House Public Health, Welfare & Labor Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (9)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SB496
· 5 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB496”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1555
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1555”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1741
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1741”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1776
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1776”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1778
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1778”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB27
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB27”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB345
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB345”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB379
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB379”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB437
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB437”
|
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
Ladies and gentlemen, if you will take your seat at the table. We'll
go ahead and get started. We have a lot of work to do today. Thank you very much. The chair sees a quorum and we will call this meeting to order. We are going to take a few things out of order this morning to assist some of our colleagues down in the Senate.
So without objection, I'll kind of manage the agenda for a few
minutes, and then we'll get back in order. Senator Dismang, are you here? If you will, take your place at the end of
the table. And I believe we'll be looking at Senate Bill 496. Is that right? Yes, Madam Chairman. And I see Senator Burnett is going to help you with that. Yes, ma'am. And Representative Tommy Wren, my goodness, Senator Dismang, you've got lots of help this morning. Well, I might need all I can give, so. If you will, just introduce yourself, not that you really need any introduction,
but introduce yourself here and proceed with your bill. And also, Senator Jonathan Dismang,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:13
and if you all, do you mean go ahead and have everybody else introduce themselves too? That way, we just have that open dialogue with the committee. Senator David Burnett. Representative Tommy Wren. Again, thank you committee members for letting us kind of come to the front of the line. I know we've got some guys who want to go out of town to make the funeral this afternoon. Senate Bill 496 addresses the Civil Action by Crime Victim Act,
which gives injured persons a remedy for damage where none existed before. That was the purpose of that act. Under the Adult Maltreatment Act and the Medicaid Fraud Act, an injured person already has recourse to pursue the caregiver or health care provider for civil damages. This bill removes those duplicate remedies. I'd be happy to
take any questions. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
2:15
Senator, I just wanted to make sure that we weren't taking any sort of remedy for for people who are victims in some way that we are
that they're they still have some some form
Speaker 6
2:34
you mind if I go address that okay I didn't
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:38
know if you're no but yes it down through bottom well articulated but no problem those code sections you see there 5-28-101 and 5-55-101 at first is the adult maltreatment act and the
Second is the Medicaid Fraud Act, and victims have under both of those the right to pursue civil damages for any cause. And again, I'm not an attorney, but we've got one here, or actually we've got a judge here that I think might be able to speak to that a little bit more. If you don't mind, Madam
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
3:09
Chairman, I'd like to pass it over to him to continue on with that answer. Thank you, Madam Chairman. In answer to your question, this does not restrict any rights that a person might have as a result of maltreatment.
It's still covered by the criminal statute specifically. It does not restrict one's right to sue. In fact, there are all kinds of criminal actions that can be a subject matter of a civil lawsuit. It just simply removes the duplication and nothing more. In fact, the only comments I've had in opposition to the bill were a single email and a letter from AARP.
You would think if lawyers were interested, there
Speaker 11
3:56
would be some objection from that source, and I've received none. Representative, you may go ahead
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
4:06
and proceed. Thank you. Well, the reason I actually brought up that question is because I did receive one email from a lawyer with a disability rights group who had commented to that effect. And so I wanted to make sure
Speaker 11
4:20
that that concern is alleviated. There were a
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
4:24
few lawyers who used those statutes in civil actions.
Most lawyers didn't. Most courts would disallow it. That's the only way I know to answer that.
Griffith, if Mayberry you finished, Doc Gaskell, you were
Speaker 35
4:46
recognized. Morning, Senator Burnett. All those years I had to appear before you, now
Speaker 38
4:51
you're here in front of me. Doc, I remember when you were there, for sure.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
4:58
Well, again, I wish I hadn't brought that up. But those were younger than wild age. We're not taking anything away from the people. I mean, are we setting limits on what they can sue? No, sir. If somebody really gets injured in a nursing home and we see that, frankly, if I may be graphic, I don't give a damn what we do to them if we own the nursing home. That does not limit this, does it? No, sir. Okay,
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
5:26
thank you, sir. There are statutes that limit recovery, however, in the tort reform bill,
But this particular act has nothing to do with the amount one can sue for, nor does it restrict their ability to sue for a tortious injury. Okay. Thank you, Judge, and thank you for being here. Well, thank you, Doc, and you don't have to bring me coffee today. Representative
Wilkins, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Judge Burnett, Line 35, Section D.
It does not eliminate them statutes, is that right?
Yes, it eliminates those two criminal statutes. Those two criminal statutes give a person that's criminally wronged certain rights, both civil and criminal. It allows the government to prosecute and to investigate. And it does not restrict one's right to sue
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
6:27
actually allows it. But it says it does not apply to offenses under Section 528-1.
That's because it's a duplication. That right is given specifically in the statute, and there's no need for it to be in this statute.
So we're not eliminating it in statute? No,
Speaker 317
6:54
not at all. Okay. Thank you, sir. Representative Smith, did I see your hand? Yes, ma'am, Madam Chair. Thank you. Judge, Senator, whatever we're going
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
7:02
to need to call you today, who's opposing this bill? I've received one e-mail and a letter that contained the same information from the AARP.
I haven't been spoken to by anyone particularly about it.
Speaker 67
7:12
Do you know why they might have implied that they were opposed
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
7:17
to it? I think they didn't understand. Didn't understand it? I didn't understand and felt like perhaps it was removing some right that a person might have, and it does not, in my
Speaker 317
7:28
opinion. So is this then a good bill to
help eliminate some duplication and maybe even, if I could say this, reduce government?
Speaker 64
7:39
I don't know if it would reduce government. If it's
Speaker 72
7:42
duplicate, it would, would it not? Senator Dismayne, would you have a comment
Speaker 64
7:50
on it? it helps it would help a judge that was hearing the
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
7:55
case where the civil action where those statutes were raised and that has happened and you've had differing opinions given on that and it would clarify that okay then it would be a better government
Speaker 317
8:09
bill yes in that sense it would alright thank you thank you madam
chair representative word you're recognized Madam Chair, motion at the proper time. I
Representative James L. Word
Unverified
8:30
got copies of the statute if you need them.
Representative Ward, we'll get right back to you in a moment. Looks like we've
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
8:49
got a couple more questions. Representative Wilkins. Now, is this eliminating the possibility that a person who injures someone in a nursing home could
be charged with a felony? Does not. Absolutely does not. Those statutes are still intact. They can still be implemented by the federal government, the state government, I think even provides for local government to prosecute for criminal activities that occur to our
elderly or, for that matter, anyone. Thank
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
9:28
you, Madam Chair. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized. Thank you, ma'am. I guess I just have a little bit of concern. What would be the downside, what negative impact would there be? And I understand we don't need to have lots of just duplicate stuff around, but if this were not to pass, what's the worst-case scenario?
And I preface this with the fact that I just have concern about making a change to something If there is a question, that someone may not be able to have that. You want to try and follow through? Yeah, go ahead. I'm going to
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
10:10
try the best I can to answer that for you. But the Crime Victims Act was really put in place for when there was not recourse for victims that wasn't already there.
And like we kind of said before, that recourse, that allowance is already provided before in these two acts and in other places too. but in these two acts. And so, again, we're not limiting these individuals, these victims' rights in any way. All it is is really that act is for instances where there's another recourse available to a victim. I guess my question, again, though, is what is the
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
10:52
downside if we were not to pass this?
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
11:00
it would be confusing in the courts, for one thing. If you utilize this statute in a civil lawsuit, the judge would have to decide whether or not to allow an attorney to use the statute in a civil action. And that's come up, I know, on one or two occasions. The downside is that would be the problem with it, the fact that you've got conflicting
statutes that allow for the same remedy. Representative DeWart, I think
we're ready for your motion. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill 496. I know we have some folks signed up to speak for and against the bill. bill, Senator Dismang, if you will, if you all will just step aside, we'll let the members of the public speak. We have signed up to speak against the bill, Ms. Martha Deaver, Ms. Deaver, if you will
take your place at the end of the table, introduce yourself and the organization you represent for
Martha Deaver
Unverified
12:17
the record, and you may proceed. Thank you very much. My name is Martha Deaver. I'm the president of Advocates for Nursing Home Residents, and I am here today to represent our organization and nursing home residents across the state. Advocates for Nursing Home Residents are strongly opposed to Senate Bill 496.
This bill attacks the ability of nursing home residents to hold nursing home operators and their staff fully accountable when crimes that rise to the level of a felony are committed against them. Nursing home residents do not lose their basic civil rights when they enter a
Speaker 101
13:05
nursing home. Sadly, the government data shows year after year that their basic rights are violated
on a daily basis. To have the
Martha Deaver
Unverified
13:17
latest government data showing that 78 percent of Arkansas nursing homes have been cited for having an environment that caused accidents, 60 percent cited for poor quality of care, 52 percent cited for poor food sanitation, and 47 percent cited for failure to prevent bed sores is deplorable. According to the last year's survey
Speaker 101
13:39
data, Ms. Deaver, Ms. Deaver, I'm going to ask you
to speak on the bill, which has to do with, I believe, the elimination of duplicate code.
Martha Deaver
Unverified
13:55
Would you speak on that bill, please? Yes. From what our organization understands, this bill makes nursing home residents' evidentiary burden higher than other Arkansans. And because there has been over 2,000 violations for actual harm to residents last year, we
feel like the nursing home residents need protection, not the nursing homes. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.
Deaver. Committee, any questions? Representative Wilkins, I see you have a question. Ms. Deaver, will you take questions? Of course.
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
14:33
Thank you. Ma'am, I appreciate your passion for this. I share that
passion, but I cannot read the same thing that you're reading, where it's a – it puts an undue burden, a ponderance of the evidence is pretty well what it caused,
you know, what you have to have to get charged with a felony anyway. way. Right. So I cannot – I don't understand who you're seeing that it makes it harder for a
Martha Deaver
Unverified
15:04
resident to file a felony. All I know is that our members and members of our organization and other attorneys have looked at this bill, and this is what we have been told. If this is not the case and it's simply a duplication, then we do not oppose the bill.
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
15:22
Madam Chair, would it be possible to
have Judge Burnett come back to the table just a minute and explain the
difference in this felony and another felony? We will do that before we take a vote,
but let's go ahead and hear from the members of the audience, but we'll make sure we get back to that before we
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
15:46
take a vote, Representative Wilkins. Thank
you, ma'am. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
15:58
I think my question is already answered, but I just want to clarify, if this truly is just an elimination of duplication, that your group, your organization would not be opposed to this bill? No, sir. Okay. Thank you. All right.
Anyone in the audience wishing to speak for the bill? We have next on our list to speak
against the bill. I believe these are together, Ms. Gloria Jordan and Herb Sanderson with AARP, if you will
take your place at the end of the table, introduce yourself and the organization for the record and then you
Speaker 124
16:47
may proceed. Thank you. I'm Herb Sanderson with AARP Arkansas, and we are here to speak against the bill. Mr. Sanderson, before you go
ahead, the lady to your right, would you go ahead and introduce yourself and we'll have that all done.
Speaker 127
17:01
I'm Gloria Gordon, also with AARP. Thank you. I
Speaker 124
17:07
think there is confusion on this bill. i'm not an attorney however our staff in washington dc who follows legislation for the rights of older people around the country have reviewed this bill and say it is a bad bill uh... that it does not just and duplication but it takes the rights of older people or families of older people why
uh... this bill was number thirty on the agenda today uh... I think it needs to be slowed down, and we need to get to the bottom of this, because we're being told one thing, that it only eliminates duplication. But our staff in Washington believes it goes far beyond eliminating duplication. And I'm not an attorney, so I can't really get into the weeds of this, but I've been told by other attorneys that it does more than eliminate duplication. So all I can do today is ask you to vote against the bill or defer it until we can get to the
the bottom of what is really going on here, and I would ask you to do that for all the people that are in nursing homes that could be affected and the family members
by this bill. Members, any questions? Ms. Gordon, you have a comment you want to make?
Speaker 127
18:33
Yes, I do. Do you have your mic on, ma'am? Yes, it's on. All right, thank you. The section of code that this bill is going to change is basic civil rights law.
And the attorneys for AARP in Washington commented that this is one of the strongest state statutes that they've seen. And I don't think we should mess with success. This is an excellent statute giving every Arkansan of any age the right to pursue a legal action in cases where the abuse rises to the level of a felony. Now, you've heard testimony that this bill is necessary to make it easier for some judges to rule in cases.
Well, the judges who rule in malpractice cases understand all the statutes. We really have no obligation to ease their burden. The obligation that the legislature has is to protect the most vulnerable citizens in this state. AARP is not concerned with the first statute cited, But the second statute, 528-101, that's excluded from this global civil right, has to do with the rights of nursing home residents and residents in other long-term care facilities.
Now, we're talking about the elderly and people with disabilities. And if you look up the history of 528-101, it says in 1988, it is hereby found and determined by the General Assembly that during recent months, certain inadequacies in the continuum of health care for older citizens of the state have been brought to the attention of the General Assembly. This act is necessary to assure each citizen of this state in need of long-term care that a high quality of care at affordable cost will be provided.
It was amended in 1993, and here the General Assembly said that the Attorney General and the prosecuting attorneys are in need of specific legislation to protect endangered adults in the state of Arkansas. Now, we have residence rights in Arkansas Code that are duplicated. They're duplicated because we all care about this very much.
Now, we have discussed this bill with malpractice attorneys, with trial attorneys, with the people in Washington for AARP, and it makes us very, very uncomfortable. And what is the great need to eliminate spelling out that the most vulnerable people in Arkansas are entitled to be protected. I mean, there is no need for this bill.
Absolutely no need. And according to malpractice attorneys who bring suits on behalf of victims, this code does affect their rights. It affects their ability to collect attorney's fees and other issues. They are not going to be permitted to use the term crime when they discuss the civil action. So there are little nuances in this that none of us understand, and I really don't think
that in the interest of getting this bill out in such a rush, it's been rushed through the Senate before anybody understood what it was, before anybody read these other statutes. This bill is not necessary, and the potential for doing harm is enormous. So I feel more strongly than Mr. Sanderson that you should just not pass this bill, because I'm sure you're going to regret it later.
Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Gordon, for your
testimony. Senator Burnett, I think we had a question for you. If you could join us back at the end of the table. We have no one else signed up to speak for or against
the bill, but I know we have some questions still, so we'll go ahead and get those questions completed. Representative Wilkins, you're recognized.
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
23:21
Senator Burnett, as I read this bill, and I've read it several times carefully
here. This in no way inhibits anyone. I mean, a felony is a felony. If there is felonious injury against someone, then nobody can say
that they can't be a
felony filed against them. Of course not. The lady was very eloquent in her summation of 555. It basically is very good legislation that protects persons in nursing homes and abused people, and it's
a strong statute, and it does not repeal the statute. It simply doesn't belong in this particular section that we're asking that it be removed from. It provides the protection that she's saying is desperately needed. I wouldn't be here advocating this particular bill if I thought it would limit, reduce, or in any way affect a person in a nursing home or extended care facility.
I've handled, in 26 years, many, many malpractice cases. And this bill simply, they're confused on what they think the bad effects of it would be. They're just simply not there. The burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence in a civil case. On the other hand, in a criminal case, the burden is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a higher burden. And if you're talking about this bill eliminating the right to bring a criminal action,
it does not do that. The lady that testified previously testified to a number of statistics. Those statistics all dealt with the basis for a civil lawsuit, had nothing whatsoever to do with the criminal statutes. If a crime is committed, it's a crime. The statistics of abuse she cited were grounds for civil action, certainly. But I probably more than answered the question.
Let me ask you one more question, Madam Chair, if you'll indulge me for a minute. Okay. Statute 528-101, if I read this right, it says this does not apply to that statute. Does it change that statute in
any way? No. Those two statutes will remain in full force and effect and available to anyone that's injured or aggrieved by a criminal act.
Well, having known you for a lot longer than any one of either of you care to admit. Maybe Doc will be longer than
Speaker 49
26:11
good. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Ford Law, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam
Representative James L. Word
Unverified
26:30
Chair. Do you have your mic on, sir? Yes, I do. Probably not close enough. Judge if you don't mind could you Reiterate on page one where it's the only page. We got line 28 through 29 for me, please. I
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
26:51
here. Sorry about that. All right You're talking about the right to
Representative James L. Word
Unverified
26:55
recover attorneys fees yes yesterday That was one of the things she brought up
Speaker 43
27:00
while ago and just to point that out That still applies in this act. We're not removing that from the civil action,
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
27:09
not at all. If you bring a civil suit, you know, this particular bill will provide for attorney's fees.
Representative Mayberry, I'll let you think too long. Sorry.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
27:30
I very much understand what you're trying to do here. I guess I still just have a little bit of concern that we're not purposely but possibly inadvertently doing something that might not be the best in general. The first lady who testified earlier had mentioned that her group, for instance,
They just kind of felt like they had not had enough time to thoroughly review, have their attorneys look at that. Would there be any consideration of possibly holding this bill until some of those folks had more of an opportunity
to look at it a little more closely? I mean, I'll
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
28:12
just say this. I mean, we are coming up to the very end of the session. You guys have a very long agenda. I mean, I made sure that the senator was able to take part today to be able to clarify anything that needed to be clarified.
I think the follow-up, even with some of the testimony, if you did, you know, the representatives from AARP said the only part or issue they had with the bill was the 5-55-101, one in which she went on to say it was a very good piece of code, a very good statute, something she was very proud of, and we are too. And we're trying to make sure, and I'll follow up just a little bit on the other part. And so we're all in agreement, really, whether or not we understand that we are or not.
The other thing is, and I've said it before, probably most of you guys that have served before, our responsibility as legislators is to provide clarification when needed. whether it be judges, attorneys, or whoever, all parties involved. If there's something that we discover that needs clarification, parties bring that forward and request that we do that. I mean, that's our job. And so, again, I think just for the time frame that we're working in at the end of the session, the workload that you have, and the fact that we have to get everybody together to make the presentation that we did today,
I mean, I can't ask for a good vote, but I would appreciate one. And I hope that – I mean, I don't want to discount anything there, but that's kind of the reality of where
we are in this session. All right, seeing no further questions, Representative Word, I think we're ready
for your motion. We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill 496. All in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye. All opposed, no. No. Ayes have it. Senator Dismane, you have passed your bill. Thank
you. Members, we're going to still skip around, recognizing that we've got some Senate members who are trying to leave town to attend Senator Fitch's funeral, and we're going to
recognize Senator Malone, if you will take your place at the table. Senator Malone, we're going to be looking at Senate Bill 437,
Is that correct? Senate Bill 437 is where we're going to go next. He needs a copy of the bill. I need to go to him.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
31:07
Members, this first bill I bring before you is Senate Bill 437. It's a new approach to control the misuse of pseudoephedrine to try to get a better handle on what we have out, what's going on in Arkansas, and briefly, as brief as I can can be. We dealt with this about five years ago, put pseudoephedrine behind the pharmacy
counter, limited to those sales. In that time frame, it was in convenience stores and everywhere, and it was just being horribly abused to the point that there were many labs across Arkansas. If any of you saw any news reports or television reports, there would almost always be a baby toy, a baby bottle or something that would show that there was a child in that area when
that explosion occurred. There was a tremendous number of children that were being treated at the Arkansas Children's Hospital. The first year after the bill came into effect, those burn instances decreased 69 percent. year they think there might have been one so we've been the bill was very effective in that way however what we have now is not the big labs but they'll buy small amounts and mix in a coke bottle and do all things like that so this bill they have before you today number one it requires a pharmacist to make the sale not a technician number two
When someone has an identification, they will have to have an Arkansas driver's license or an Arkansas-issued identification, and that will be at the Department of Finance Administration Office, and those cost $5, and they won't be able to get both. If they have a driver's license, they will not be able to get a photo ID. They will not be able to type the number in the lead zone lab device. It will have to be scanned. It doesn't scan, no deal.
The reason we had the looseness of the bill was about 20% of Arkansans, by and large, most of that 20% are senior citizens and don't have a driver's license, and we wanted to make it where that everybody would have access to that medicine. It's one of the only ones that people can buy over-the-counter that really works. So we didn't want to go to the draconian route of requiring people to have to go to a doctor to get a
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
33:48
cold tablet. I think that's the sum and substance of the bill.
I'll be happy to answer any questions. Senator Malone, it's the Chair May. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. On the back page on Section 6, Line 20, in addition to providing what happens with pseudoephedrine, I believe we also are giving the State Board
of Pharmacy additional – the opportunity opportunity or the authority to adopt rules for other drugs. Would you speak to that just a
little bit for us, please, so that we're clear on how that works and why that provision in the bill?
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
34:26
That's in there so that we don't have to wait for two years if there's another substance that comes on the market that's in the marketplace before we can require it to be sold by a pharmacist, and that's the intent. I know the pharmaceutical manufacturers aren't very happy about this Section 6, but it will allow the Board of Pharmacy, after they've had public hearings, they have to go through the Administrative Procedures Act, but they can take a substance that's available now
and put it in this category. There's a product called dextromethorphan. Some of you had cough syrups, there's a product brand named Robitussin, DM, dextromethorphan. We're beginning to see that it's beginning to be abused and somehow taken out of those cough syrups. And if that product, if that takes off and it becomes a problem, then the Board of Pharmacy can do with it exactly what we're doing here today to give them that authority.
MS. So just to follow up on that, as it goes through the administrative procedures,
it would come before the rules and regs of the legislature, right, before that would be adopted? MR. Right. MS. So it's
not something that the pharmacy board can do that independent of the
Speaker 173
35:51
legislature. MR. Good point. Absolutely. And it will be impossible, in my view, in Arkansas with
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
35:58
the Administrative Procedures Act, and the fact that they do have to bring it before rules and regs for them to do something
nilly-willy, and they never have, and hopefully they'll never have to invoke this chapter or this section, but that's right. It will be before the rules and regs, and that'll be a point where everybody
can voice their concerns. Thank you, sir. Members, any other questions? Representative Ward, you're
Representative Ward
Unverified
36:26
recognized. Thank you, Madam Chairman. In your presentation, you said that this
would only allow the pharmacist to make the sale of these particular drugs and not the technician. Yes, sir. Now, I know that currently I purchase Sudafedrican and all, and now the technician can actually
provide the medication to me, but the pharmacist signs off on it. So the technician will not be able to handle it at all? Is that what you were saying? No,
Speaker 27
36:52
they can handle it, but they cannot make the
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
36:56
sale. Could I add a little bit more to that question, an answer? Certainly. As you know, I'm in the pharmacy business, and my stores don't sell but maybe one or two or three boxes a day. And we lie and say we don't have it.
We take care of our folks, and we don't have those lines at my pharmacy and at most pharmacies in Arkansas. We had at least two choices. One was to put it on a prescription, and some of us, in fact, it turns out to be the attorney general, the governor's office, State Board of Pharmacy, Pharmacy Association, and a lot of doctors support this bill. I can't say the medical board or association because I don't think they've done a poll.
But the point is that we've done everything we could, including to require the pharmacist to sell it so that they make a determination that it's for a legitimate purpose so that it doesn't have to be on prescription. That's what some states have done. And, folks, Arkansas is a rural state, and you do have pharmacies in a lot of these towns, even sometimes when they don't have doctors, and they can go there and get their medicine. But it is a serious enough threat on the other side for the abuse that most pharmacists,
that it wasn't unanimous, believes that it should not require a prescription. It should not require somebody to pay $50 to go to the doctor to get the medicine. And so I can tell you almost unequivocally, if I had my druthers, I would not want to have one of my pharmacists using, they cost a little bit more than a technician to go over there and have to sell a cold tablet. But that's part of what pharmacy is about, taking care of the people. And, yes, it can't be the technician.
It has to be the pharmacist. And the Board of Pharmacy then has the authority to monitor and keep up with the sales. And if somebody is getting out of line, out of proportion to the number of sales, for instance, one of my stores went from three a day to 40, they'll come in and look at it. DEA does not have the ability, they don't have the staff to enforce that, much less the hydrocodone issues in the Schedule 3 drugs, much less this product.
And by the way, last point, last thing, hopefully, there's some that are advocating prescription only. Well, let me tell you, hydrocodone is prescription only. Schedule 3. And it is one of the most abused drugs on the street there is. So putting it on prescription does not solve the illegal distribution part of it. But
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
39:50
we think strongly that the public should have access to this cold medication.
Representative Gaskill, you're recognized. Thank you. Good morning, Senator. Good morning.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
40:08
We've been there before, haven't we? Yes, sir. I've had you for me and against me. I like it a lot
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
40:18
what people fail to realize is that we take pharmacists for granted. You have a doctorate in pharmacy. Those of us in the practice of dentistry and medicine, we depend on you every day to guide
us, and you know that, don't you? Yes, sir. Do you remember the Darvon Compound 65 controversy years ago? Yes, sir. I'm that old. And I relied on my pharmacist to warn me ahead of time what was going on with that. And we depend on you every day, and I think this
Speaker 186
40:50
is good. I just really can't find anything wrong with it. Thank
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
40:54
you, Madam Chair. I'll tell you what he's talking about. In that product, there was a little thing, a tablet, a little, and they take it out and
it began to be of use. So, yeah, I
do remember that. sorry members we're just trying to get our calendar organized here seeing no other questions what's the pleasure of the committee we have a motion do pass from representative lovell for senate bill 437 do we have anyone in the audience who wishes to speak against the bill mr. hauser if you will take your place at the end of the table Introduce yourself and the organization you represent, and you may proceed.
Leo Hauser
Unverified
41:48
not hear you. Yes, sir, we will do that. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the committee. My name is Leo Hauser, and I'm representing today CHPA, the Consumer Healthcare Products Association. that is the trade association representing the manufacturers of the over-the-counter products, including products containing pseudoephedrine. I'm here this morning at their request to express our opposition to the bill on several
points I'd like to offer for your consideration. And number one, before I get to that, I want to just personally express my appreciation to Senator Malone for all the work he has done for so long to try and address the issue that CHPA stands arm-in-arm on, and that is trying to get our hands around the problem of methamphetamine. We're in the business of making good products. Unfortunately, sometimes those products are taken by bad people and used for horrible reasons. So, Senator, thank you. We appreciate that. To the bill, the first thing I would ask for your consideration
is in Section 3, where the bill, as Representative Ward, raised a question about the pharmacist only accessibility point for pseudoephedrine products. CHPA believes that this will create another access barrier for the consumer, the legitimate consumer, and is going to have a dampening effect on the availability of the products in the legitimate market. It's also not far-fetched to assume that this could create a problem
for pharmacists who have more than enough to do as it is is, and asking them to add this to their plate of activities could again create some problems for the legitimate consumer to get their necessary medicine. To Section 4, which Senator Malone raised regarding the need for an Arkansas-only based ID. Number one, I'm not an attorney. I don't have any particular expertise in interstate commerce, but I do believe on behalf a CHPA, we believe that having a state-only issued ID is going to create access issues
for people visiting here, traveling through, vacationing, and it is going to have another impact on sales. And finally, to Section 6, which I believe the Chair raised, that has to do with the additional authority granted to the State Board of Pharmacy. We're concerned that this is really going to first of all seed authority from the legislature to a state agency, and that is strictly your purview if you choose to do that.
And Senator Malone is correct, as the Chair asked, that rule changes that would add additional products to this list would have to come before the Rules Committee. In my experience of 19 years here, I have not seen anything to lead me to believe that the Rules Committee's job is to simply review, and I do not know that the Rules Committee has the legal authority to block rules. They review.
I stand to be corrected, but just raise that as an issue of concern. And finally, the bill, and I understand Senator Malone's urgency in wanting to do something to address the problem. The bill came off the Senate floor yesterday in very rapid fashion and is here this morning for our discussion and your consideration. We believe that there is more that needs to be discussed and shared so that this committee can make a fully informed decision, and we're asking if the bill cannot be opposed to the
extent where it fails. We ask the bill to be put in a position where we can have another hearing where folks from CHPA with the expertise they have to come in and address this body. With that, I would thank the committee and the
Speaker 193
45:46
chair again for the opportunity, and if there are questions, I'd be happy to take them. Thank
you, Mr. Hauser. Representative Smith, you have a question. Thank
Speaker 317
45:56
you, Madam Chair. Yes, I do. You referred to in Section 4 that it has
to be an Arkansas-based driver's license or identification.
Don't you think that this is intended to slow down out-of-state trafficking from illegal purchases, that is, people out-of-states in Junction City, maybe Texarkana or Fort Smith on border cities that might come across the border with an out-of-state license, and at current rate they could use that license or identification, and will this Section 4 border plate, that would prohibit that and help slow down illegal use of these kinds of medicines? Don't you agree that's what that's there for? I
Leo Hauser
Unverified
46:33
think that's a very plausible possible scenario you raise, and this could have that impact you talked about.
There is one other thing I would like to share with the committee, which is a program that CHPA has available, will make available to any state that wants to implement it, which is a multi-state tracking service. What it does is allows a state that chooses to use this service to connect with other states that are choosing to use this product a border state or any other, and it is real-time, point-of-sale, electronic data that will pick up on a person going, as you described, state to state, especially in the border corners
of states, and clamp down on this cross-state purchasing. What's the cost of that system? That system is absolutely free and is given to any state that wants to use it. But how long would it take to implement it? I would have to ask someone from CHPA, and the reason I need clarification on that is because currently the state is using a program that Senator Malone referred to, the Leads on Labs program, and I offer what I say not to displace Leads on Labs.
That is not why I bring this up. I'm told by CHPA that NPLEX, the program they offer free, is compatible or can be made compatible with what Leads does. It is an add-on that creates a multi-state tracking system, which may be actually more effective than going to a state-only issued I.D. But I think the state-only issued I.D.
Speaker 317
48:07
would be a very good prohibitor right now, don't you agree? It could very well be under
Leo Hauser
Unverified
48:13
the way you outlined it. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. Hauser. I see
no further questions. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Committee members. Yes. Senator Malone, you're recognized to close for your bill. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you. Representative Malone, you have a question. Is it for Mr. Hauser? Oh, it's for Senator
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
48:41
Malone. All right. Representative Malone. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Senator, I apologize. I stepped out earlier to go to the restroom. Is it true that you have to have an Arkansas ID to purchase?
Yes, ma'am. So anyone coming from out of state, if they're here visiting, like when my friend from New York comes and if she has a sinus headache and needs to get Sudafed from behind the counter, she wouldn't be able to do it? No, ma'am. So I could buy it for her and then she could take it back? Yes, ma'am. I guess I'd have
Speaker 206
49:08
to. Let me give you a little bit longer. It really doesn't fix the trafficking
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
49:17
issue, I guess, is my question. Well, no, we are not going to fix the problem.
Oregon put it on prescription five, six, seven years ago, and they stopped having them have access. The honest people and good people had to go to the doctor to get a prescription. But the people that wanted methamphetamine started buying it from Mexico. So the sales of Sudafedrine are down in Oregon. The number of instances of people using methamphetamine is up. So I don't propose to tell you this is a perfect bill. It is not a solution. It is not the perfect solution. But the other alternative is, there's two alternatives.
If this bill doesn't become law, I suspect, and to my friend, Mr. Hauser, the law is going to be in this state. You've got to have a prescription. And then not only will you, your friend from New York, have to find a doctor in Arkansas, or get their doctor to call, or you're going to have to get your doctor to call. So this is, in my view, a much better alternative to keep the product on the streets for the legitimate users. Did that answer halfway, Ripson Malone?
Speaker 202
50:26
I didn't. Halfway. All right. Thank you. Well, to finish that, it is going to
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
50:31
require an Arkansas driver's license and to to represent Smith's
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
50:36
point a while ago, Mississippi has put it on prescription, and they're just going to surrounding states. And currently they can have multiple identification cards, so it's out of control. And we all know we've got to do something. It's just a matter of is it going to be a prescription or is it going to be the pharmacist?
So that's it. Let me just close with this. Leadzone Labs does it now. They can do
a lot of things, and they're going to tighten it up. Senator Malone, I'm sorry. We have
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
51:12
one more question before you close, if you don't mind. Representative Perry. Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Malone, on Section 4, when you go looking at this, I live in an air-based community. We have people who are, you know, they don't have an Arkansas driver's license. Would this under the Department of Finance and Administration, would that be from any
state or just Arkansas? Arkansas. Okay, so if I have a military member who comes in, he doesn't have an Arkansas driver's license, but he has a military ID, he would not be able to get this. Is that correct? Now, you're
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
51:48
talking about somewhere in Arkansas or at the Air Force Base,
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
51:54
in that pharmacy. Well, I see military people in Kroger all the time getting prescriptions.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
51:59
Federal law supersedes what we do in Arkansas.
So at the VA or at the military base, this law wouldn't apply. So whatever they're doing now, they could continue. But yes, if
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
52:13
they want to go to Kroger's, then they're going to have to have a valid reconcile ID okay all
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
52:25
right thanks center center you're now recognized for
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
52:36
your clothes let me go briefly leads on lab is a company that that scans
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
52:41
will scan no longer be able to type in a number they're going to provide reports that will go out to law enforcement upon request rather than law enforcement having to go to the database. When we
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
52:55
talk about the pharmacist's time, yes, they're busy, but they're not too busy to do what they signed up on when they became pharmacists, and that is to take care of their
patients. It is an Arkansas driver's license, an ID, and I've checked with some attorneys, including the one in the governor's office. It's their opinion that Arkansas can do what it, without worrying about interstate commerce, can do what is necessary to protect the citizens of Arkansas. Those that are visiting Arkansas now, if this bill becomes law, will absolutely have to have
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
53:33
either a prescription or, as Representative Malone said, someone goes to the store and
buy it for them. The pharmacist knows. The impact on sales, we heard from Mr. Hauser. I'm here, interestingly, I've had several bills
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
53:48
this session, and every one of them is going to cut business from my pharmacies, so I wonder why I'm here. Let me tell you, I like it, put it like it was, or leave it like it is, and we can quit saying no, or we can quit saying we don't have them, and I suspect I could probably
and make a half million dollars a year or more in the stores that I own by just opening the doors and saying, come on in, bring those IDs, bring them in from out of state, come over here from Mississippi and all those places, and we'll let you load your wagon. But that's not what the pharmacists in Arkansas are saying to you. They're saying, we need to get this under control, we're prepared to spend the time and talk to the patients that legitimately need it, and we'll do our best to keep the ones that don't need it away and so in the last part about the State Board of
Pharmacy yes that's what the State Board of Pharmacy is for to protect the public health and welfare of the citizens of Arkansas and if we have another product that comes out like Sudafedron that gets abused as this is I've not ever known them to be radical or look out for my interest as a pharmacist they look out for the interest of the people of Arkansas and they may if necessary come before rules and regs to get this approved but I tell you this this group or any other group will not come in there and even though mr. Hauser's right
all we do is review we can't say no but I don't think there's very many agencies going to come before this legislative body and do differently what they're told, because budget season rolls around pretty often. So I'm comfortable, I hope to ask for a good vote, and this is to protect those people in Arkansas that are being harmed by – children being harmed by their parents or step-parents getting this stuff and putting them in harm's way, so I appreciate a good vote.
What is the pleasure of the committee? Representative Gaskell, you're recognized Do pass We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill 437 All in favor, say aye Aye All opposed, no No Ayes have it Senator Maloney,
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
56:15
you have passed your bill Thank you Could we take, I think it's 435 The prescription drug monitoring program 345, I'm sorry, 345
345, yes, sir, we can. And I'll hopefully be briefer. I'll ask someone from the governor's office, from the attorney general's office, and anyone else that wants to get up here. We'll get it all at one time, and we won't have to have a bunch of people speaking
for it. Senator Malone, we have an amendment, I believe, that you have on that bill. The staff is handing that amendment out. Yes.
And as soon as that amendment gets passed out, if you will, speak to the amendment first, and we'll take care of the amendment first, and then we'll get to the bill. Thank you.
Speaker 173
56:53
Oh, did you go get him? Yeah, he did. Oh, ask him to come up here. Well,
come on, sit down with us. This is the amendment. All right, am I ready to go ahead with the amendment? Yes, sir, and if you will have your guests at the end of the table, go ahead and recognize themselves and state the organization they represent for the record.
Speaker 227
57:29
Representative Tim Summers. Fran Fleener, State Drug Director. Gene Block with the
Attorney General's Office. Jerry Jones, Department of Health. All right. Senator Malone, you may
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
57:46
go ahead and discuss your amendment. Thank you, Madam Chair. The amendment that's in front of you gave us
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
57:53
an additional comfort for all of us for the privacy part. This has been an issue that has been strong for all of us.
I was opposed to this bill for at least two sessions because we couldn't quite
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
58:06
get it worked out to make sure that the public would be absolutely assured that their health records or prescription records were safe. In this amendment, it says that a certified law enforcement officer has to have a probable cause and get a judge to issue a search warrant. So the
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
58:30
way the bill is presently written, they could just request information and get
it. This says they cannot without probable cause, and a judge has to agree with them. It's agreed
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
58:41
upon amendment, and I ask you to please adopt the amendment. Committee, you've heard the amendment.
Any questions on the amendment? We have a motion due pass. We have a motion, I believe, from Representative Hall. What is your motion, sir? Motion due pass. We have a motion. On amendment. Thank you. To adopt on amendment. To adopt the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Price. We have a motion to adopt the amendment.
Any questions on the motion? All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. There was no. All right, Senator Malone, you may go ahead and proceed presenting your bill. Thank you.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
59:19
I'm going to start out with Jerry Jones and let them go around, and then
Speaker 237
59:26
maybe my remarks can be shorter. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the Committee. This bill is
Speaker 240
59:31
to cut out on the incidence of abuse and diversion of and addition to controlled substances while ensuring the patients who have chronic pain can legitimately get their
medication that get it in the time and manner in which they so much deserve. In 1997, the pharmaceutical manufacturing produced enough controlled substances to apply possibly 100 milligrams of controlled substance for every citizen in the U.S. at that time. In 2007, that number had increased to almost 700 milligrams of controlled substance per person. That's enough controlled substance to give every person a Vicodin tablet every four hours for three weeks. That's a lot of medication on the market.
In 2007, there was 11,500 deaths due to overdose. And for each overdose that you have, you have approximately nine abuse treatment admittances and 35 emergency department admittances for abuse and overdose. If you live in Jonesboro, Arkansas, and you can obtain 250, 40-milligram Ossacontin, it's not that difficult to do if you go to one doctor. You could sell that on the street for approximately $10,000. That's pretty good income.
We have a problem. We feel like this bill
Fran Fleener
Unverified
1:00:47
will help reduce that. Thank you. My name is Fran Fleener. I'm the state drug director representing the governor's office. To give you a little bit of more background than Dr. Jones did on how this bill came to where it is today, nationwide prescription pain relievers are abused or we have more first-time users than any other illicit drug combined, that includes
heroin, cocaine, marijuana, the rate of first users is higher. Today, today, Thursday, in this nation, 2,500 young people will start down the path to addiction through using prescription pain medication. Today. And it's not just today. That's every day. 2,500 per day new initiatives of young people. So when we began to look at those figures, we thought, well,
maybe that's not the case in Arkansas. But we found out that in Arkansas, the latest report of the National Drug Czar's Office ranks Arkansas as number one. We're number one. So as a result of this, and when we begin to really look into this, we put together a working group that included about 30 different agencies, directors, associations, including the health department, the attorney general's office, the pharmacy board, the pharmacy association,
medical board, all right on down the line, the DEA, the Sheriff's Association, the Chief's Association, to put a prescription monitoring bill together that would protect people's privacy, because that was utmost in our minds. We have to protect people that have legitimate pain needs and give physicians the assurance that they're doing what they need to do.
From that is the bill that you see before you today. We're very proud of it. There are several people in this room. Ray Scott, I saw a little bit earlier, worked on this as well as there's more folks in the room. If you have questions, they'll be glad to answer them. But we have a tremendous problem. We're only one of five states in the nation that does not have this legislation in place. We feel like that this will have a tremendous effect on saving people's lives,
and that's what we're about. I'll be glad to answer any questions that you
Jean Block
Unverified
1:03:36
might have. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee. Again, my name is Jean Block. I'm with the Attorney General's Office. I am here on behalf of Attorney General McDaniel, who would be here. He is en route to a funeral, but he believes this is an important issue and testified in support of the legislation when it ran in the Senate last week. We believe that the prescription monitoring program will be an effective tool
in addressing drug diversion and drug abuse in Arkansas. We felt that our role at the table was to ensure that there was limited access to the data and that the confidentiality of these records would be maintained. And to that end, you will find that there are numerous provisions outlying the confidentiality of the data. The data is not subject to a FOIA request. It is deemed confidential. It is not subject to a subpoena or discovery in a civil proceeding.
In addition, with this morning's amendment, law enforcement will be required to have a search warrant before they can access the data. In short, we believe that this monitoring program will be our most effective tool in reducing doctor shopping, pharmacy shopping, prescription forgery, and the resulting diversion of prescription medication into illegitimate channels. Thank you. Tim Summers, Representative.
Representative Tim Summers
Unverified
1:05:03
Colleagues, the panel so far has discussed statistics and data with you. Most of you know that I'm the director of a drug and alcohol rehab in northwest Arkansas. This is an opportunity to save lives. I refer to a young lady that grew up next to my house who was University of Arkansas cheerleaders, a lovely young lady in her 30s who died from an overdose of prescription pills. We see that constantly in our treatment center and the other treatment centers around the state.
This by no means solves the problem, but it is a huge first step in addressing this. Drugs and prescription pills are an epidemic in Arkansas. My grandchildren live in Fayetteville, and I'm more concerned about prescription pills, pharmaceuticals, than I am about street drugs or alcohol with them. And this will save lives. It will make a difference, and I urge you to pass this. Thank you.
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
1:06:06
Let me just add, I think this will be a tremendous bill to help the true pain patients in Arkansas. It's getting to be more and more difficult for a chronic pain
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
1:06:20
patient to have a doctor that will stick with them and provide the medicines they need, because now doctors are under scrutiny from DEA. The doctor does not know if they've been doctor shopping. And so they tend to say, after about the third prescription, well, I can't take care of you, and then the person has to go somewhere else.
And that promotes doctor shopping. And we have a significant number of people that are true pain patients. And this bill will allow their doctor to know if they are doctor shopping and will make them a lot more comfortable to take care of them for the long term. And I want to make sure that people in the audience and the press picks up, this is not suggesting that everybody that's taking pain medicine is taking it for the wrong reasons.
This will allow pain patients to get their medicine, doctors, dentists. Folks can always go to a dentist and say, I've got a toothache, and a dentist can't see the pain. And so historically, that's what they'll do. Or they'll give them something to stop the pain. This way a dentist can look and see if they've been getting this medicine or any kind of pain medicine anywhere else before they write a prescription. So I think the reasons they've all told you are excellent reasons alone to vote for it, but for the legitimate pain patients in Arkansas, this is going to be a way to make their life
much better. I'd answer any questions and appreciate a
good vote. Representative Wilkins, you're recognized for
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:07:54
a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mine may be more of a statement than a question, but I'd like to address Dr. Jones when he mentioned the place in Jonesboro. I know how bad that is. I've talked to the Drug Task Force and Sheriff's Office, and I spent a long time in law enforcement, and I still got somewhat of an information network.
And I've had, in the last eight months, I've had two young people. Children, I call them, but they're 21, 22-year-old, take me by and point that place out to them and say, you can get anything you want there. So, you know, if this will help curtail that and give us the information to get that guy, then I'm 100% behind it.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Seeing no
further questions. I'm sorry. Representative Ward, I see your hand.
Representative Ward
Unverified
1:08:49
Thank you. You're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Will this monitoring program be in an additional
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
1:09:02
cost to any of the local pharmacies? Bless you, neighbor. Thank you for saying that. No, it will not. No. No, in the bill, let's look at the last page. The bad part
of this bill is funds have to become available through the health department.
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
1:09:26
And the governor is an attorney general, but the governor specifically in this case on the budget side is asked that this be done this session. That was the first call I got from Governor Beebe that he said we need
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
1:09:40
this kind of deal. But he did want in there, because of the budget constraints we have, the effective date, operational is by focus March 1, 2013, which is a ways off. But it will take
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
1:09:56
time to get the system in place and to make sure there's funds available to take care of it.
So it will not be on the backs of the doctors or the pharmacists. It's going to be on the
backs of the taxpayers of Arkansas. Representative
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
1:10:17
Perry, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got a question for Dr. Jones. You wouldn't by chance be a distant relative of Jerry Jones with the Cowboys, would you? We need some help on this NFL issue to get it settled.
But I have a motion at the proper time. Seeing no other questions, Representative Perry will – and we'll come to the public here in a moment, but Representative Perry will take your motion. Representative Perry will
Speaker 249
1:10:52
take your motion. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Motion do
pass. We have a motion do pass. Do we – As amended. As amended. Thank you. audience who wishes to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak
for the bill? Seeing none, all in favor of Senate Bill 345 as amended indicate by saying aye. All opposed, no. Senator Malone, you have passed your bill. Thank you very much and thank you, committee, for
Speaker 238
1:11:21
your indulgence this morning. Safe travels, sir. We're
still going to skip around just a little bit. We're going to recognize Senator Key. He has a couple of bills he'd like to run this morning. I think the first one is Senate Bill 27. Senator
Key, if you will, take your place
Speaker 251
1:11:44
at the end of the table. And you may
Speaker 253
1:11:50
proceed. Thank you. Senate Bill 27 is a bill that adds to the current statute that requires the reporting to the law enforcement of gunshot and knife wounds that come into a hospital for treatment. What we're adding in this bill is the reporting of certain types of burns.
This was brought to me by the Far Marshal of Harrison, and right now when burns come in to an ER, to a hospital, they could be meth burns, they could be burns-related arson, and there's just no reporting mechanism. I've worked very closely with the Arkansas Hospital Association to get this language right. It's also been reviewed by the Medical Society, and they're happy with it. The two specific types of burns, if you look on the bottom of page one and then the top of page two,
they have to be reasonably, could be connected to criminal activity, and they're a second or third degree burn to 5% or more of a person's body, or they are burned to a person's upper respiratory tract or laryngeal edema, and that's due to inhalation of superheated air. That's a typical type of burn that can happen in a meth fire. The reporting requirements are to make the report to the county sheriff, if it's in the county, or to the city that's their first class or municipal law enforcement agency,
or it can be made to the local fire marshal, the fire chief, or other fire officer that has jurisdiction of the area. And, Madam Chair, I'd be glad to take any
questions. Representative Smith, you're recognized. Thank you,
Speaker 317
1:13:30
Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator, for bringing this. How many, in your opinion or in your estimate, occurrences
would have happened in a year's time that would relate to some criminal activity, that being methamphetamine and other things? Do you have a number on that? I don't have a number.
You said the law enforcement agencies brought you this, so there must be some indication they have a strong feeling about that there's lots of occurrences. Do you
Speaker 253
1:13:54
not agree? Yeah, there are a number of occurrences. But since they're not being reported right now? We don't know. We just don't
Speaker 317
1:14:04
know. They know it's happening, but they can't put a number to it. Okay. And this should be a move to help law enforcement and thereby protect the common health of the citizenry at large? Is that what you would assume? Well,
Speaker 253
1:14:15
absolutely, because if you have a meth fire, someone comes in and gets treated and there's no reporting of it,
then that person can go right back to doing what they've been doing. One, they had a fire, and that place is already contaminated, even worse than what it was just by the cooking process. Two, they're back in there doing it again, possibly. And so, yeah, I mean, there's a public safety risk here, especially now with this one-pot method, which is very explosive. Right. And that's something that we're trying to get a handle on with several of the bills we've had this session. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Seeing no other questions, Representative Allen, you're recognized for a motion. Motion do pass. We have a motion do pass on Senate Bill
27. Anyone in the audience wishes to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wishes to speak
for the bill? Center Key, are you closed for your bill? Closed for my bill, ma'am. All in favor of Senate Bill 27, please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no.
Center Key, you have passed your bill. I believe you're wanting to run Senate Bill 379, is that correct? Yes,
Speaker 253
1:15:31
ma'am. All right, if you'll go ahead and proceed with that. Senate Bill 379 is a simple identity protection. There are current filings with ADEQ that require Social Security numbers of individuals related to that business, and this simply removes the requirement for the Social Security number to be included in these filings. It has the agreement of the ADEQ, Arkansas Environmental Federation, and so I would call it an agreed-to bill.
Members, you've heard the presentation of the bill.
Any questions on the bill? We have a motion to do pass from Representative Wardlaw. Anyone in the audience wish to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wish to speak for the bill? Senator Key, are you closed for your bill? I'm closed. All right. The motion on the table then is to do pass Senate Bill 379. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no.
Senator Key, you have passed your bills. safe travels, sir. We also are going to recognize Representative Bradford at this time. She has someone from out of town, and we're going to ask her to come to the end of the table and present her bill. And that is House Bill 1555. Representative Bradford, if you will, have your guest introduce himself
Stuart Sofer
Unverified
1:16:55
for the record. Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Stuart
Sofer. I live in Whitehall. I understand we have an amendment that's being passed out, Representative Bradford, that is to add sponsors only.
Let's go ahead and take care of the amendment. Members, what's your pleasure on the amendment? We have a motion do pass on the amendment for House Bill 1555 to add sponsors. Any questions on that motion? All in favor of amending House Bill 1555 indicate by saying aye All opposed no Representative Bradford go ahead and present your bill as amended
Representative Toni Bradford
Unverified
1:17:37
Thank you Madam Chair This will be short and sweet
This is a simple bill concerning the sale of air conditioner parts And I'm going to let Mr. Sofar explain the intent of the
Speaker 268
1:17:52
bill Thank you Madam Chair, committee members, the intent of
Speaker 13
1:17:55
this bill is to make it legal for honest people to sell their own property. I sent you all an email with a picture of an item what we call in marketing a tickler, and the question was what cost $1,300 to obtain in 2007 is worth about $60 today and cannot
legally be sold. The answer is a part of an old air conditioner that I had to have replaced in my rental property for $1,300. But let me just sum it up by reading you an email I received this morning from Johnson's Recyclers in Pine Bluff. Stu, we make so many customers feel like criminals for the way the law is written currently. However, some unscrupulous scrap dealers locally hadn't adhered to the letter of the law and
and refused to purchase ACRs as well as catalytic converters as dictated by the law. We are not in that group. I hope you know that as well. Hopefully, the law will be amended to a more reasonable fashion so respected, honest citizens may sell their own scrap metals in whatever form without fear of another knee-jerk by the legislature. It was just a small oversight. The legislation is needed. There are a lot of people out there stealing scrap metal.
But folks such as myself or any one of you in here that have to replace an air conditioning unit from $1,000 to $2,000, and if you're astute enough when they offer to haul the old one away to say no, you just can't sell your own property. All this bill lets you do is an honest person sell their own property. Thank you. MS. Members, you've heard
the discussion on the bill. Any questions on the bill? Representative Smith. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Speaker 317
1:19:48
Okay. Would you believe then that by implementing this House bill, this will slow down the illegal activity of people that are stealing units from rental properties and other things to sell them for scrap? Is that what one of the intents would be? Hopefully, it would slow it down. And when they take it to the scrap dealer, there's going to be – run that through me again. I want to hear it one
Representative Toni Bradford
Unverified
1:20:14
more time. How are we going to handle that? Well, they'll have their receipt from purchasing a new unit and –
Okay. Yes. And – What if they
Speaker 317
1:20:21
don't have that receipt? They don't sell it. Is that
Speaker 66
1:20:26
right? Right. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. Representative Allen, you're recognized. Motion do
pass. Motion do pass as amended. Anyone in the audience wants to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience wants to speak for the bill?
All in favor of House Bill 1555 as amended indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed no. Representative Bradford, you have passed your bill. And, sir, thank you for being so patient waiting on us. Thank
you, committee. I believe we're going to
the regular agenda now. So we'll start down that agenda. I don't see Representative Nichols here to run his bills. Anyone here to do that for him? Representative McLean.
Representative Carter. Representative Lindsey. You are recognized to present House Bill 1741. Thank you, Madam
Speaker 277
1:21:43
Chair, members of the committee. When you call 911, you'd like to obviously know that
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:21:54
the folks that you talk to on the other end of the line
would be there to help you when you had an emergency. You want someone that answers that phone that you know and trust has got all kinds of training so they have the ability to act quickly, proficiently, to help me or you or your constituents, when citizens of this state help folks save lives. But quite frankly, today in Arkansas, there's no legal requirement that 911 operators be trained to any kind of standard, a standard of a reasonable expectation of certification,
any of those things that are in a lot of the other laws for law enforcement training and some of the other things. Everything is in the law that proves to us that that 911 operator is skilled and has the ability to handle that real important job. Now a lot of places in this state do a very fine job. Shannon McEwen is the manager of the 911 center in Washington County. Bud Gray runs the emergency management center in North Little Rock. Both have very good operations as do many other places in the state, but there are gaps
in that coverage around the state where folks that are running one of the 115 PSAPs, as they're called, the public safety answering points, don't have sufficiently trained folks. At least that seems to be the case. This bill provides, I believe, an agreed-upon solution to that basic need that 911 operators be trained. Coming to that point of agreed-upon bill has been a two- or three- or four- or five-month
process, as you can well imagine. Shannon and Bud started last fall working with the Association of Counties. Remember, this is sort of a city-county deal, and we started working with the Association of Counties and Municipal League. Municipal League said, fine, you bet, this is what we need to do. But we ran into a little bit of roadblock at the Association of Counties that said this This looks like a mandate. Representative Lampkin knows how county judges feel about mandates.
So Shannon and Bud sat down with Sonny Cox. You all know Sonny Cox is a county judge 30 years, I think, in Arkansas County. Representative Lovell, Sheriff Mills in Poinsett County was on that committee. We had all the sheriffs, all the police officers, law enforcement training, fire marshal, everybody that had a dog in the hunt came to the table, sat down in a room. I think you locked the door, Shannon, to try to basically get some kind of agreement that we could put a 9-11 bill on the table, get it into statute, and begin a training process.
It really works without impact to city and county government, without impact to state revenue. You know, no new taxes, no new fees, that sort of thing. So they were able to do that, and that's what this bill does. Now, I want to real quickly walk you through the bill so you can see the sections. On page 5, you'll see section 3. That basically is the root of the minimum training standard. We've had some push back and forth about what those standards ought to be.
We say that the standard should meet the national, what is a national training standard should mirror that under the APCO rules, the Professional Communications Operators Association. This bill is also permissive. We would have liked to have made it a little stronger than that, but we have made it permissive. We may. Cities and counties that run the 115 PSAPs all over the state may provide that training, okay?
We also tied the training standards in that section to approval of the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards. So we had a mash-up between the law enforcement agencies and Alita Law Enforcement Training Academy that provides the service. So we've gotten everybody together on this bill about what the standards need to be, what the training levels need to be, that sort of thing. On page 2, line 13, you begin to see the other piece of the puzzle.
What were the standards going to be was the first. Second was what's it going to cost and who's going to pay for it. And that's bottom line of where a lot of the disagreement was. We've got Alita, Law Enforcement Training Academy, again, to give us their pricing for what it will take to train all the 115 9-11 center operators in this state through a trainer-on-trainer process, and we're trying to do it the most economically and efficient way we can do it. Sonny Cox was very adamant, don't reinvent the wheel about this thing.
If we've done it right, let's try to do it again. And so we've gotten a leader to agree to that. We've also amended a LEEDA statute to add the authority for them to hire one more person to do that. The funding mechanism is a little bit unique. We went to the Arkansas Emergency Telephone Services Board. Now, on your cell phone bill, you see the line 9-11 fee, right, 65 cents a month. That goes into a fund administered by the Emergency Telephone Services Board.
Eighty-three and a half percent of that money goes back to cities and counties to operate the PSAPs, 115. Everybody has agreed to take $120,000 off the top of that $17,000, $18 million a year that comes in out of the 911 fee to implement the training program. So zero cost to the state, basically the same dollars going to the cities and counties, and it just basically enforces the original statute that says a 911 center shall provide some degree of training.
It just doesn't say what kind or under what certification or how often or any of that. That is the root of the bill. That's what it does. It's two simple paragraphs into six pages. And I would, Madam Chair, I would yield for questions with the sake of brevity and seeing the lateness of the hour.
Thank you, Representative Lindsey. Representative Lee, you're recognized.
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:28:35
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate you changing from 9-11 to 9-11 at the end. This is 9-11 we're talking about. Yes, ma'am, that's correct. There is a cost to the counties on this, and I was wondering if it was discussed. In order to train their people, someone has to take the place of the person that's being pulled out to be trained. Was that discussed at the time? MR. Madam
Chair, with your permission, I'd like to yield to Shannon McEwen and Bud Gray and let them try to answer it. They're in the negotiations, and I think they had that discussion.
MS. Ms. McEwen and Mr. Gray, if you would introduce yourself for the
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
1:29:12
record, and then you can proceed in answering the questions. MS. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm Shannon McEwen. I'm the dispatch manager at the Washington County Sheriff's Office. I'm also the Arkansas Executive Council Rep for APCO
Speaker 287
1:29:23
International. MR. And I'm Bud Gray. I work for the city of North Little Rock Emergency Services. We are the 911 center as well
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
1:29:32
as the emergency management agency for the city. And, Representative, to answer your question, we had lengthy discussions and meetings concerning that.
And Judge Sonny Cox was the one that actually had brought that up because he was concerned about the replacement. So we did discuss the training, and we came up with a train-the-trainer, which would cut down the time away that someone would have to be away getting trained. They would go take the training, take it back, and then would be able to train their employees at their agencies instead of having everybody leave. So we did discuss that, and we compromised, and that was the best solution for everybody.
Speaker 288
1:30:07
May I have a follow-up, Madam Chair? Certainly. Thank
Speaker 289
1:30:10
you. As a quorum court member, I see it a little
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:30:14
differently maybe than a judge or someone does. Because that's why I'm asking, because we were the ones that had to come up with comp time, et cetera, to pay for people as they were gone for training. Is any training happening at Alita also medical training as well? I mean, that's what the 911 operators needed to some degree to talk people through until the ambulance got there as well.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
1:30:38
It wasn't just a police issue. Correct. And there's currently no, there's not. We have discussed the curriculum on the different disciplines that dispatch centers will dispatch if they do law, fire, or EMS, and we are coming up with a curriculum for that, hopefully after this bill passes. If you don't dispatch for EMS, we wouldn't require you to take an EMS course, so there is going to be some tiers in that that will come up at a later date, yeah.
Speaker 289
1:31:08
is this going to come through rules and regs at any future point telling how all of this was worked out? I guess that would be for you, Representative Lindsey. Representative
Speaker 290
1:31:19
Lindsey, I'm not sure that ELITA's rules and regs for their training procedures comes through review.
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:31:24
If it's required under statute to come, it obviously will, but I'm not aware of review process for ELITA.
Okay. Representative Lindsey, I consider an expert sitting to my right It's shaking his head yes that he thought that they did, so.
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:31:40
I will yield to the expert and say, yes, Representative Lee, they
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
1:31:52
will. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized. Quick question. You said that they were all taking $120,000 off the top. Do we know what that $120,000 would be currently utilized for? So in other words, where's that coming from?
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:32:05
MR. All the 83.5 percent of the fee, the 65-cent fee, goes to the PSAPs, the cities
and counties that run 911 centers. That replaces equipment and does upkeep, operation and maintenance, that sort of thing, also pays the salaries for the 911 operators. Okay. So it comes out of that because basically if we – I believe if we can use that money, we'll have a better staff. We'll have – there will be less stress in the job, I think, and these folks can speak a lot better to that. I think we'll have a little less turnover.
We have that fully trained staff. Seeing no further questions from the committee, what's the
pleasure committee? We have a motion to do pass from Representative Smith. All in favor of do pass on House Bill 1741 indicate by saying I'm sorry I didn't give the audience time to speak for or against it I need to do that
so in the audience do we have anyone who wishes to speak against the bill anyone who wishes to speak for the bill alright thank you Representative Smith you have made a motion do pass on House Bill 1741. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Representative Lindsey, you have passed your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, members of the committee. Next on our agenda is House Bill 1764 for Representative Wren.
Anyone here to run that bill for him? And 1765 for Representative Wren. After that That is House Bill 1776, and I'm going to step to the end of the table
to run that bill, and I'm going to ask our vice chair to take over, please.
Speaker 297
1:34:21
Mr. Vice Chair, may I introduce my guests first
Robert Breck
Unverified
1:34:31
before I proceed? Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is
Robert Breck, the Deputy General Counsel for the Arkansas Department of Health. Thank you. Members, House Bill 1789 is a health department bill, and it is basically changing the structure of appeals on sewage disposal.
And I'm going to let my guest talk about the bill in detail, if that's all right, sir. Representative Tyler, are we on, Madam Chair,
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:35:00
are we on House Bill 1776 or 1789? You know, I picked up the wrong bill, so it is 1776. Thank you very much for pointing
that out to me. OK. Do you have a copy of that? Would you like to . We have a copy here. Thank you. MR. Okay.
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:35:12
Okay. We're ready when you're ready. Thank you. MR. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Robert Breck
Unverified
1:35:24
What this bill would allow, if an individual had a system permit, and these would be septic systems, and the Department of Health denied that permit, they would have the right to appeal to this committee. Now, this committee was established in 1983 for the purpose of research and development of individual sewage disposal systems. They have a great deal of knowledge and expertise in the area, and we think that the person would get a better hearing in front of those experts instead of a subcommittee of the Board
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:35:54
of Health. That's all it would do. MR. Thank you for your testimony. Are there any questions from the
Chair
Unverified
1:36:04
committee at this time? Representative Lee, you're recognized with
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
1:36:08
the question. MS. Thank you very much. The agencies, the final agency decision, the agencies you're
Robert Breck
Unverified
1:36:13
discussing here are who? It would be the Arkansas Department of Health. They're the ones that review septic tank permits. Thank you. Are there any
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:36:23
other questions from the committee at this time?
Is there anyone here in the audience that would like to speak for the bill, against the bill? Representative Tyler, would you like to close for your bill? I'm closed. Thank you, sir. What is the pleasure of the committee at this time? I would like to recognize Representative Allen with a motion. Motion do pass. I have a motion to do pass. All in favor say aye. Those opposed, congratulations. Madam Chair, your bill is passed. Thank you, sir. Members of the committee. Thank you.
Are we moving to another bill? We're done? Okay. Thank you. Take your seat at the end of the table.
If your guests can state their name and who they're with, for the record, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Thank
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:37:54
you, Mr. Vice Chair, ladies and gentlemen on the committee. I'll let my guests
Joyce Cloud
Unverified
1:38:00
introduce themselves. Thank you. My name is Joyce Cloud. I'm representing the Jason Foundation. And
Donna Monk
Unverified
1:38:07
my name is Donna Monk, and I'm also representing the Jason Foundation. Representative Letting, you may proceed.
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:38:19
Thank you, Madam Chair. On July 16, 1997, Jason Flatt, an otherwise healthy and active high school student, committed suicide. In working to deal with his son's death, his father, Clark Flatt, began to research youth suicide in our country and eventually established the Jason Foundation, an organization dedicated to improving awareness of youth suicide. in the U.S. is the 11th leading cause of death of Americans. Among children 5 to 14, it is the fifth leading cause of death. It is the third leading cause of death of children 15 to 24, and it is the
second leading cause of death among college students. The Jason Foundation, as I said, is committed to increasing awareness of youth suicide. The purpose of this act is to require principals and teachers in our schools to receive two hours of suicide prevention training every five years. We brought together educators across the state, the Arkansas Education Association, addressed some concerns with the original form of this bill that's already been made law in five other states. All parties agree to this bill. And with that, I'll take questions.
Speaker 317
1:39:23
Representative Smith, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Relating, who establishes the criteria for the training for these individuals in preventing teen suicide? Can you help me
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:39:34
with that? The materials come from the Jason Foundation, and they're provided so there's no cost to the state. Would
Speaker 314
1:39:47
the… Okay. Thank you. Thank you. The materials are developed by the Jason Foundation based on the Center for Disease Control Statistics
and for… But they're available throughout the United States. Okay. And these individuals will be
Speaker 317
1:39:59
able to come to a central location for the teachers. or whatever, or are they going to do it through the local co-ops, educational co-ops? Where
are we going to get the training? I guess I didn't understand. It can actually be accomplished through self-review.
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:40:11
There are online modules that the teachers can take. They don't have to go through all two hours of the training at once. They can approach it, like, bite by bite. And then at the end, they put off a certificate that proves that they actually received the training.
Speaker 317
1:40:25
So they take a test at completion of this online course, you're saying. Is that right? I don't believe there's actually a test, But there is a certificate that proves that they sat through the training. So they have to answer some
questions, though, don't you agree, that would be something similar to, like, a discrimination that a teacher would have to take
an online application or form in beginning the school year? Yes, that's my understanding. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
We recognize Representative Woods. Representative Letting, I just
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
1:40:59
wanted to say thank you for running this bill. I lost several friends in high school due to suicide, and I've lost several in the last year due to suicide, and I really don't think the economy is helping the situation either. And so I just want to say I think this is a good bill. Thank you. Thank you. I do want to add
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:41:19
that I was not alone in having this idea. Senator Johnson actually requested a draft of this bill the same week I did, and we found
out about it afterwards. So he's also a co-sponsor of this
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:41:37
bill. Representative Wilkins, you're recognized. Representative Leading, I also recognize the importance of this. I've
known some of my grandchildren, classmates who have committed suicide. But for this training, who is, what's the financial, is that a burden on the schools? You may have said that and I may have missed it.
But who pays for it? The Jason
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:41:59
Foundation provides the materials to the
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:42:01
state. Okay. Who pays the educator? Is this for educators, teachers, or? For principals and teachers. Okay. So we're going to mandate that they do this, and who's going to pay for their time? The teachers already undergo professional development.
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:42:18
They have to get a certain number of hours. That was one of the original concerns from the AEA and some other educators. They see a continued fracturing of the professional development process.
That's why we made it just two hours every five years, as opposed to originally we had it two hours each
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:42:35
school year. Now, are we mandating this training? They would
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:42:38
be required to receive this training, yes. Thank you, sir. Thank
you, Madam Pura. Representative Wagner, you're recognized. Motion to
pass. Representative Wagner, we'll get to you in just a moment.
Representative Lampkin, did I see your hand up?
Speaker 328
1:43:05
Representative Lampkin. I certainly support the bill. My only question is how do we monitor that to make sure that they actually do take this training? Being very tired is going to take it. I'd like to know that. My understanding
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:43:18
that after they take the online, the module, there's a certificate that's printed off, and it can only be printed off if they have completed each step of the
Speaker 330
1:43:27
module. That would be correct. Yes. Okay.
Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
1:43:35
I was just going to make
a motion, and it's
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:43:43
already been on the table. Representative Wilkins, you're recognized. I'm just not clear still on the cost of the school. My schools told me not to
pass no unfunded mandates. Teachers are
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:43:58
already sitting through these professional development courses,
so they're already, this isn't going to add,
it's going to just be included in current programs? But it's two hours.
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:44:12
Correct. Are there professional development courses not already maxed out maxed out, or is it an additional two hours? It would
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
1:44:20
be included in the 60 hours that they're
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:44:24
already required to receive. Well, I'm not opposed to the bill. You know that. But my superintendents have been very adamant about unfunded mandates on their programs.
Representative Ward
Unverified
1:44:35
Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Ward, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. My wife, she's an educator, and I know that they go through a lot of training and any event that they don't complete this particular two-hour training would have any bearing on the renewal of
Speaker 314
1:44:59
their license. It is included in the reason that we extended the time from one year to five years was so that it could be included at some point in the schedule of their training so it doesn't
actually add to any of their training that they're already required to do, but it would be as one of the elective trainings. It's required that it be completed in the five years, but not at any particular time in the five years. One
Representative Ward
Unverified
1:45:33
more, please. So in the event that in between that five years that their license come up for renewal
and there is no certificate in there showing that they have completed this particular training uh... will the school district or the state uh... honored the fact that uh... they have not completed training still renew their license i'm not certain
Speaker 314
1:45:55
about that it's my understanding that it is required that it would be required i suppose
we have anyone here from department of education who could speak to that question because I don't think we have
a good answer for that question representative
letting do you have someone who might be able to
answer that question I believe I do all right ma'am if you would introduce yourself for the record please and if you would
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
1:46:32
be able to answer representative words question that would be great my name is Nicole Hartz and I also work with the the Jason Foundation helping get this through but one of the things that we did when we got ready to draft this bill is we talked extensively to the Arkansas Education Association. We have spoken with the Department of Ed, but there's a lot of steps there, but they have not opposed anything outright. But this would be similar to the
requirements that teachers have right now for Arkansas history and things like that. It is a requirement, but one of the reasons that we tried to make it only every five years is so that that would lessen the burden on the teachers, but it is going to be a requirement. We did also do the five-year period because it's the certification period, like you mentioned, but also because as schools try to implement this and as the Department of Ed tries to implement that, that will give us time to have another session. If there's any kinks that aren't working correctly, there's not going to be any immediate burden on the teachers
that they're going to face licensing concerns, and I guess with that. I
guess, Representative Letting, from my perspective, I'm not sure that still answers the question in terms of what would happen if a teacher did not complete the requirements. So they would have to get it done to
Speaker 342
1:47:47
be renewed, just like the Arkansas history requirement. I'm sorry. Okay. I went around to say that. Thank you.
Maybe you said it, and I'm just dozing today or something.
But thank you very much. So, Representative Ward, did that answer your question?
Okay, all right. We have Representative Mayberry in Wilkins. Thank you. Representative
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
1:48:16
Mayberry, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chairman. So, I just want to clarify that they're currently required to take 60 hours, and this would just be a piece of that. And so, there is no additional burden in terms of total number of hours of training.
This is just a requirement within that existing 60 hours, and if they didn't take it, it would be just as though they had not taken some other requirement within those 60 hours. So there is essentially nothing different than the way it was before in terms of being recertified. Is that correct? Yes.
Okay. Thank you. Okay. Representative Wilkins, did you have your
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:49:02
this this is mandated it is required so how could it not it's not adding to the 60 hours
Speaker 351
1:49:08
there'll be something else that it's what now it is tied to recertification like we said it's like the arkansas
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
1:49:19
history requirement if the teachers don't do it then they'll have to do it before they can renew their license all
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:49:24
that right i'm sorry all teachers i'm sorry i just want to make sure yeah we're not talking about a counselor and in
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
1:49:30
the school right now we're limiting it to certified to teachers and principals licensed personnel K through 12 yes
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:49:35
all teachers yeah right now there is a 60 hour
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
1:49:45
requirement that the teachers must get 60 hours and continuing at each year and this would just be two hours towards their 60 one of the five years
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:49:56
you know I understand that, but I always understand from my teachers that their training is pretty well, you know, all parts of their training is necessary, and they don't have extra hours, which is what I have been led to believe. Now, I'm not a teacher, but that's what I have been led to believe in my teachers.
Speaker 342
1:50:16
Right now, of the 60 hours that teachers are required to
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
1:50:19
get, I believe it's less than 20 are actually specified in the code which classes that they have to take for those in services so there's a wealth of time still that these teachers have to to do this two-hour training we don't think that it's if the 60 hours were all split up already then we would have more concern but what we got from the teachers that we spoke to and from the aas is that it's not a concern
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
1:50:46
as long as it wasn't more frequent did you speak to any
of my teachers that is my number one concern thank you thank madam chair representative Wagner you're recognized for a motion motion do pass we have a motion do pass anyone in the audience who wishes to speak against the bill? Anyone in the audience who wishes
to speak for the bill? Representative Letting, would you like to close for your bill? I'm closed. All right, all in favor of House Bill 1778 indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, no. Representative Letting, you have passed your bill. Congratulations. Representative Harris, are you here? All right. And I'm thinking about running House Bill 1789. Is the Pharmacy Association here to help me with that? Apparently not. We'll skip over that.
House Bill 1808, Representative Hyde House Bill 1800 and 1801, Representative King Ladies and gentlemen, we have no other business to come before the committee We are adjourned
Agenda
Call to Order
SB496
SB437
SB345
SB27
SB379
HB1555
HB1741
HB1776
HB1778
Deferred Bills
Adjournment
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Linda S. Tyler Chair
Unverified
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Representative Andy Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 6
Representative Butch Wilkins
Unverified
Speaker 11
Speaker 35
Speaker 38
Representative Billy W. Gaskill
Unverified
Speaker 43
Speaker 317
Speaker 67
Speaker 64
Speaker 72
Representative James L. Word
Unverified
Speaker 32
Martha Deaver
Unverified
Speaker 101
Speaker 124
Speaker 127
Speaker 49
Senator Percy Malone
Unverified
Speaker 173
Representative Ward
Unverified
Speaker 27
Speaker 182
Speaker 186
Speaker 188
Leo Hauser
Unverified
Speaker 193
Speaker 206
Speaker 202
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
Speaker 227
Speaker 237
Speaker 240
Fran Fleener
Unverified
Jean Block
Unverified
Representative Tim Summers
Unverified
Speaker 249
Speaker 238
Speaker 251
Speaker 253
Stuart Sofer
Unverified
Representative Toni Bradford
Unverified
Speaker 268
Speaker 13
Speaker 66
Speaker 277
Representative Uvalde Lindsey
Unverified
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
Speaker 287
Speaker 288
Speaker 289
Speaker 290
Speaker 297
Robert Breck
Unverified
Representative Jon Woods
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Representative Greg Leding
Unverified
Joyce Cloud
Unverified
Donna Monk
Unverified
Speaker 314
Speaker 328
Speaker 330
Nicole Hartz
Unverified
Speaker 342
Speaker 60
Speaker 351