House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (8)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1839
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1839”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1840
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “right. House Bill 1840, Representative Rice. I don't see Representative Wilkins in…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1915
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…we'll be revisiting that I'm certain I'm going to pass over House Bill 1915 Representative Summers, are you back in the room for House…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1943
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1943”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB2167
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB2167”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HR1023
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HR1023”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB381
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB381”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB803
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB803”
|
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 5, 2026
...to adjourn by 1-15. So I'm going to go down the agenda, and I think we've got several that are not here. Representative Carter, I know one is
not here. Excuse me. Representative Harris is not here. Senator Johnson. Harris said that it deferred. And Senator Teague.
Representative McLean, Representative Nichols, I
believe you're standing there ready to go. So House Bill 1839, members, is next on
our agenda. Representative Nichols, if you will, present your bill. Thank
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
0:48
you, Madam Chairman, and I'll try to keep this quick because we're also serving lunch over the judiciary side. But if you probably noticed that I had filed several misclassification bills or at least
two or three others besides this one. And as a result from talking to the various folks that are involved in this issue, I've come up with something that I think Representative Parks is not controversial. The purpose here is that we have three state agencies that deal with the issue of independent contractors. The workforce services through the unemployment system, you've got workers' compensation
who deals with it through their system, then you have the Arkansas State Department of Labor that also deals with the independent contractor situation. And what I'm trying to do is to get those three agencies to share information if somebody is violating their particular law on independent contractors, and they also may be violating the other agency's law on it. So there needs to be some coordination there, and that's what I'm calling for.
You know, we have a, what, over a $300 million deficit in our unemployment insurance trust fund, and part of the reason is the misclassification of workers. They are really, they're not independent contractors. They are employees, and the employers need to be paying the unemployment tax. They need to be paying their workers' compensation premium, and those things that they try to keep from paying by classifying someone an independent contractor.
And it's not because they call them an independent contractor that makes them an independent contractor. They have to meet the definition under the law of being an independent contractor. So I think this is a modest proposal because these three agencies have different definitions of what makes it to be an independent contractor. But the positive of this, it should improve our unemployment insurance system and our workers' compensation system. So that's what is driving this particular piece of legislation.
And I will be happy to respond to any questions.
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
3:13
Thank you, Representative Nichols. with your presentation there
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
3:17
are some questions from some committee members at this time represent Wagner you're recognized
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
3:24
with the question thank you representative Nichols so your bill does not define independent contractor but just ask these agencies to work together is that correct
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
3:36
no that's correct see each of these agencies the Department of Workforce Services has its definition of
what is an independent contractor for purposes of paying the unemployment insurance tax. Workers' compensation has a definition of independent contractor that is different, but it's to those that are required to have workers' compensation coverage. The Department of Labor deals with it when people are not paying minimum wage or overtime, but they're calling them independent contractors. And they have a different definition, which is basically what the federal government calls far in the Fair Labor Standards Act so but in reality they're all kind of
similar and I think if one agency knows that another agency is looking at this particular employer for not paying under under their requirements they're probably not paying under the other agencies requirements and so this kind of forces them to get together and deal with the issue thank you
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
4:36
thank you mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Wagner. Representative Hall, you're a recognizable question. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
4:44
Chairman. Representative Nichols, can you just, and you may have answered this, but can you help
me how does this on your subtitle here or your title, it says to indirectly amend initiated act for 1948. Can you help me with that act and kind of walk me through where you're
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
5:04
at? I think I needed to put that in there any time that we talk about the Arkansas workers' compensation law, this indirectly deals with workers' compensation because we're asking those folks to be involved in this. I don't think it will, but sometimes amending a workers'
compensation law on the floor would require two-thirds vote. And so that's why I put that in there. But the other bills I had, I had actually split them out. I had one dealing with workforce services, one dealing with workers' compensation because those were directly impacting the workforce service and workers' compensation law. So it would require, if it's workers' compensation, it would require a supermajority.
If it's just unemployment comp, it's just a simple majority.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
6:00
But to summarize, and you're saying, in your opinion, you're really not going to be amending or getting into the
Speaker 24
6:07
initiated act? I don't think so. Okay. But someone could chat. Well, I just want to make sure
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
6:14
I'm reluctant to start voting against initiated acts of any kind. Right.
Thank you, Representative Hall. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized with a
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
6:31
question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I understand correctly what you said a while ago, there are different definitions for independent contractor within each
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
6:42
of these agencies. Is that correct? That's correct. Would this potentially cause some type of confusion if one qualifies
under one definition but not another? Well, I think they're similar
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
6:54
enough that if one is violating their definition
of independent contractor, in all likelihood they're violating the other. It's just that there is not a definition statewide on who is an independent contractor. And I think that there's enough similarities there that if one agency has a bad actor, they're probably having problems overall these other agencies also and I'm just wanting them to to share
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
7:24
information is there anything currently that would
preclude them from sharing information well I think they need some
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
7:34
strong encouragement from this body to do that and that's what this legislation does it It puts in, you know, I think what, semi-annually they're going to, at least twice a year, they're going to meet on this and report back to us what is happening. Do they currently have some sharing of information that already
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
7:54
takes place in regards to this?
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
7:59
In my discussions with DOL and Workforce Services and Workers' Comp, for the last several
Speaker 20
8:06
years there's been no sharing of information. And
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
8:11
my final question regarding this is, have you spoken with the agencies and what is their
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
8:18
stance on this as well? I have this language that you have is language that was provided me after I met with those three agencies and asked them to come up with some language that could accomplish this.
So I think this amendment before you, sometimes I hate to say that they are in total agreement with it, but I did meet with them. I did ask them to provide me with some draft language, and this was what was provided to me. Now, whether all three are definitely strongly on board, I assume they are, but I can't say they are. thank you
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
9:06
representative Mayberry are there any other questions from the
committee it's not representative Pinard to recognize with question
yes most of my questions were asked by a representative Mayberry so I have a motion do pass at the
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
9:23
appropriate time thank you representative Pinard that is noted representative Smith you're recognized with the question
thank you Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Nichols, is there anyone in obvious opposition to this bill that you know
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
9:35
of? They have not approached me about this particular bill. Now, some of my other misclassification bills I was getting some pushback on, but not this
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
9:43
particular one. Is there a fiscal impact involved in
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
9:46
this bill, do you know? I think it's part of I cannot imagine that there would be just requiring state employees to meet, you know, and exchange information. as Representative Mayberry was alluding to. I think they could do that now. They just
need the encouragement to do it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Smith. Representative Ward, you're recognized with the question. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Speaker 53
10:14
On page 3, line 16, this bill would require them to report semi-annually. Currently, are there any reporting requirement that these three organizations have to
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
10:26
meet? I'm sure that each agency has reporting requirements to the legislature on various things that they're involved in, but this is specifically directed to tackling the problem with misclassification of workers. So it would require that type of report to the legislature
twice a year. Thank you. Representative Nichols, I have a question, too. Does this require any technology
or any additional staff or anything in these departments in order to accomplish this report? The three agencies
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
11:06
I met with did not indicate that it would be any. It's kind of what they do now. It's just that they need to share it with each other.
Go ahead. All right, are there any other questions from committee members at this time? Is there anyone here in the audience to
speak for the bill, against the bill? Representative Nichols, would you like
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
11:32
to close for your bill? Just appreciate a positive vote,
committee. I'd like to recognize Representative Penartz with a motion. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. I recommend due pass on House Bill 1839. Okay. There's a due pass. All in favor, say aye.
Ayes have it. Congratulations, Representative Nichols. Your bill is passed.
right. House Bill 1840, Representative Rice. I don't see Representative Wilkins in the room
Senator Crumbly Representative Johnston for 1872 Representative Letting 1881 I'm let's see Representative Letting we've already done 1882 we'll be revisiting that I'm certain I'm going to pass over House Bill 1915 Representative Summers, are you back in the room for House Bill 1935? Representative
Nichols, are you prepared to present 1938?
being amended. And 1939? It's
Speaker 73
13:16
being amended. And Representative Dale, are you
Speaker 29
13:22
ready to present 1943? Representative Dale, you
may proceed.
If your guest will introduce himself again for the record, and you may
Speaker 75
13:35
go ahead and proceed. Robert Dale, State Representative, District 70.
Randy Young
Unverified
13:42
Madam Chair, Mr. Vice Chair, members, my name is Randy Young. I'm the Director of the Arkansas
Natural Resources Commission. And we're looking at House Bill
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
13:57
1943, members. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I apologize for my confidence earlier,
But maybe it will save us some time now that I will not go through the total introduction that I did before. But to briefly tell you, this is an act to provide the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission with authority to petition a court to appoint a receiver for a public water or sewer system. Its purpose is to furnish potable water and services to the citizens of Arkansas when the system has broken down financially or in maintenance wise and I'll take
those additional questions we had representative
Narsha recognized thank you madam chair as you know represent Dale I didn't get a chance to ask
you but I did get a chance to ask the gentleman sitting beside you a couple of questions about this bill I was especially concerned about the financial aspects and what protections there might be for the actual water system of the city or town could you elaborate a little bit about my concern
in regard to the the taking over of the water system and how what the sustainability of that water system once you all take it over because
we're We're talking about citizens having water or not. I think that maybe
Speaker 83
15:31
Mr. Young might be better prepared to answer that than I, and I'm
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
15:36
going to turn that over
Speaker 78
15:41
to him. Thank you, Representative Bernhardt.
The first goal of the Commission under this bill will be to work with those systems that are in distress and correct the ills, so to speak, get them up functioning properly, meeting all of the state and federal regulations, get in good financial standing, and in situations where there's problems with one or the other aspects of getting that, then ultimately we'd have the opportunity to work with an adjoining system and see if we can work out an agreement
for a merger, and if we were able to do that, then under this bill we would have to petition the local court, demonstrate the need and hopefully the agreement of the systems to that approach, and ultimately it would be up to
the court to do that. In that case, you'd have a judge that
sufficient evidence would be brought before that judge about a determination of the receivership, in other words? Correct. One other thing is in your experience, say for the past year, have y'all had to – what
do you do when you have a system like this that's near failure? I mean, I know you indicated you do some technical assistance, and I think that's a great thing because some of these small cities just don't have the expertise that some of our larger cities like Fort Smith and others have. I would like to hear from you what you're doing in terms of those systems you see
Speaker 78
17:29
as potentially having problems to avert receivership. Our current approach, we have a contract with the Arkansas Rural Water Association
to provide both technical and managerial support to those problem systems. And so under that agreement, they work with them to try to address those problems. And then also, we have the ability to provide financial assistance, and in most cases in these systems, they can't qualify for a loan. So we're typically left with having to provide grant funds to replace those burnout motors
or repair a bursted line, that sort of thing. And typically our approach in the past is if we see an opportunity to merge two systems, we use our financial carrot to try to encourage those two systems to get together and merge. And we've had some success doing that, but more often we're simply providing a $15,000, $20,000 grant to make those emergency repairs, and then it's
not uncommon to see them coming back in two years for a very similar type
of work. Well, on that point just there, and I think this is a good bill because you're trying to help our water systems and make sure that people have drinking water. On just that issue, when you have something like that, the scenario you just described, What is it that you can do in order to prevent them coming back again and being in a situation
where they have a problem again? Is there anything in terms of the technical assistance that you
can give them to address that issue of a relapse? In most cases
Speaker 93
19:28
where we have repeat problems, it's because they have a declining customer base, and they already have
Speaker 78
19:35
their rates up as high as their customers can afford. So in that situation, ultimately the solution is to see if we can merge them with a neighbor
system to try to deal with that. Well, I appreciate what you're trying to do here, Representative Dale,
and I think you do have a good bill here, and I think it will potentially help the citizens of the state, and I
would have a motion at the appropriate time. We'll recognize that motion at
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
20:10
appropriate time. Representative Smith, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess, Randy, it might be your question, but how viable is it to merge a rural system with another one?
I mean, is it a large, obviously a large geographical area? Would I be able to assume that? Several miles of waterways, water systems? Most likely it will
Speaker 78
20:30
involve smaller systems that doesn't serve a large geographic area. Did you mention this morning or did I imagine
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
20:37
this, that it's in southeast Arkansas where
you're most often seeing these failures, or is that something that you're alarmed about in that area? Is that right? At least
Speaker 78
20:48
what I intended to say this morning was east Arkansas.
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
20:52
East Arkansas, okay. But wouldn't there be a large geographic area most likely that we'd have to combine two systems? I think that's what you're talking about,
Speaker 78
21:01
right? It could be, but I think our experience is it's smaller systems, smaller geographic areas. Closer in proximity
Speaker 51
21:08
that might support one another? Yes. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Representative Lee, you're
Chair
Unverified
21:16
recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative
Speaker 100
21:20
Dale, I think you could be confident when you came in first thing.
I think it was a good bill, and I was just going to make that motion as well, but Ms. Penartz beat me to it, so thank you.
Thank you. Representative Wagner, you're recognized.
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
21:42
Thank you, Madam Chair. Who would be some examples of
a receiver where your bill reads that there would be a receiver? Who is that?
Speaker 78
21:54
Two that come to my mind, one would be, under this bill, our agency could be named the receiver. And another thought that I have, and I haven't discussed it with them, but I think they're here in the room and they can throw something at me, but the Arkansas Rural Water Association might, in fact, they have the expertise, the personnel. Conceivably, they might could be named
Speaker 106
22:23
a receiver. a follow-up question one other question certainly you may
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
22:28
follow up uh according to what you were
saying earlier this morning and then perhaps now it appears that some of these may just be because they don't have funds and then they're asking for a grant So is that what you would base entirely your decision on why they might have to go into receivership because they don't have funds?
Speaker 78
22:59
Certainly their financial situation is one factor, but that's just one factor.
To give you an example of an experience that we experienced a few years back, we had been working with this system that was having difficulty. And late one Friday, we got a call from the operator who says, I haven't been paid in six months, and I'm walking off the job today. Do you want me to leave the power on to the system or turn it on? And so that's the kind of,
really the kind of real serious problem situation that I think we could assist with under the under the authority that this bill would provide so
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
23:44
more likely that there would be several items that would
be wrong yeah certainly but you do make grants I mean people would not be afraid to to apply for a grant my experience
Speaker 105
23:55
is they're not bashful about that well I think you would
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
23:59
all of a sudden decide they had to be in receivership just because they asked for grant thank you
Thank you, Madam Chair. Seeing no further questions, Representative Penartz, you're recognized for a motion.
Madam Chair, if I may, I'd like to yield to my colleague, Representative
Lee. Representative Lee, you're recognized for a motion. As always, Representative
Speaker 100
24:31
Penartz is gracious. I move, do pass. We have a motion due pass.
Anyone in the audience who would like to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience who would like to speak for the bill? If not, the question before the committee is approval of House Bill 1943. Thank you. I'll indicate approval by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. So, committee, without objections, there's a couple of bills that I'd like to go ahead and bring to the top, if we may.
House Bill 2023 is a resolution for SHRM. I'm going to go ahead and bring that to the top. And Senate Bill 803 for Senator Teague, he's asked if we could go ahead and listen to that bill today,
and I'm going to present that bill on his behalf. Do
Speaker 118
25:42
you have 2023? It's 10, it's 1023, sorry.
Where is it? Well, we might not do
Thank you, Madam Chair Present your
bill Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair Members, House Resolution 1023 is simply proclaiming April 13th as the Arkansas SHRM Human Resources Day SHRM stands for the Society for Human Resource Management and
you can see the resolution there in front of you.
I just might bring to your attention that in 1983 I was president of this association and spent a number of years in this association,
so it is a little bit near and dear to my heart. So
I would appreciate a good vote. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Lee, you're recognized. Do pass. All right. Chair sees a motion. MR. I'm sorry. Representative Penartz, you're recognized. MS.
I apologize, Mr. Chair. I did have a question. Would typically do you know personally whether these individuals deal with health benefits or these? MS. Yes, ma'am.
They do. MS. Does human resource mean health benefits?
MS. They mean health
Speaker 131
27:56
benefits and labor. MS. For example, could you give
me an example? Like the Fair Labor Standards Act or the health insurance for
employees, compensation for employees, the Title VII Act for employees.
Are typically these individuals are typically in the administrative part of an organization? In other words, they're not in the delivery of
products. They're normally in the administrative side of a business? Generally, that is so. It
depends upon how the corporation or organization is structured. It may be
that they could be deployed to the line side and be a part of the line staff, but generally they are part of the administrative section of a business.
On page 2, you mentioned something that I was not aware of.
On page 20, I'm sorry, Madam, Mr. Chair, lines 21 and 22, does this conference or do you know if our Labor Department participates in that conference I do not know the answer to that
I have personally participated in
it many times and I think that they have been there as speakers but as whether or not they attend as participants I do not know well the
The reason I was wondering is if they do deal in employment law, what I was concerned about, which
was an issue we just talked about before, and that is our unemployment fund, which we have a problem with now, and are these people normally people that are involved in that issue at their place of business? Yes, ma'am, they would be. And
I guess my point there is that since you have been a member, I would – if you could
just check for me personally whether these individuals – whether they anticipate at this annual conference entertaining or having
topics on this issue, because I think it is important in light of the major problem that we have with unemployment, the trust fund. Penartz,
I will be glad to do that. I am certain that they have had those on their agendas in the past, but I will certainly
spend time with this organization and make sure that they have the information to be able to have it on the agenda
in the future. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker 53
30:47
Chair. Thank you, Representative Penartz. Representative Word, you're recognized with a question. I see that the conference is held in September. So why would you not maybe have this day in September rather than April 13th?
Mr. Ward, I think that it's in conjunction with a national SHRM day is the reason April 13th has been selected. So the CHRM, the Society for Human Resource Management, is a national organization, and I believe they've selected that date on that basis. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Ward.
Are there any other questions from the committee at this time?
Is there anyone here in the audience to speak for the bill, against the bill? Madam Chair, would you like
to close? Members, it's a great organization. I think you'll find many of your constituents' businesses employ these individuals, and I
would just love to be able to honor them. Thank you. Okay. Representative Lee, you're recognized with the
motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do pass. Okay. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Those opposed. Ayes have it. Congratulations, Madam Chair. Your bill is
passed. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. I'd like to be able to present Senator Teague's Senate Bill 803, and I would invite, with your permission, the Health Department to join
me in presenting that bill. Okay. And that is Senate Bill 803? Yes, sir.
Okay, you may present the bill.
Thank you. If it pleases the chair and the committee, I'll let the Health Department gentleman to introduce himself and to present
Robert Brecht
Unverified
32:46
the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Robert Brecht, Deputy General Counsel for the Arkansas Department of Health. What Senate Bill 803 will allow is the State Board of Health to set a fee that is currently in place in statute. The Health Department has run a radioactive material licensing program for many years.
Unfortunately, the fund balance that operates that program has been rapidly depleting, and there is a need to increase those fees. If the health department does not increase the fees and does not operate the program, then all of these radioactive devices would be regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. If that were to occur, the rates that Arkansas businesses would pay would go up an average of 1,900 percent. The one example that I saw was UAMS.
Their bill would go to $66,000. They currently pay about $2,000 to $3,000. We've committed to raise the fees no more than 15 percent of what the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would charge. The bill actually says that the cap would be 25 percent, but we have committed to the Hospital Association and other businesses that we would not ask for more than 15 percent of that fee. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions that you might have thank you are there
any questions from the committee at this time representer
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
34:12
Wagner you recognize with a question the the fees that are listed here there's no change so this is what they were well and you're asking for 15% above this no Actually,
Robert Brecht
Unverified
34:29
what are listed in the statute that's been there for many years, what we would be able to raise through rules and regs, it would be no more than 25 percent of what the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would charge.
Those fees are much higher than what they're currently in the bill. Actually, a 15 percent increase would raise most of those fees probably by around 200 percent, but that's still much less than the 1,900 percent that Arkansas businesses would have to deal with. That's why they're very much in favor of us continuing that program Motion
at the proper time Thank you represent Wagner representative Allen you recognize Motion
Hey, I see two motions. Is there any other questions from the commit a committee at this time? Is there anyone in the audience would like to speak for the bill? Against the bill Representative Wagner, are you recognized with a motion? Motion do pass. Okay. Motion do pass. All in favor say aye. Aye. Those
opposed? Ayes have it. Congratulations, Madam Chair. Your bill is passed.
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
36:26
House Bill 2167 is dealing with the HIV Task Force. As you know, two years ago when this legislation was first, first became law, one of the things that took place, it was very, very difficult for us to get off, for the HIV Task Force to get off the ground. And then finally the HIV task force did get off the ground. And then there was also problems with the HIV task force having a quorum.
And it was because of the language and the way it was written. And what we want to do is modify the language or relax the requirements so they can have a quorum. And I have with me today is Adonia Trotter who is over the minority task force and without objection I would like for her to make a few
comments your recognizes state your name and who you're
Speaker 153
37:31
with for the record thank you thank you representative
Speaker 154
37:34
Allen mr. co-chair appreciate the opportunity this task force has done a wonderful job
I'm actually the director of the Arkansas Minority Health Commission and through Act 842 which created this particular task force they've done a really good job over the last few years of promulgating and educating the Arkansas communities about HIV. However, this task force has always had a difficulty in obtaining a quorum. The reason why is that the language of the law, although it was really meant for good purposes, it basically is just too rigid in that it does not allow, even with us working with the Governor's
office these are appointees through the governor's office but we've not been able to find people to fit the strict requirements that the law currently has and so we have asked that and we would appreciate it if this committee would allow this particular bill and that it would loosen the rigidity of the requirements for membership but yet maintain the spirit of diversity that this particular task force seeks to have thank you thank you we'll be happy to
answer any questions are there any questions from the committee at this
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
38:57
time represent Wagner you're recognized with a question
thank you mr. chair you mentioned that this would that having a quorum would be loosened the the number needed and did you mean that or did you mean just the types of individuals who would be on the board
Speaker 154
39:19
would be the right now the law requires night has 19
individuals to be appointed right now there's only four that's actually appointed and it's so therefore even with those four there's not a quorum they really would need ten people to be there in order to make a quorum for valid decision-making processes. And as we've worked with the governor's boards and appointments and as we've tried to even seek out people to fill the positions, there just has not been the ability to find people
that are able to fill the positions. And I can give you one example. The one example of one of the appointees is that it would be a member of the Department of Human Services HIV unit. Well, the problem with that appointment is that the Department of Human Services does not house the HIV STD hepatitis C unit. The health department does, so that position would never be able to be filled. So there's just some tightening of it that needs to be done, and then to loosen some
of it so that we would be able to get really there's a lot of people that want to be a part of it but because they can't meet the specific rigid requirements of each of those then they just simply not been
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
40:42
able to get a quorum so how many members will you
Speaker 154
40:48
have and therefore how much for a quorum what this bill request is 13 to bring the number from down from 19 to 13 members and then there would be a need for at least seven in attendance to make
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
41:00
a quorum all right and one other question please does this task force
have an end date or is this will this go on
Speaker 154
41:07
forever yes act 842 requires I think through 2015 very good thank you thank you mr. chair thank you represent a Wagner represent
a word you recognize to know the number
Speaker 158
41:19
of task force members that was currently on the board
Speaker 53
41:24
I would actually be a part of the board so she did ask my course by saying 19 thank you representative word
Speaker 44
41:36
representative Smith you're recognized thank you mr. chair I have motion it's proper
time okay motion is noted are there any other
questions from the committee at this time is there anyone here in the audience like speak for the bill? Against the bill? Recognize. Representative Allen, would you like to close for your bill? We're closed. Representative Smith, you're recognized with a motion. Do pass. All right. I see a motion do pass. All in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Ayes have it. Congratulations,
Representative Allen. Your bill is passed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. Thank you. Members, I think we still have one other non-controversial bill. Is that right? Senate Bill 381 that Vice Chairman Woods would like to run on behalf of Senator Dismang. If you would, take your place at the end of the table. Senate Bill 381. Excuse me? Yes.
We have two more. Is that what you say, Representative Allen?
All right, you're messing with him. Vice Chair Woods, you're recognized, please, and have your guest introduce himself for
the record. Thank you, Madam Chair,
and thank you, colleagues. Senator Disming asked me to run Senate Bill 381, and to my left I have Kent Schroeder, who's the Director of Assisted Living. And I'll just go ahead and start in. It's a simple bill, from my understanding.
Senate Bill 381 did receive a unanimous vote in the Health Committee and the 34-0 on the floor. It allows assisted living facilities to be reimbursed on a per diem basis as opposed to record start-stop times on personal care. The new method will cut down on paperwork, and it is revenue neutral. Arkansas Medicaid is not opposed to this bill, and no
one has voiced opposition from my understanding. I'd be glad to take questions. Thank you.
Representative Penarch, you're recognized. Thank you,
Madam Chair. Representative Wood, you're indicating that the Department of Human Services is in favor of this bill. That and or no opposition. Well, which is it? They are or
they aren't? My understanding is no opposition.
They're not opposed to the bill. All
right, which is a different thing than they endorse
the bill. I would agree with that. Okay.
Are you telling me that there's no fiscal impact to this bill at all because you're adding assisted living facilities for Medicaid personal care services on a per diem basis? So your testimony is that there's no added or there's no fiscal impact? I was told that there is
no fiscal impact, but with your permission, I'd like to have Ken Schroeder maybe clarify that question.
Speaker 164
44:47
Thank you. Assisted living facilities are already a place of service for Medicaid personal care.
What this bill will do is change the way that the record-keeping is done for that
Medicaid personal care. Okay. Could you explain to me, if you're already providing personal care services, how is it that
this makes it any different then? I mean, what's
Speaker 164
45:14
the need for this bill, then, if you're already doing it? Presently, what's happening is that residential care facilities are being reimbursed on a per diem basis. It was determined by a committee that through House, through Act 1421 of 1999, that that's a better way to reimburse in the congregate setting, but assisted living had not come to pass at that time.
So whenever the multi-hour daily service rate or the per diem rate came to pass, it was only for residential care because there were no assisted
Speaker 166
45:51
living wasn't included in that act. So all we're asking for them to be included in that. Excuse me,
sir, just a moment. So what is the per diem for
Speaker 164
46:03
RCFs now? What is it? It's a multi-tiered program. It covers 10 tiers of levels of
care. Would that apply to ALFs if we added them here?
Would those same ten tiers apply, or you're
only talking in terms of personal care services? Are those in ten tiers?
Speaker 164
46:23
Yes, they are for residential care, and we would hope that DHS would do it exactly the same in ALFs.
Okay. So all this does then is merely put
you all on the same playing field as the RCFs for per diem reimbursement? Yes. And how is that
not an increase in – how does that not have a fiscal impact because
you're already being paid for personal care services? I'm having a problem saying you're already paid for it, but now you want to be
on a per diem basis. So what's the difference
Speaker 164
46:59
if you're already being paid for it? If an RCF converts to an assisted living facility, which they're allowed to do, and they're presently as an RCF being reimbursed under this per diem rate, when they become an ALF, they have to go back to doing the minute-by-minute. In other words, when an aide starts a service, they have to record the start time.
When they're through, they record the end time. Like it's a fee for service, almost. Like it's a fee for service, almost. Yes, it's still the same. In other words, all the assessments are still the same, the amount of money that gets paid for the services is still the same, it's just that they are reimbursed on a per diem rate rather than on a minute-by-minute timekeeping rate, which is very time-consuming and onerous for the facility operators to try and keep
up with. Okay. So if we were to look a year from now, if we came back and had this in mind based on
in your statement, we wouldn't see an increase in Medicaid because of this change? When it
Speaker 164
48:05
started in RCFs, I don't think there was any increase at all, and really this program, due to the number of eligibles, has been decreasing over the last number of years. Just
one further question, Mr. Chair. How many ALFs are in the
state? About 70. And how many RCFs?
Oh, 70-odd. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Woods. Madam Chair. Representative Wagner, you're
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
48:41
recognized. My questions have been answered. Motion if appropriate. Okay. Any other questions,
Committee? Seeing none, Representative Wagner, your motion. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass. the audience who wishes to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience who
wishes to speak for the bill? If not, Representative Vice Chair Woods, are you closed for your bill? I'm closed. Thank you. Members, the question now is Senate Bill 381. All in favor of do pass. Indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, committee members. Committee, do
you think we got enough work done today? Absolutely. I think we are adjourned.
Agenda
Call to Order
HB1839
HB1943
HR1023
SB803
HB2167
SB381
Adjournment
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Linda S. Tyler Chair
Unverified
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
Representative Garry L. Smith
Unverified
Representative Charolette Wagner
Unverified
Representative Jon Woods Chair
Unverified
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
Speaker 24
Speaker 29
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 20
Representative Tracy Pennartz Chair
Unverified
Speaker 53
Speaker 66
Speaker 69
Speaker 73
Speaker 75
Randy Young
Unverified
Speaker 83
Speaker 78
Speaker 93
Speaker 51
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 100
Speaker 106
Speaker 105
Speaker 118
Speaker 120
Speaker 119
Speaker 131
Robert Brecht
Unverified
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
Speaker 153
Speaker 154
Speaker 158
Speaker 44
Speaker 164
Speaker 166