wanted to be able to help some of the students of the institution of which he was a board member.
And as much as I empathize with that, too, I think that when people are members of the do you not agree that when people are members of boards, they have to look at the general good rather than
what may individually favor one or two of their possible constituents or friends I can
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
24:33
certainly see that point thank you
Speaker 18
24:39
any other questions from committee members if not we're going to
Speaker 4
24:45
go to the public we have let's see Jane Benton to speak against the bill good morning
Speaker 142
25:03
madam chair and fellow committee members thank you for allowing me this time to hang on just a
Speaker 32
25:10
second I need you to identify yourself into the
microphone and you need to identify the
Speaker 142
25:16
gentleman with you thank you Jane Benton director of state procurement Ray Pierce attorney for the office of state procurement one of our primary concerns is the erosion of the state contract because eventually little by little will be diluting the group purchases of this bill currently the manufacturers of vehicles see the state of Arkansas as one large buyer if we start allowing onesies twosies then they
will start seeing us as individual buyers and we lose our ability to for those dealers to negotiate a deep discount off of that pricing for the state government one of the points I also want to make is approximately 56 percent of this contract is actually purchases by non-state agencies that would be cities counties and school districts so they're they don't have to this contract like our set agencies do but they choose to because the pricing
is better than they can get anywhere else so we know that it is a very effective con to go on there we
Speaker 143
26:25
know this is a very effective contract and we are very concerned that
Speaker 142
26:30
there will be some erosion and slippage into that where eventually we may not even have a contract we also have concern from our contracted dealers today we have 15 across the state of Arkansas we're having a hard time hearing you okay can you hear me now sorry we have 15
dealers today across the state of Arkansas so there are various dealers throughout Arkansas that bid on this the state of off the office of state procurement actually sends an email notification to every licensed Arkansas dealer to let them know about this contract all of those dealers have the opportunity to work with their manufacturer to offer our discounted price, and the contract is awarded based on those meeting those minimum specifications and offering the lowest price.
Speaker 4
27:21
Do any committee members have questions for Representative Hobbs? Thank you,
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
27:24
Madam Chair. Can you tell me how many vehicles, colleges, and universities buy on average in a year? I would be speculating.
Speaker 142
27:34
I'm sorry, I do not know that. But you don't have any idea? No, but I would, out of the,
Speaker 150
27:40
I can tell you how many state agencies purchase.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
27:43
Well, excuse me for interrupting, but since this bill only applies to colleges and universities, I think that's the number we need, or at least I need to know.
Speaker 142
27:52
I'll be glad to get that for you. They are, they also have, higher ed, because they do have additional fund sources, do tend be the larger pool of that purchase on the contract because those state agencies are purchased from the motor vehicle pool what's that called the motor vehicle fund and so
Speaker 143
28:16
those funds are very limited excuse me
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
28:21
would you restate that did you say that the colleges
and universities have a larger pool
Speaker 142
28:28
well no they have additional fund sources okay means meaning not just state funding that they purchase vehicles from other funds that they purchase
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
28:40
and with those funds do they still purchase through this date state contract yes ma'am okay
Speaker 142
28:46
yes ma'am they do of the 352 in 12 2012 vehicles I would estimate at least half of those were
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
28:57
higher ed okay madam chair at least for my information I think it's important to get that information thank you any other questions
from committee members we have a mr. is there anyone that wants to speak for the bill now then I have
Speaker 4
29:23
someone else to speak against the bill mr. Leighton thank you thank you
Rick Leighton
Unverified
29:33
identify yourself for the record please good morning my name is Rick Leighton I'm the fleet director of Landers Auto Group is Lane County go ahead with your testimony we're against the bill and the two concerns I have is one it's going to end up costing the state more money in the long run and two it's going to be kind of a chaos as far as enforcement issues if I can briefly kind of explain how the how the bid process works on our end there are 78 different
items that we bid on every year on the state contract and it's open to every dealer in Arkansas there's no cost to do it it just takes a little time we're a multi-line dealers so basically we have to bid Ford Dodge and Chevy of the 78 items so we end up bidding specking out like 234 vehicles it's a pretty big process it takes about three weeks to do then we have to go to the factory and we have to ask for specials state money for the state of Arkansas and that's based
on how many vehicles were sold with the previous year and then that's how we do the bidding process so it's about a three-week process if this bill passes basically it opens other dealers to basically piggyback off what we've done it also dilutes the sales that we do on the state contract which will lower the money that we're going to get for the next year the other concern I have is
is that if, let's say somebody walks into a dealership and item number 38 is a Dodge Caravan, part of the minimum specs are that it needs to have stow-and-go seats where the seats fold directly down in the floor and it has a rear air conditioning. They could very easily end up with a van with no stow-and-go seats, no rear air. the state's getting a vehicle that lists for three that's $3,000 less than what they're supposed to
get nobody knows that this even happened because they're going directly to a dealer and not going through procurement any
Speaker 4
31:56
questions from committee Thank You mr. Leighton whoops excuse me representative
Speaker 165
32:01
Dotson so when this bill came before committee this may be for representing Blamkin the I think one of the things that we had discussed was making sure
that any any bids or any anybody who sold a vehicle to the state had to meet the exact
Speaker 166
32:22
same spec spec requirements as what was on the state bid so it had to be an equivalent vehicle identical to it so if whoever was on the state bid got the awarded the bid and some other dealer came in and tried to sell it it had to be an Arkansas dealer and it had to have the exact same specifications is that correct does this bill do that now I was
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
32:47
advised that when I put in on
section 2 part F to see if the college university can demonstrate to the state procurement director that it can procure the passengers so it would have to be with their approval that it is the same vehicle I was advised that that would take care of that it has to go through that through they're okay even at that that it is the hat does have the same
Speaker 165
33:14
specs and then there was another question that was raised the last time that basically I can't remember was
Speaker 166
33:23
DF&A or who it was but basically the they didn't see how it would be possible for somebody since since the whoever won the state bid got such a volume discount that no other dealer could possibly match that price and so obviously if another dealer wanted to take a loss and match that price then they would be more than capable of trying to bid on that and get that business but that could be to their own loss if they're not getting it the same
volume discount so I have a hard time seeing is how this bill will will dilute the state bid contract pool because you'll still have the cheapest price around and if you don't then another dealers taking loss in order to try to sell it to the state would that be wouldn't you agree I guess is my question I was just going to
Rick Leighton
Unverified
34:21
question well what it would do is it would lower the total number of state of Arkansas government sales for this year which would affect the bid money that we're going to get
for next year for instance if they walk into a dealership and deal with the local dealer there and purchase it retail and it ends up being a retail sale well the factory never knows that the state of Arkansas bought it as a government agency so it does not count toward the total for our bid money for next year I guess my point is if
Speaker 166
34:56
you're the cheapest price around and what's your concern well you've locked the competition out because they can't buy it
for as cheap as as what you're selling it to the state
Rick Leighton
Unverified
35:09
for well I guess my biggest concern is like like back to the caravan who's how you know now with 78 items there there's one award winner per item so basically if we deliver a vehicle to state agency and it doesn't meet specs then they have one dealer to come back to to make sure that it is what it's supposed to be if this is opened up now each item is open to 300 dealers and my concern is who's gonna
to be able to police all of this and to make sure that what they're getting actually meets the state minimum specs
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
36:04
thank you represent a bill I'm a farmer do some construction work and as I sit and I think about this if
If my local feed dealer bids on my feed purchases for a year, and I make an agreement to do that and buy at that rate, and then I start buying all my feed from other people because they offer me the same price, I don't think he's going to bid on my feed the next year. And as I think about construction bids, if I bid on a project for somebody and they take it from another guy because he offered them the same price, I'm probably not going to bid on their project the next time.
Is that what you're basically trying to tell us is happening with cars if we do this? Well, that is
Rick Leighton
Unverified
36:55
correct because basically if we can just sit back and not even have to do the bid and let somebody else do the work and we can kind of piggyback off of what they did, we're going to have less bidders. And it's been my experience that any time you have less bidders, it's less competitive and the
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
37:13
price is not as cheap as it could be. and as all of us know that prepare bids for various things preparing a bid is an
expensive and labor-intensive process is it not yes sir it is
thank you very much all right we have one other person signed up to
Speaker 169
37:34
speak against it they're also from Dfna mr. Leverett no we're having a head nod that that
is not to take place representative Hickerson I
probably think that's not necessary because that's the last person to speak against it but no no that's fine those no and and they
just told me that there was not so representative Lampkin would you like
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
38:01
to close for your bill I would just like to restate that the bill is exactly what it says I understand the concerns on both sides I would
appreciate a good vote I don't I don't really know what else to say but I'd appreciate good vote thank you
Speaker 4
38:21
thank you representative Lampkin what's the will of the committee
see no motion representative Lampkin thank you for coming today thank you representative
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
38:48
Cozart please remind me the number of the bill that you are presenting like madam chair that would be HB 1800 and I would like to call Tim Humphries up to help me
with this that's all right with the chair 1800 give the members
just a minute to find it representative Cozart you're
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
39:23
recognized thank you madam chair this bill is an act to amend the law concerning
changes of polling sites what this actually does
if you have a emergency situation of something that happens and the polling site cannot be accessed 15 days are closer to an election any time before that they have to send out a public notice to the voter to tell them that it's been changed but if there's something happens within that 15 days we want to be able to there's not enough time to send out that notice to the to the public voter public so we would like to be able to just to post on that place
that they would have been voting information about where they would need to go to vote that's pretty well the gist of this bill glad to answer any questions all right representative
Speaker 193
40:20
Kerr representative Cozart describe to me what you would consider
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
40:29
I say that say the building burnt down or something happened in
emergency they've the water lines burst anything that happened okay
Speaker 196
40:36
that's not good all right okay I appreciate
Representative Allen Kerr
Unverified
40:38
it thank you sir representative Hobbs thank you madam chair represent those are
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
40:46
do you have any idea how much this will cost the county and sending out the special notices to the voters that already
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
40:54
happens we're not trying to do that that we're just trying to do it if in the last 15 days this happens all we would do was post a sign on the door of that polling place that has been changed or
moved to another place so I'm sure the impact is whatever it costs to print a piece of paper
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
41:11
to put on that door well I'm sorry if I'm reading correctly on
line 24 I believe the first page this is by the county clerk mailing notice to affected register voters we're not trying
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
41:22
to that already happens yes that already happens we're not really trying to change that that if the public place moves now they already have to do that so I don't know what that costs I couldn't
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
41:33
tell you okay so you don't know why that's underlined
Speaker 205
41:37
as though it's new language then it's it's moved from lines 28 through 30 okay thank you for
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
41:43
that clarification thank you madam chair
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
41:48
representative Walker thank you madam chair I I would like to follow up on what representative curse said do you all have a definition of emergency or is it just something that one responsible for election can declare and not be subject to any kind of review a scrutiny represent
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
42:15
Walker I'm not sure exactly what all that could cover it could cover numerous things but you know the biggest thing when we looked at this and the reason we were doing this if there was an emergency that the building had been closed or whoever owned that building did not want to let us use that building at that time then that would be the reason to move I mean it would have to be some pretty well some kind of emergency situation or something that would close that building or that site that we would use I I wouldn't think it
Speaker 194
42:46
would be just to close a polling spot it's not for that reason if
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
42:52
I made madam chair obviously this situation has occurred sometime in history perhaps recent history otherwise you would not be
introducing this bill what precipitated that was it a Katrina type situation or was it perhaps the inadvertence of the election commissioner where they failed to get a secure written approval from the owner of the site where the
Speaker 205
43:18
election is being held in the November 2012 election a church burned down a few days before the
Speaker 219
43:24
election that's what precipitated this bill and that's that happens just about every election year you have you lose a building for some reason sometimes the owners of the building back out they decide not to allow the building that facility to be used and if that happens within a short period of time before the election this is an expensive burden and something that as a practical matter often cannot be met
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
43:55
madam chair master was given this by representative bill but thank you
Speaker 169
44:03
represent bill Johnny on the spot representative Kerr I'll recognize you have a motion at
Chair
Unverified
44:10
the proper time madam chair okay pardon me yeah
hang on representative Clemmer said she raised her hand and I failed to see
it I was just going to clarify is it the Election Commission that's making those
determinations on the selection of polling place correct yes so it's not I mean you've got I mean just to kind of reassure the room you've got members of both parties if that's correct yes that would be the ones making that term making the termination of where the polling place is set thank you very
much and I have no one signed up to speak for or against this bill so representative Kerr I'll recognize your motion at this time motion
Speaker 4
44:55
do pass madam chair the motion is do pass all those in favor aye aye all opposed congratulations
representative Cozart you've passed that like you madam chair thank you committee I
Speaker 115
45:25
saw representative Douglas in the room okay any other representative in the room please come up here and represent Douglas you're
recognized if there's any other representative in the room ready to run
their bill representative bill you'll be after this one please let me know people are falling off wanting to run their bills today so okay if you would come up here and identify yourself if you're in the room wanting to run a bill today okay representative Douglas 1819 is that
Speaker 234
45:58
the number yes madam chair thank you very much and thank you committee for allow me to
Speaker 235
46:05
present my bill today this is a bill to let me get my book opened here
Speaker 234
46:23
it sounds harsher than it is but let me read it for you it's to remove the governor's disaster emergency responsibilities the power to suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation of firearms. In 1972, I believe, there was a bill to set up an emergency management situation in the state of Arkansas. And then the legislature came back last session in 2011
and amended that to make sure that cities and counties could not suspend the sale and transport of guns during an emergency. This little clause in the original 1972 law was overlooked at that time, and it's just a matter of cleanup to go back and make sure that we have this included. to protect the citizens rights to bear arms during an emergency so all I'm
doing is striking one word fire arms and I would entertain any
Speaker 237
47:35
questions representative Bell Madam Chair, I just have a motion at the proper time. Representative
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
47:55
Walker. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Douglas, you indicated that this was overlooked in 1972. No, sir.
2011. 2011. Is there some... And I
Speaker 234
48:09
was, excuse me, I was not a part of the legislature at that time. That was just
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
48:14
my understanding. I don't recall that. but at any rate I'm a little concerned about limiting the authority of the governor during disasters let's assume it's a Katrina type situation exactly and let's assume that it's anything let's assume food I mean it would seem
to me that the governor ought to have the power to ration or to do whatever is necessary to promote the public interest and not to elevate necessarily one thing ABOVE ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE DURING A DISASTER OF THE PROPORTIONS AS WE HAVE SEEN WITH RESPECT TO KATRINA AND SANDY AND SOME OTHERS, WE'RE LOOKING AT PRESERVATION RATHER THAN TRYING TO BE DEFENSIVE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO PROMOTE FIRST THE SECOND AMENDMENT
OVER THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO LIVE. I mean, how do you address the right to live being elevated over the right to live and otherwise act in the general public interest over the governor's right to, I mean, over the right to bear arms? I mean, are you simply saying that a person dying, sinking or whatever, has a right to have a gun while he's
Speaker 234
49:38
sinking? I really feel like you've just made my case for me because the right to defend yourself in a situation where the government may be fragmented and not able to come to your rescue is a basic right of the citizens of the United States given to us in our Constitution.
and I think that is what we are saying here that that's what we need to be able to do is defend us
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
50:20
we are in imminent danger so thank you when you have persons with limited resources and access to help are you saying that those people who can get guns should be should be given more PREFERENCE THAN THOSE WHO MAY NOT HAVE THOSE RESOURCES SUCH AS AND I'M
TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN AND DISABLED PEOPLE AND OTHERS WHO ARE BASICALLY TRYING TO
Speaker 235
50:45
SURVIVE I THINK THIS AGAIN EXACTLY ADDRESSES THAT IF IF IF MY NEIGHBORS DO NOT
Speaker 234
50:51
HAVE THE ABILITY TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND I DO HAVE A GUN I'M GOING TO COME TO THEIR RESCUE AND SO I THINK THIS IS A BILL that protects those that are defenseless any other questions from committee
members I do not see anyone that signed up to speak for or against the bill
Speaker 4
51:21
representative Bell I'll recognize you for a motion at this time move do pass madam chair the motion
is do pass all those in favor aye all those opposed nay the bill passes I see
Speaker 22
51:40
one hand for roll call I see two hands for a roll call
Speaker 245
51:56
represent Baird represent Hobbs represent Hopper represent climber representative Nichols representative Nichols represent curve representative Altus represent Catlett represent Catlett represent Westerman representative Hickerson represent Overby represent Walker represent Bale
representative Richie representative Dotson represent Miller representative Hutchinson represent Wagner represent a bitch Wilkins represent Wilkins
13 I votes I guess my hearing is okay
the bill passes thank you committee appreciate it representative bill you're recognized to present senator Pierce's bills Senate bill 422 in 803
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
53:36
thank you madam chair I'm bringing my own electronics down here so maybe I can sort
Speaker 4
53:42
of keep up let's give the committee members
Speaker 19
53:54
a minute to bring those up Senate bill 422 and Senate bill 803 committee members
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
54:10
Representative Bell thank you madam chair members of the committee I was approached and asked to run these bills and have not had a lot of time to prepare for them but as I'm going through Senate bill 422 it did pass the Senate 35 to 0 doesn't appear to be controversial the the gist of the bill is that the Department of Corrections has sometimes occasions where they need to purchase commodities commodity products in a prompt manner for purposes
of cost savings or they have a large order that they need to fill and going through the procurement process for commodities that they're already purchasing makes that difficult or sometimes they wind up needing or paying substantially more for a product I'm going to defer to some of the personnel from Department of Corrections if we get into some questions here but that that seems to be the bottom line on it and it's again it appears to be non controversial and send it in are there any questions from committee members I
Speaker 4
55:19
assume you move do pass representative bill that is correct madam chair then the motion is do pass all those in favor aye
Speaker 114
55:31
all those opposed you've passed the bill go on to Senate bill 803 we'll
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
55:34
give everybody a minute to catch up as I catch up here madam chair this is also is everybody ready
pardon me you're recognized represent a bill thank you madam chair this bill is also a Department of Corrections bill it goes back to some of the Senator Malone legacy as well directly addresses a fee that's currently assessed that's not in statute this is an attempt by the Department of Corrections to bring what they're already doing in the line with statute they are currently assessing a
fee a copay charge on inmate initiated health care requests to answer representative Nichols question I'm certain is coming shortly that fee is currently three dollars and they don't intend to change that it does set a maximum of five
so with that I'll take any
Representative Allen Kerr
Unverified
56:54
questions representative Kerr thank you madam chair representative Bell co-pay for for drugs or medical assistance is both of them are five
Speaker 259
57:04
dollars or is it just as I understand that they're currently
Speaker 262
57:13
expert witness all right Sheila Sharp Department of Correction it's simply inmate initiated services so if they put in a sick call request to go see the doctor I said three dollars okay where's the money come from if they have it in their account they receive money from different family members friends but it cannot be reduced past five dollars I
Speaker 265
57:35
see and it can't be reduced from indigent funds
Speaker 266
57:40
I see okay motion the proper time madam chair representative Hickerson thank
you madam chair what I I mean if they were what if they're really sick I mean
did they make that judgment that does the physician make that judgment or because you know they they may have a cold or cough and they want to go see the doctor they put in a request and you
Speaker 262
58:08
know they really they really need these services if they need
these services it certainly does not exempt services or chronic clinics when they have been diagnosed it is for ongoing care a staff member or officer can request that they be seen and they are not charged it is simply a method to prove prevent inmates from tying up the sick call and we've had very good success in that okay what would you just give can
you just sort of give an
example of what the inmates just an example of what an inmate
Speaker 269
58:56
what they will say how they will abuse the system
Speaker 261
59:00
well as you know all of our inmates must have a job and so it's hot summertime and they don't
Speaker 262
59:06
want to turn out previously they go sick call it may stand in line all day but they wouldn't have to go to work this simply is an incentive for them to make personal responsibility they're going to give up
three dollars if they put in that request and a lot of times that's a lot of money to some of them we do use those funds I might mention to pay a third party medical provider medical quality review to look at our medical provider on specific cases to make sure that they're taking care of everything they I
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
59:43
need to take care of. Representative Walker. Now, you basically have
instituted a means test for persons who have no control over
their incomes and who may not have income for them getting what they consider to be necessary medical attention. Isn't that right? No one would be refused medical care. Well, if they request
Speaker 272
1:00:03
it and they can't pay for it and you all
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:00:05
choose not to give it because they don't have the three dollars That's the means test isn't it? We would never choose not to give it They would be saying there
Speaker 262
1:00:15
might be a lien put on their account so that any future funds they may receive it could go against it But they would never be refused medical care Well, then why is this bill necessary?
in 2005 the Board of Corrections implemented through administrative regulation we went through the administrative regulation process and this body approved that fee so we've been doing this since 2005 it's just that legislation passed last session by Senator Malone I believe required that any agency charging a fee through that process must put it in statute for us to be able to continue and that's all we're asking
Speaker 272
1:00:53
to continue something that's been working very well how many people were
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:01:04
required to pay this fee last year and what revenue did it produce and what was the administrative cost of collecting that revenue can you tell me
Speaker 272
1:01:18
those things I can tell you the amount collected was $97,000 and
Speaker 262
1:01:22
we paid a hundred and five thousand dollars for that administrative quality review process so we didn't make any money on that the number I guess could be divided by three dollars to find the number of inmates
sick call request yes sir representative Walker
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:01:45
I think your mic went off thank you well I don't see the necessity for making this a statute I mean I
understand senator Malone suggested that it be but why is it that we have to put everything in statute when you have certain discretion and you've been doing things that appear to have
Speaker 272
1:02:05
worked a bit why do it our understanding
Speaker 262
1:02:08
is that senator Malone statute requires it for us to continue past the end of this
fiscal year being able to charge
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:02:15
this fee but you now vest you with the authority if a person doesn't
pay that three dollars to deny that person prompt access to medical care if if he if he
Speaker 19
1:02:32
requested if if I may did I just I heard you say earlier in your testimony that no one
Speaker 280
1:02:39
is denied medical care absolutely not
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:02:47
any other questions from committee members represent Nichols are some of the
Speaker 272
1:03:04
inmates entitled to Medicaid coverage currently
Speaker 262
1:03:07
inmates we receive we can have Medicaid coverage for inmates that have overnight or 24-hour hospitalization the ones that currently qualify are those that are pregnant and go in for a
delivery for age 65 and above or for those that are disabled so we we have a few inmates the last year that we have received Medicaid coverage for those hospitalizations that will change January 1 where virtually we believe if expansion is in place that all inmates for overnight hospitalization will be covered and I assume that
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:03:48
most of your facilities you have a clinic there that
I guess where the inmates are going well that if there is some type of expansion are there any prohibitions on co-pays or deductibles for those inmates and could that mean that this law could be out of compliance with whatever health care rules we have after January not to my knowledge thank you thank you
I'm sure any other questions from committee members and no one
Speaker 4
1:04:32
from the public has signed up to speak for against this bill I'm represent a bill I assume you move do pass
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:04:39
that's correct madam chair and I would like to say this received vote of 32 to 1 in the Senate appears to be largely non-controversial there as
Speaker 4
1:04:48
well all right motion is do pass all those in favor aye all those opposed the
Speaker 293
1:04:55
ayes have it thank you madam chair members the committee thank you
Speaker 4
1:04:58
Representative Catlett and again if there's any representative that's come into the room that wants to run a bill please come up here and
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:05:18
let me know and the number of your
bill it's bill 1895 1895 okay give the members a minute to pull that up
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:05:28
Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, I appreciate you allowing me to bring this bill to you. What this does, it allows certain employees to donate a cured sick leave or a cured annual leave to another employee who is employed by the same state employer and has a severe illness or has an immediate family member who has a severe illness.
Members, as a 30-year state employee retired, the colleagues that I worked with over those years, they're like family. You know, we get closed by working on a day-to-day basis, and whenever one of our colleagues has, you know, a tragedy in their family with a severe illness or possibly death, we want to do something for them. And we have now in our state agencies what's called catastrophic leave,
And what it allows the members to do is when they max out on their sick leave and annual leave, they can give to the catastrophic leave bank. Well, when a member of the agency has a catastrophic leave or a tragedy in their family, and they burn their sick leave and their annual leave up, they have to basically go off payroll, and with the agency's approval, they can draw out of that catastrophic leave. well this bill takes it that a little bit further in the fact that me being a
state employee if I have over 80 hours accumulative sick leave or annual leave and that employee that I work with my colleague my friend I can give them out of my own personal leave bank or sick leave I can give my friend my colleague some sick leave now I can't give more than I can't draw down on my own personal leave the bank less than 80 hours but what this will do it allow members our state employees across this state to try to do something for their
colleagues that that's probably a little brief explanation of it ma'am but that's that it that's it in a nutshell and I'll take any
Speaker 19
1:08:00
questions I know there are school districts that do this it's a very common practice I've heard of this
before representative Clemmer let me just be clear thank you madam
chair representative Catlett you are allowing me to designate a person that I want it to go to correct
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:08:21
yes ma'am that person is required of course that you have to
be improved approved by the by the agency head and yes ma'am and you have to meet the criteria of having somebody in your immediate
family have a severe illness it's still it still requires the agency
heads blessing yes ma'am it does and it's in the bill right um I'm just making sure that I've got it straight so So instead of the main change is that where a lot of institutions have a bank, you're allowing, instead of just putting it into a bank, you're allowing someone to designate who they want it to go to.
Yes, ma'am. Okay. But it still has to have the
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:09:07
approval. Yes, ma'am. They have to be employed by that agency one year, and that's also identified in the bill. Okay. And it has to receive the blessing of the state
Speaker 94
1:09:16
agency. My question was, if you had an employee who was abusing leave policies, the agency head could
say, well, they can't go begging somebody else for their leave, and that would still give them some control. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. Representative Overby.
Representative Betty Overbey
Unverified
1:09:35
So basically what you're doing is giving state employees the same rights as the teachers have. Yes, ma'am. I saw like
Speaker 169
1:09:48
three hands whip at once representative Nichols yes
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:09:52
it's been a while since I've dealt with a catastrophic leave bank but it seems to me that in order to receive leave from the catastrophic leave bank that you
also had to participate in donating your leave some of your leave into the bank does it work that
way now or is that a requirement or well well sir presently
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:10:18
I know the agency that I work for now this may not be the case across the state but in order to give to that credit catastrophic leave bank you had to max out your sick leave and your annual leave so if you know what I'm
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:10:37
referring to is being a recipient of a catastrophic leave do you have to be in the past should you have
Speaker 309
1:10:43
participated by donating leave no no sir and that's what I was getting
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:10:47
at you can't donate till you have the maximum amount allowable to that catastrophic leave so if you take a guy that's been working two years he hadn't had enough sick leave accumulated to be able to donate to that catastrophically is that if that's your question
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:11:08
representative Walker thank you obviously the intent is good
you indicate that the director may deny transfer of leave from one person to another and it's up to the administrator
to keep that leave from going to a person who needs it did you not well sir that yes
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:11:38
and that's the same how it's the same process now with
catastrophic leave the agency head can deny a catastrophic leave but I want to
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:11:47
make sure that it's understood that the agency directors decision cannot be unreasonably withheld or withheld for arbitrary or capricious reasons would you not agree yes sir I agree with you totally thank you any other questions from the
committee I I don't see anyone from the public signed up to speak for
Speaker 4
1:12:14
against it representative Catlett I assume you move do pass
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:12:20
I do thank you madam chair I do move you pass
that's the motion all those in favor aye all those opposed nay congratulations your bill passes thank you members thank you madam chair representative Alexander you're recognized to present senator Lindsay's Senate bill 446 if you'd give
Speaker 4
1:12:40
the committee members a minute to pull
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:12:46
that up on their tablet you're recognized thank you
madam chair Senate bill 446 by senator Uvalde Lindsay and myself raises a threshold for a program that currently exists for
what is called a job order contract what this does is it allows a university on a small project to be able to move more quickly to address a need if it's below a certain threshold like many policies of this type that that stayed an absolute threshold over time the intent of the original legislation is watered down because the purchasing power of the amount of money is less and less as you
move through the years and inflation diminishes that so the purpose of this is very simple it's to raise the threshold from four hundred thousand dollars to seven hundred fifty thousand dollars I believe initially when it was started it was $200,000 and it was raised 2009 I believe I'm not sure about that I've had the opportunity to actually use this program when I was executive director of housing at the University of Arkansas and just to give
an example of how it might be used well first of all there are certain requirements for a capital project the capital project is a minimum of a MILLION DOLLARS, AND THERE'S A LONG LIST OF HOOPS YOU HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH FOR THAT TYPE OF PROJECT, BUT EVEN BELOW THAT AMOUNT, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH, AND THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS FOR SMALL PROJECTS, AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, $750,000 IS A RELATIVELY SMALL PROJECT, IT JUST WASTE TIME AND MONEY, FRANKLY, TO
GO THROUGH ALL THE STEPS THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO GO THROUGH FOR A larger project when I was director of housing we had a very substantial growth and enrollment every year I was there we went up but one year we went up higher than anticipated and we learned late in the spring that we were going to have to use a couple of residence halls that had been closed when we constructed new residence halls a couple years prior to that we had closed these with the intent of not reopening them but we needed the space so because this kind of
opportunity was available we were able over the summer to provide some necessary renovation and buildings that we had not put much money in for a few years because the plan had always been to close them and without this we could not have been ready in the fall to be able to meet the need so that's that's the bill in a nutshell it simply raises the threshold from four hundred thousand dollars to seven hundred fifty thousand dollars I'd be happy to answer any questions representative Bell I just
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:16:06
want to make sure I understand correctly
the current currently if you pass that four hundred thousand dollar threshold the project is bid is that correct well
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:16:17
in order to be on the list to be a job order contractor you have to go through a selection process and then the university selects based on criteria that they've established in advance they invite people to apply for that and then they are selected and once they are selected and placed on placed on the list then you can go to that job order
contractor for a project like this but they bid all of the subcontracting work you're basically initially instead of having go through a long process to get someone to leave the project you're you're short circuiting that but then they would still put out bids for plumbing electrical whatever was required with the project so if I was a small prime bidder
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:17:09
with this make those projects more accessible or less accessible to me typically it would be
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:17:20
more accessible because that by nature and by definition these are small projects and their projects that most trades people could handle unlike say a construction of a 50 million dollar residence hall where they may not have the resources to do that this would this would be something that practically any contractor would be able to handle
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:17:43
and this process makes that makes it more likely
that a small prime bidder who might not be able to get a large job
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:17:52
order contract could do that yes on a large project what happens is you occasionally
receive bids from a company to do some work that it's clear that their capacity to actually perform that in the time frame required is is in doubt but on something like this that that wouldn't that wouldn't be the case you know anyone could
bid on this and you go with a low bid so if they have
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:18:24
the best bid they'll get to work I think I understand represent Nichols I'm having to maybe I'm like Mr. Bell I don't I
see this as allowing work to be contracted without a bid is that
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:18:52
correct no there's a process first of all for
you to become a job order contractor and and that is a selection process I I believe last time the University of Arkansas put this out for bid, they had 11 bids. They selected three. And so that gets your contractors. And then when you actually have the project, they put the work out for bid, and you would get bids. Who has they put
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:19:22
the work out for bid? The
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:19:24
job order contractor and a partnership with the university.
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:19:28
Okay. Okay, well, if I'm a plumbing contractor and a piece of this contract is
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:19:43
was a low bidder, high bidder,
whatever, for that particular piece of work? Well, that would
be public information. In what way
would it be public information? IF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS SELECTING, THE FOI LAW DOES NOT APPLY.
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:20:00
THE JOB ORDER CONTRACTOR IS NOT SELECTING. THEY'RE PUTTING OUT THE BID. THE UNIVERSITY HAS TO APPROVE THE SELECTION. THEY SEE ALL THE BIDS, AND YOU WOULD
GO WITH A LOW BID UNLESS THERE WAS SOME PARTICULAR
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:20:17
REASON THAT YOU COULD VERIFY NOT TO GO WITH THAT LOW BID. I want a way for the contractors who do not receive the bid can see what the bid, the successful bid was, and maybe the university lobbyist can explain that this is or is not
public information. I know we had an issue at the Med Center on whether it was public information or not, deal with the contract not there and the court
Speaker 169
1:20:49
ruled it was not welcome to the table recognize yourself that for
Speaker 331
1:20:53
the record thank you Richard Hudson University of Arkansas at Fayetteville just a bit more background then I'll
Speaker 332
1:20:59
try to address your question specifically this as I understand this everything is bid the difference is the bidding is done up front so that you get on the approved
list you've already stated what your rate will be if you're called upon and so forth this is something like as it's been explained to me at home on my refrigerator I may have plumber Johnson's this number the electrician I'm ready in case something comes up in this case it's similar except to get on that list you've already gone through the bid process you've competed you've been selected you may or may not get called just because you're the job order contractor doesn't mean you'll get any business but if you're if you're owned
there and approved and your rates been established and all that and suddenly we need to renovate three classrooms between the fall and spring semester then we can call on that contractor every all the the advertising that bidding has all been done it's just a matter of now putting
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
1:22:03
him to work but so this does go down to what I would call the subcontractor level of the plumbers electricians the the carpenters there they have bid to do work for the
university is that what you're saying that's my understanding this is not just awarding it to a general contractor to make the decisions on who to hire as their subs yeah I'm not
Speaker 331
1:22:29
going to say for sure on that because I honestly
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:22:35
don't no I can okay the answer is no let me read from the actual guideline the contractor shall be required to bid all subcontractor work and the state agency
or institution of higher education shall receive and open the bids with the contractor present at bid opening and at bid openings contractors are allowed to be present at those as
Speaker 329
1:22:59
well when they're open you have relieved my concerns thank
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:23:07
and we have that on record representative Walker well
thank you madam's here well he he hasn't relieved man doesn't it appear this gives you the opportunity to engage in nepotistic practices you can
favor whom you choose on the basis
of determining who gets into that final list of three? And then the people who are outside that list of three have no recourse. First of all, answer that. Do the people outside the list of three have an opportunity to challenge their
exclusion from that list? I don't know the answer to that. That's fine. But here
I am. I've gone through the process of going all the way from Camden or West Memphis
TO FAYETTEVILLE TO MAKE A BID AND THEN SOMEHOW ANOTHER I HAVE A LOW BID AND I'M PRETTY CLOSE BUT I'M NOT TO BE CONSIDERED
FOR ANY FUTURE WORK FOR SOME REASON THAT I DON'T KNOW AND MAY NOT
BE ABLE TO CURE IN THE FUTURE ISN'T THAT CORRECT I DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY THAT YOU
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:24:11
WOULD NOT KNOW I SAT IN ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT BID AND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND WE REGULARLY GAVE FEEDBACK
TO THE PEOPLE THAT WERE NOT SELECTED THEY WANTED TO KNOW WHY THEY WERE NOT SELECTED But that feedback is not in writing, is it?
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:24:26
And it's not something that becomes where you have a record basis for later review or challenge. I don't
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:24:32
know if it's in writing. My role on the
committee was to provide my feedback that was gathered by the chair of the committee and how they communicated
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:24:40
that I'm not aware. I want you to understand my concern. The legislature in its wisdom, which I decry, has determined that there are only about four contractors or five in the state WHO ARE WORTHY TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE STATE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND THE BIGGER
ENTERPRISES OF THE STATE AND THEN THEY COME UP WITH A PROCEDURE WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN DESIGNATION AND THEN THOSE PERSONS DECIDE WHO THE SUBCONTRACTORS ARE. SO THIS GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ONE OR TWO OR THREE PEOPLE TO STEAL AND TO OPERATE AT THE WORST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE BECAUSE OPEN BIDDING, REPRESENTATIVE BILL AND THE OTHERS I'M SURE WILL AGREE, OPEN BIDDING IS DESIGNED BY THE STATE JUST AS WE DEALT WITH IN THE CAR AUTOM, THE AUTOMOILS SITUATION.
IT'S DESIGNED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THE BEST RESULT FOR THE LIMITED DOLLARS THAT THE STATE HAS TO SPEND AND THAT ALL CITIZENS OF THE STATE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN IT ON THE SAME TERMS. AND THERE'S A QUESTION IN THERE. That is the question. Now, why is it that you want to deny Mr. Bell, for instance, if he's a contractor, or Mr. Miller, if he's a contractor, an opportunity to participate on the same terms as these other people you've already predetermined to be your primary contractors?
Speaker 337
1:26:02
Well, first of all, your initial premise is incorrect. On very large projects,
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
1:26:08
you are correct that it is a handful of contractors that usually get the bid. And the reason for that is quite simply there are a handful of contractors that have the resources to handle a project of that magnitude. For what we're talking about today, we got all kinds of bids. I sat in on many of these, and we got bids from people who never even bothered to bid on the larger projects.
And, in fact, the people who got the larger projects typically wouldn't bid on these because it was
Speaker 328
1:26:39
too small for them to be interested in. Any other
Speaker 18
1:26:48
questions from committee members? I do not see anyone signed up
to speak against or for this bill. What is the will of the committee? representative Kerr do pass manager motion is do pass all those in favor aye
all those opposed nay the ayes have it another hand two hands roll
Speaker 245
1:27:30
Baird, Representative Hobbs, Representative Hopper, Representative Klemmer,
Representative Nichols, Representative Kerr, Representative Altus, Representative Altus represent Catlett represent Westerman represent Westerman representative Hickerson representative Overby represent Walker represent Bale represent Richie represent Dotson represent Dotson
represent a Miller represent of Hutchinson represent Hutchinson represent Wagner represent Wagner represent Wilkins all right my hearing needs to be
checked that failed actually it's a tie 7 7 so
Speaker 344
1:28:46
I'm going back my hearing was okay but it failed Point of
information? Yes. For a newbie, does the chair vote? Yes. Yes, and I voted yes. Thank you. Representative, but for the record, the chair doesn't have to vote, but yes, I did vote on that. Representative Hutchison, you have
Representative John K. Hutchison
Unverified
1:29:15
a question. Can I ask what we was voting on?
I'll talk with you afterwards. I mean, you know, I mean, to be honest, I'm sorry if that
Speaker 23
1:29:26
tends to lay down. Not a problem, but it wouldn't have made a difference. It needed 11 votes to pass.
Okay, thank you. No problem. Representative Hickerson, you're
Chair
Unverified
1:29:38
recognized to take the end of the table. This is Senate Bill 807.
It looks like you have
an expert witness. Now, is she speaking on this
or on baseball? She's going to speak
Speaker 99
1:30:05
on whatever she chooses to speak. You're correct. Let's
identify yourself for the record. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. I have with me Danielle Fusco, and she is here to answer any questions about this bill.
This bill basically is a bill just to clarify procedures pertaining to notary publics, and it is the Secretary of State's, from the Secretary of State's office, they approve the notary publics commissions. Basically, it adds some additional requirements for applicants for the notary public appointment, and it specifies that they must use blue or black ink.
It adds an additional reason for denial or revocation of a notary public's commission and several other things. And I would appreciate a good vote on the bill. I'd be glad to take any questions about the reasons for any of these changes. I see quizzical looks. Okay,
Speaker 115
1:31:13
here we go. Representative Kerr. Representative Hickerson I see in the
Representative Allen Kerr
Unverified
1:31:19
in the bill that you've added that he or she must has not been convicted of a felony yes sir that's a good thing and
that the Secretary of State may require that the applicant demonstrate that he or she received the law concerning notary public in other words they must be they must know the laws regarding what
they're doing well yes sir it says that he or she has reviewed the law concerning notary public and understands the duties of a notary public and if you'll notice in there says the secretary of state may require the applicant to do this they're looking at
a multiple-choice exam right now the notary public handbook is online applications they're looking at an application process online the exam would also be online the handbook would be available so that they could reference the questions it would all be taken from that handbook that's my understanding they just would like to I think Secretary of State's office would just like to make sure that they
have a an understanding of the laws pertaining
Representative Allen Kerr
Unverified
1:32:34
to to this Commission well these are all good good items I would as a side note I would love to see the Secretary of State's office do something about the day-long process it takes to get a notary public get a notary because my wife does and honestly it's every 10 years and I understand that but my gosh we had to take a day off to get it done oh well I think maybe there's a question in there yes
Speaker 193
1:33:02
wouldn't you agree yes madam chair I have a have a motion to
proper time yes sir representative Carr I would agree and I believe they're trying to simplify this with some of the online
filing in the online requirements thank
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:33:19
you representative Walker thank you madam chair what's the empirical evidence of the need
Speaker 355
1:33:25
for this I conduct our notary public seminars around the state I spoke to approximately 1500 last year alone and these suggestions actually came
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:33:34
from them. I was asking about empirical evidence is over against
anecdotal evidence. I'd like to know whether why the present situation is not working. My observation
is that notaries are very low paid people. The people in the public don't necessarily know where they are. They're often inaccessible. They may get $5, $10, $15, $20 for their work. it's not really a big issue. So why is the Secretary of State making it a big issue? I mean, is there some obvious problem as evidenced by data rather than by opinion that somebody says, here's something else we can do? Madam Chair, if it's
okay, Martha Adcock, who is the legal counsel, is here, and may I prefer that question?
Speaker 356
1:34:20
Absolutely. Identify yourself for the record. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Martha Adcock and General
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:34:27
Counsel for the Secretary of State. in representative in the sense of us having gone through and tabulated some of the answers or tabulated some of these things we haven't done it but I can give you because we do receive notary complaints and so there are several of these that some of them they did come from notary complaints not all of them we were trying to be proactive in some of this in regards to recognizing
that the folks who actually do this the actual notaries who go in for training many times they have the best suggestions on what should be the law in there and so we were trying to take part of it for being their lead for example one of the issues in regards to the blue and black ink we did that for financial institutions because since we are going to the technological age many of these things that we're doing now are being scanned and you have to have the right color of ink in order for it to scan appropriately and if you use a red or
some other color of ink that becomes difficult for scanning purposes and so that's why the specific thing is in there for blue and black and so we're just trying to make sure
Speaker 356
1:35:34
we keep current with some of the stuff that is done
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:35:42
and that was the reason for the changes I can question madam chair I understand
representative curves indicated he likes the felony inclusion is there any INDICATION THAT SOME OF THE PREEXISTING NOTARIES ARE FELONS, AND IF SO, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE
PARTICIPATING AS NOTARIES HAS CONSTITUTED A PROBLEM. I GUESS I HAVE A CONCERN BECAUSE MORE AND MORE WE'RE TRYING TO SAY FELONS CAN'T DO ANYTHING, AND SOONER OR LATER PEOPLE WHO HAVE FELON IN THE CONVICTIONS ARE GOING TO HAVE JOBS SOMEWHERE IN THE STATE. SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE THE EXPERIENCE IS WITH PERSONS WHO ARE FELONS EXECUTING NOTARIES. IS THERE ANY
Speaker 358
1:36:20
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON THAT? IN TERMS OF I CANNOT GIVE YOU ANY
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:36:24
SPECIFIC EXAMPLE TO THAT ONE. I DO KNOW THAT THIS IS A CONSISTENCY IN REGARDS TO OTHER STATES.
SO WE BRING IT IN THERE. AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A NOTARY TO TAKE AN OATH, THAT'S PART OF THAT. AND UNDER THE FEDERAL LAWS, YOU HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES IN REGARDS TO DEPOSITIONS. could and so therefore we think it logical for that in terms of the veracity and in terms
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:36:49
of then taking oaths etc the final question since there may be persons who
already notarists who may otherwise have been approved by a
previous Secretary of State and who may be a fellow does this grandfather those in or they immediately excluded as notaries they're not specifically grandfathered in but that means this they're not put out either I think
Speaker 362
1:37:15
well yeah I think you within you would have the question as to whether or
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:37:20
not they meet the qualifications well I don't see how you can take away a license that the state is given simply because someone has determined that they don't like the
fact that a person has or does not have a particular qualification well and I
Speaker 361
1:37:35
guess if you're looking at here in terms of where the idea of the felony comes in it is included
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:37:41
in the section on the application which would impact then if you're going to do it it would probably come into the fact that you're doing a renewal or a new application there is nothing in here that says we're going to go after those who already have the position
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
1:38:01
representative Hobbs thank you madam chair I see on page 4 line 4 you're adding taking depositions under rule 28 that's already in the rules right now and we just
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:38:15
wanted to make sure it was consistent within the code because if you look at the the rules the rules of civil procedure in both the state and the federal that's one of the things that notary is allowed to do and it wasn't then included within our statute so again we were just trying to update
the statute to make sure we knew
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
1:38:35
that it was authorized so by depositions you're talking about pre-court hearing top depositions yes ma'am thank you thank you madam chair
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:38:45
thank you mr. Walker Walker now court reporters thank you madam chair court reporters
are notarists aren't they not all of them But some of them may be, and they notarize their own work product, or at least they may notarize something associated with the depositions they take.
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:39:04
They may be notarizing something that they take. They should not
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:39:08
be notarizing their own work product.
Now, are you requiring a court reporter to meet the requirement of a notary? No,
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:39:17
sir, not unless it's there. That requirement for a court reporter is not set within here. so not at all representative
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:39:34
Bell well representative Walker brought up something that got my attention I've
been long long concerned about situations where we have an immediate family member notarizing documents for another family member is that addressed at all in this bill there's
not in this bill represented bail it's not is it do you know if it's any any other section no
because that is allowed and that's just something that has been
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:39:59
allowed that you can do it for immediate that's consistent across notary law
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:40:03
do you believe that that it just and I know it's not germane the bill I appreciate the indulgence just a second it's not
often you get these kind of experts sitting here at one time I don't
feel totally indulgent as it creeps up to noon so please be aware just is there is
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:40:20
that has that been a problem with potential fraud etc or have you not seen anything they're not really for family members and I think
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:40:27
Danielle may be able to speak to that the biggest some of the biggest things we have is people who may sign with the when the person is not the person who's actually present there and does the signature in front of them that's been some of our biggest areas of
concern is that they would notarize something that had been pre-signed and or in the person you know there wasn't presence there and they didn't know them breaking know their signature etc that's been our biggest area it's
Speaker 224
1:40:55
not been with a family member thank you oh most indulgent madam chair
Speaker 4
1:41:01
any other questions I I see no one signed up to speak for or against this bill I assume representative Hickerson you move do
pass yes ma'am all those in favor aye all
those opposed the bill passes we have one other person in the room representative slinkered if you're prepared
to present thank you madam chair and committee members I wish to talk about House Bill
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:41:45
1754 thank you mr. chair this is just
a technical correction in the wording
regarding when concerning the ballots for school elections currently in the of course they can use electronic voting machines or paper ballots this just rewards that so it's very clear that now the county board may use electronic voting machines or electronic voting tabulating devices or paper ballots counted by hand it just rewards that section there so it's very clear I'll
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:42:56
take any questions questions on committee represents low repeat you have
Representative Betty Overbey
Unverified
1:43:05
a question no question just do pass at the proper time represent
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
1:43:12
Hobbs thank you mr. chair I do have a question represent this linkered the way I'm reading this and maybe I'm reading it incorrectly but it looks like paper ballots counted by hand and provide no voting machines and so it looks like if you're going to use paper ballots you
cannot use any voting machines well normally in those school elections there is a provision in the law that says that if there are no other issues on the ballot for the school election and only the Canada there's no candidates I mean there's candidates but then they can hold their election by absentee or early voting and so this so that they get one vote so they can prepare paper ballots for that to be counted by hand okay thank you thank you mr. chair any other
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:43:59
questions is anyone signed up speak for the bill or against the bill represent the ovary of ovary I'll recognize motion from you recommended motion do pass all in favor say aye opposed
Speaker 84
1:44:19
congratulations represent it's like are you past your bill
thank you members Thank You mr. chairman may I also do 1756 right quick yes ma'am you're
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:44:31
recognized that 1756 Thank You members mr.
chairman and members what this bill
does it talks about a special primary election so often or sometimes it could happen when there's only one candidate in a special primary election that they have to go ahead and print ballots and do all of that as preparing for an election what
this bill will do if there's only one candidate in that special primary election then that candidate would be certified by the county board without having to hold that special primary election and also save some cost any questions of
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:45:25
committee mr. Walker I'll yield first to representative bill
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
1:45:33
this this specifically addresses special primaries and wouldn't have wouldn't directly address
like the election that we had last fall where the only candidate on the ballot didn't even vote for himself and wasn't elected does then is that kind of that that's not addressed here is that correct that's
correct this this just says if there is only one candidate then that candidate shall be certified thank you
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:45:58
representative Walker you're recognized for a
question thank you mr. chair does this preclude a write-in
candidate I'm not have to say that I'm not sure this is is only if there's a special primary election to fill a vacancy
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:46:23
in office is it not is it not your understanding that people
have a right to write in as a candidate for any Any position?
That is true, Representative Walker.
I believe that if there was only one write-in candidate, that it would be certified as having been elected without having to hold that special primary. May I have Ms. Martha Adcock from the Secretary of State's Office, General Counsel, to help me here. Well,
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
1:47:01
some of my colleagues are sort of nodding disagreement with me, but it's my understanding that the process of the Arkansas process allows for people to register within a primary for a competitive position.
Primaries necessarily mean competitive position. and then for others who may not be a member of a party or whatever
to be able to write in or get in otherwise by petition that's not your understanding okay if
Speaker 368
1:47:34
I may if I may respond representative Martha Adcock secretary of State's office you have your write-ins at
Martha Adcock
Unverified
1:47:40
your general elections and so if you have if you have the petition for somebody who wants to be an independent
or a write-in they file at this they file at the same time within the within the filing season and then they're on and their place is then on a general election ballot not a partisan primary and her bill only deals with a primary for a partisan primary you know we did have and if I can go back and just just jog your memory in terms of 2011 you had a hotly contested special election over
in East Arkansas to where you had two party primaries plus you had somebody who wanted to be an independent and so therefore you had the two party primaries that occurred one month you still had your independent and the independent was then placed on the general election ballot and if they want to be a write-in that also occurs on your general election ballot and so if If you have this one to fill a vacancy with what she's doing here, then your write-in would apply on your general election, but what she's changing here is your party.
Speaker 380
1:48:51
Thank you very much. You have satisfied me. Any further
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:49:02
questions from the committee? Proper time, motion due. I have a motion due passed. Anyone in the audience want to speak for the bill or against the bill? If not, I'll recognize Representative Klemmer for a do-pass motion. Motion do pass. All in favor?
Opposed? Congratulations. Representative Schlanker, do you have passed your bill? Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you, members. I'm all accept a motion to adjourn. All in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Thank you.
Agenda
HB1878
HB1457
HB1950
HB1665
HB1584
HB1130
HB1800
HB1819
SB422
SB803
HB1895
SB446
SB807
HB1754
HB1756
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Speaker 1
Representative Mary P. "Prissy" Hickerson Chair
Unverified
Speaker 6
Speaker 11
Chair
Unverified
Representative Bob Ballinger
Unverified
Speaker 18
Speaker 21
Speaker 22
Speaker 23
Speaker 7
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
Speaker 30
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 39
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
Speaker 48
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
Speaker 59
Josh Curtis
Unverified
Speaker 62
Speaker 4
Representative Ann V. Clemmer Chair
Unverified
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
Speaker 94
Speaker 96
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
Representative Sheilla E. Lampkin
Unverified
Speaker 121
Representative Nate Bell
Unverified
Speaker 93
Speaker 142
Speaker 32
Speaker 143
Speaker 150
Rick Leighton
Unverified
Speaker 165
Speaker 166
Speaker 169
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
Speaker 193
Speaker 194
Speaker 196
Representative Allen Kerr
Unverified
Speaker 205
Speaker 219
Speaker 115
Speaker 234
Speaker 235
Speaker 237
Speaker 242
Speaker 245
Speaker 114
Speaker 259
Speaker 261
Speaker 262
Speaker 265
Speaker 266
Speaker 269
Speaker 272
Speaker 280
Speaker 293
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
Representative Betty Overbey
Unverified
Speaker 309
Representative Randy Alexander
Unverified
Speaker 331
Speaker 332
Speaker 329
Speaker 337
Speaker 328
Speaker 340
Speaker 344
Representative John K. Hutchison
Unverified
Speaker 99
Speaker 355
Speaker 356
Martha Adcock
Unverified
Speaker 358
Speaker 362
Speaker 361
Speaker 224
Representative Mary L. Slinkard Chair
Unverified
Speaker 84
Speaker 368
Speaker 380