State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs-Senate

We have some pages here today would you stand up. Pages. The just start here in the front and introduce yourself and where you're from. So we have a concurrence of the Senate bill three fifty four. The. There in there in other committees the. Just a concurrence on house amendments. So. I make a motion to concur on house amendments or Senate bill three fifty four. All in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign. So. We have one that was referred back the thirteen eighty one. Has anybody found that yet. Well as engrossed yesterday I I thank I think memory a conversation the this gets the the statutes that are in in DC back to Arkansas I think that's what this. Well I guess what this does I thank. I think it means statues the statuary as the the that are in DC this statute was counted yeah. I think there's a difference between statues in statutes. But I may just be a type of the needs corrected somehow the online. Yeah. Just Amended to correct the technical. Issue to statues yes yeah this is this is just gonna make a motion to suspend the rules to make a motion in the rooms. The all in favor say aye aye All opposed like sign the now make no make a motion to I move that we make the technical correction by amending this line twenty eight line twenty seven on page one line twenty seven yes I think that's the only. Lace that the only place take the last T. out of statute. Yep. Second by Senator Dotson all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign. The. And entertain a motion to accept Senate bill three thirteen eighty one as amended. All in favor say aye hi opposed election. Thank you senator. I understand it with self session. The. Senator king Senate bill two thirty one. Seventeenth three forty nine. Four twenty three. Four fifty three. What do you all of your meals. Sixteen seventeen if you want to come up. House Bill sixteen seventeen. Just introduce yourself you're recognized thank you Mr chairman call Clowney aspera representative district twenty one this is a bill that would require a post mortem examination and autopsy in the case of a suspected drug overdose this bill arose out of some work in the behavioral health working group that we did over the interim where we realize the Arkansas was drastically under reporting deaths from opioid use amps is very dangerous obviously in the light of just the explosion effect on the scene we really need to understand where it is how bad the problem is and how many are Kansans it's killing in order to prevent those deaths it's also bad though because by under reporting these debts we are unable to receive a lot of federal money relating a lot of federal money on the table in terms of grants that are surrounding states are getting because they are reporting higher numbers we don't have lower numbers than the states were just reporting that right now as as lower than they are so this bill is the result of of months of work with crime lab corners governor's office AG's office and others and this solution is that in the case of a suspected drug overdose corners shall turn over a body for postmortem examination for an autopsy and that's what the bill does I'm happy to answer any questions and I've got some folks here who I know I have more expertise than I do who would be willing to answer questions as well. Three questions to answer for in. Thank you Mr so what's the volume we expect this to create and do we have the capacity to address that. Senator Payton yes we do have the capacity to address that I can bring Director channel from the crime lab that he can talk more specifically about exactly numbers in terms of volume but the crime lab certainly feels prepared to take on this additional of yes. And so this is not currently a decision that the corner corner can make it on their own or is it the corner can make this decision but they don't currently have to send that body and so for various reasons I'm in a lot of cases where corners no that it is is that it is a drug overdose they are not not reporting it as that okay. So I would like to hear from the crime lab about the the volume and and what this may entail. Just while we wait for Director channel center payments want to let you know that I'm Kevin Cleghorn from the coroner's association actually presented this hell with me on the house side and to and from a committee. This state your name and you're recognized of current channel director the state crime lab. So if you could elaborate on whether you expect this to create much more volume or how much and whether or not we have the capacity to deal with that yeah we did look at the numbers and we we would expect about two hundred additional cases of throughout the state for a an autopsy and we do have the capacity to do that and like resume Clowney said is that corners do have the ability to submit them but there's no requirement for them to submit it and the reason this is important is what couple reasons number one medically you really need to look at the total totality of the case when you look at their medical history we need to do a forensic pathology examination including toxicology and the fear is always that if a quarter just submits a blood sample we tested in toxicology to when we don't get any results how was the corner going to officially determine the cause and manner of death so it's it is something we can handle it is a a a good step forward okay and so what about. Preserving the family's rights do they have any rights in the situation in a situation like that they they really don't and that's a good point but one of things that also does if there is a corner that let's say owns a funeral home which is true in this state and they're pressured by the family not to submit that body because it's a drug overdose and potential stigma then this is a tool for them to say well by statute I have to to submit this case gives covered in the corner in some cases. Yet will assist corners in cases okay thank you thank you Mr. Yeah. Into the. All right there any other questions. I think it's. We have this whatever the cost is is covered in the budget and RSA auth I'm I'm ninety nine percent sure. That's right and there is no transportation costs those are gonna be paid for the attorney general's office is committed to paying For those additional transportation costs I'm out of the opioid settlement money. So were there any other questions anyone. I don't see anybody's to signed up to speak for against this bill is or anybody audience speak for against this bill seeing none your clothes your bill because for the bill appreciate a good vote what's will of committee. Motion by Senator flowers second by Senator crawl all in favor say aye hi All opposed Like sign. Thank you representative passed your bill thank you. All right. So motor vehicles all right. Yeah this interview chance. Representative long. What's your bill. Sixteen forty eight. Introduce yourself you're recognized. This push that push. The representative one long house district thirty nine. You're recognized. House Bill for sixteen forty eight fixes a problem that I didn't know existed until last November in the general election it was at that time that I discovered it we do not have a long place for general manager elections tool that might close to your. The at that time I discovered that we do not have a law in place to require general election run off for state representative and state senator. And this new to me was a real problem thinking that someone could get elected with less than a majority of the of the voters having cast a ballot for literally you could have somebody elected with thirty four percent vote in three man race. seven otherwise by screen you could have sixty four percent of the pop of the voters. Voting for the other person are the two people in the race in the. Hi I have a state senator elected to go with the your base come on a minority of the public funding of forty four the. This bill basically what we're in the general elections exactly the way we handle it the primary elections if nobody receives a majority vote of the end of the area the top two candidates would go to run off four weeks later. The guy to try to answer any questions. Your questions. Go ahead senator flowers. So. So you're trying to address time as. For. Senate or house races at the general election. Get senator and you your bill calls for special runoff election. Of the two. And it is it receives the. Greatest number equal votes. And if. The special runoff election. Results in another time. Then you're going to allow the state board of election commissioners. To determine the winner. By lot. That's that's correct senator currently in a situation where there's a tie at heart he. Currently in a situation where there is a tie vote even before my bill of the state the state board I determined by lot who wins if there's a time and in a general election. So that that part for the other part the law doesn't change its well then what do we need this bill it alternately if it's another tide that resulting. The state board of elections is going to choose anyway now the reason for my bill is not necessarily in situations where there's a tie but when nobody receives a majority of the vote in the general election year within three person race we read example in Conway this past November there is some three candidates of the libertarian candidate got three fourths of the vote is very close race in both the Republican and democratic candidates did not get over fifty percent of the. What under armour all that's not required is it. But you get over fifty percent you just have to have more. Then the other candidates that's that's current law yes senator so what's wrong with that I would just good to be distancing like very democratic way of doing it for a person to representatives for got that I think that at a minimum you need to have more than fifty percent of people supporting that person in this would give us the ability to do that I have a second round of votes doesn't happen often but when it does I think it's a problem. I. Getting more than the next candidate is democratic. So I don't. I don't understand the need to have more expense for special run off ballot somebody got one vote more in a recount is is hat and comes out the St one more vote than the other candidates that's the winner. In my mind wouldn't you agree. No ma'am that's one running bill. Red Senator paying. Thank you so this bill doesn't just become effective whenever it's a very tight very close race one of the biggest concerns is that somebody might be elected with way below a majority of of the district's support so maybe thirty seven thirty eight forty percent of the district supports on they would be hamstrung or. find it hard to represent that district. Is that I mean I understand the bill also addresses it's a very tight race with three people in it. But this bill would never be in effect in a two person race is that correct. That's my understanding yes Sir so any race that has two candidates and not a third is unaffected by this bill yes Sir okay saw common I think it's a good idea that we try to make sure somebody has majority support in a district before their represent that district is the time frame viable from having the November election and getting the criteria met to set up the run off in the special election yes to read we divided for walls up for the make it three weeks later or four weeks later I do too of the thanksgiving holiday but because the general election has a longer time period for certification. We had to go with four weeks to make sure you have a certified vote before you went on to the on all so now does this only affect the general election or does it affect primaries primaries already covered by this thanks for the same person well that's why I ask I was in a three way primary this last election cycle and I came in first in that primary out of three but I had to compete in a runoff against the second highest one yes Sir this creates the same situation in the General that already exist in the primaries exactly yes Sir okay I appreciate that I'll turn it over to somebody else if I have a question. Your questions Senator flowers. I just want. To understand what you just responded to the senator's questions. For saying if nobody gets. Fifty one percent is that what you're saying yes ma'am fifty percent plus one vote. At the ready receipts that I feel that the month at. So so majority. Doesn't mean majority. As I believe it does you fifty percent your deal means the present one. Plus four plus yes so majority does not mean majority. If some if there. After. If you get three people in the race. What I'm gets forty nine percent. Everyone gets thirty percent. Any other gets twenty one percent. The candidate with the majority of votes forty nine percent does not win the race that that would be a blue that's considered a plurality and in that situation which is what exists currently on arrival my bill are you would have if no one received fifty percent plus one vote then the top two candidates would then go on to a runoff four weeks later and. You're basically they would realize there was a time the report somebody would come out the winner with a majority of the votes. So. We already had in the law it in you stricken the language on page two line four and five. And it call for higher number than any other person. In the race the other two candidates. So you're changing that to say you've got to have fifty one percent at least fifty percent plus one vote yes. To me. A majority is that higher number. You we used to have you considered how many of the registered voters would. Have voted in the race. To come up with this. Have you considered that yes ma'am. And how does that play into your. Your bill I mean I still feel that of to be of a good representative a person should your representative at least more than fifty percent of the voters choice and in the electoral election. Well. The one with the higher number would. We representing. All of the. Well as I that district as mentioned earlier senator at you're in a in a very close race of. In a very close race diligently can have someone currently elected with thirty four percent vote which means your sixty six percent of the people in that district did not want this person representing them but under current law that person would be representing him in this law in a script this bill would jump. Aboard that personal that possibly happening. Any other questions there's no one signed up to speak for you there's no one. Please put your phones on silent the. There's no wants to speak for against the bill your clothes your bill thank you senator of chip Mr of the young. Because lections Commission and the. A elections division so as at the same. I'm secretary of state's office reviewed the bill and didn't see any conflicts remainder of any situations about and the problem with this bill some. Are referred the president good vote. What's will of committee of. Motion by Senator Payton. Second by Senator crawl all in favor say aye. All opposed in. Sorry representative your bill fails thank you Sir thank you. The next bill Senator Eddie. It's ten thirty. This is the. Introduce yourself you're recognized you got these come up. Right. Mister chair a gym Petty Senator district twenty nine and that's okay I'm gonna invite to representatives from the attorney general's office in the state board of election commissioners to be available for questions here at the table. Bill number fifteen thirteen H. B. fifteen thirteen. Introduce yourself you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair members of the committee Alex button with the attorney general's office. Thank you again Mister chair of this bill H. peace fifteen thirteen is to create an election integrity unit within the attorney general's office quite simply this bill helps provide a framework to prosecute election crimes it provides accountability by creating the election and tender integrity unit within the attorney general's office gives teeth to the prosecution of major election fraud efforts the state board of election commissioners also has expanded investigative authority the bill provides layers of different layers of election law enforcement both criminal and civil and it will help us improve the public perception of election integrity and with that I will stand available to answer any questions. Three questions. Good Senator Tucker. I'm I'm curious if the. If the prosecutor Seaview prosecutors in here I'm I'm just curious for their opinion about this I mean all right now prosecutors really have jurisdiction to to prosecute election fraud and does this change that in any way no Senator Tucker thank you for the question it does not what it creates is a new Civil cause of action for the attorney general's office so we do not run into any original jurisdiction issues okay who John be soon. It would be's any civil it would sue individuals that may have an. Committed something that is already outlined in the criminal code it references back to those charges and so we're not creating any new violations or what would constitute a violation it's just creating a civil action and. Guess what what remedy would you be seeking the remedy under this is a fine. And I believe that is on. I'll looking occupation line number for you. Thank you senator. That. Pardon me Senator notice of course as soon as I go to look for it I cannot find it and. Yeah I think I found it Page six line in this subsection for the stars on it. Yes Sir. Okay and I also see you can get an injunction or declaratory judgment Actual damages although it's hard for me to imagine what those might be Okay we we had a discussion Judiciary the session and code revision commission about whether violation that has a financial penalty with it is an unclassified misdemeanor so I guess I'm just tying the this back to my first question. It says here is a violation of at least one thousand dollars so I'm I'm I guess I'm just concerned that that could be construed as an unclassified misdemeanor where you might run back into the original jurisdiction issue. Senator without having at the benefit of being there when you have this conversation with code revision I can't speak to that exactly but it's our position that it would not be an unclassified misdemeanor that would just be a civil penalty. Okay just at some point for your vote on this I'd be curious to hear and from the prosecutors they have an opinion about it. Senator flowers. On this Page six. Lines five and six. It says whenever the AG has reason to believe that a person or entity is engaging. Has engage our is about to engage in any act a practice declared unlawful by seven one one oh three or seven one one oh four what what what is something. That somebody is the ballot may be about to engage in a lawful. I don't have those sections of code in front of me. Thank you senator at the that language was actually pull directly for and mirrors the Arkansas deceptive trade practices act so it would it would target the activity of some sort of conspiracy to commit and Alexion fraud crime and taking substantial steps to have not yet committed the crime in this case a civil. C.. What. Seven one one oh three and seven one one old for those is a misdemeanor and the felony. At causes rather charges. For the it is one of three is a misdemeanor and one four is the felony section but what type of actions what type of behavior. There is a there's a a full let me and I can hold that a percent that. So on the specifically on the felonies it would be falsely making or fraudulent or just destroying any certificate of nominations to see no public official or other person shall in any manner will fully or correctly permit any person not entitled to register for the purpose of voting to register nor shall a public official or other person Ford or attempt to forge registration there are a just a felony section eighteen different felony violations. I'm just trying to figure out. How can you bring a civil action. Against somebody. Based on. What do you think they're about to do. They would have the. The plaintiff in this case being the attorney general's office would have to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the The bad actor here has taken some substantial steps to defraud election so there would have to be whatever the proof maybe in any particular case I without you know the fact pattern before me I would have a hard time coming up with a hypothetical for you. Sounds like maybe. If that's covered under is engaging. I don't. I guess if you brought the complaint. Just to be on the safe side they put. All of this in there is engaging has engaged or is about to engage they have to put some some basis for the complaint. So if they say. They're about to engage in what. I think you were going to I'm sorry showing. I mean how how would you state that. Six this going back this poles and what part of the request for relief maybe in injunctive relief if there is you know you maybe you haven't completely committed the the full crime but you are in the process of it and this. I think that there were a couple of questions in your question I'm trying to persons out any and systematically answer those I guess I'm just stuck on that. About to engage. How how does a person. Well this I I think about two engages for example in the felony section no person shall vote in any election more than one vote and if this person has voted and then they tell their friend while I'm going to go over to this other place and I'm gonna go vote over here and they're on their way to go vote for a second time that would be about to commit that second offense. So they don't have to. Form the act I mean but they might be just joking around with differing and and. And for me would have to to prove intent in this case yes ma'am. Things like an act would have to be committed thank you. Three other questions. Seeing none they have one to speak against the bill. fifteen thirteen Rebecca Zimmer. Okay go ahead can I make a motion at all testimonies at two minutes not including questions please yeah. Per per individual is. All right what's will of committee all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign or at me limited two minutes the. Rebecca Zimmerman. Introduce yourself to your right. Thank you chair members of the committee I'm Rebecca is amended with Arkansas advocates for children and families we believe voting should be easy and accessible for the families of the state however during the past two legislative sessions dozens of bills have been filed with many becoming law that have made it more difficult to vote and this study chipping away at voting rights continues and we are gravely concerned about that and that this bill would take that even further. Boenning drop boxes that don't exist in the State giving powers to the legislature to interfere with our elections establishing an earlier deadline to submit absentee voting ballots removing exemptions to the state voter ID law all of these and other new laws added to a state where it's harder to vote that was five years ago public perception is not a valid reason to roll back something as fundamental as a right to vote the reality is our system works election crimes are exceedingly rare and can already be prosecuted under current law the creation of this election integrity unit. Continues to shift the idea of voting in our country no longer as a fundamental right of the citizens of the State Country as. But rather an active privilege where we accept that no longer can everyone who is eligible to vote and who wants to vote can we live in a democracy our public in a right to vote is just thank Chris eight we urge you to please vote against H. B. fifteen thirteen. Thank you any questions. Thank you for. your oppose the bill. Yes Sir chair I believe this bill improves the public will help us improve prove the public perception of election integrity and will not address Are any of the comments from last. Representative and I am closed thank you what's will of committee. The motion to pass by Senator crawl second by Senator Payton all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign. The did not pass the thank you senator. Senator Boyd. What number is. Introduce yourself you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair. this bill provides the Chinese or Russian made drones will not be purchased with public dollars it also provides that on May first two thousand twenty seven Chinese or Russian made drones will not be used by public entities that should cover the life of any drones that are already purchased D. J. I. is covers about eighty percent seventy to eighty percent of the drone market and they've been called a Chinese military company by the US department of defense the department of defense has banned these drones from use with the military this bill protects our infrastructure and infrastructure knowledge and provides an America first policy so that's really what the bill does And happy to try to answer any questions your questions. Read. Senator boy you never talked about this I enjoy the heart of this but here's were I have a problem is. If we do this there's one company that we can get these for. And the cost is. Amazing comparatively. and I've had a lot of people sheriff's. a lot of state troopers. Contact me about the price difference in the quality and everything. Yes Sir that that's about the point that the the really ality is is the Chinese the Chinese. The country of China Chinese C. see see see pay their subsidized drones these drones come in they have the ability to be hacked and if we don't encourage market in America or with our allies we're going to continue to buy. Drones that are subsidized by you know definitely competitors and some might even argue adversaries and so again we gotta start with America first in these drones are an important place to do that what I've been told is the sheriff's of kind of stood down they they had some opposition they were given a four year extension for the drugs that are already in circulation that doesn't mean there might not be a sheriff somewhere I'm not speaking but I have been told the sheriff says an association are are not planning to oppose this guess we'll find out of somebody's here all. Okay all. Go ahead. just just quick follow up have you followed with the kind of did in Florida where they pass this and now they're having to amended because they're having so many problems. So what I can say is we are not the only state that is looking at this Florida is one of them but further Florida Texas California Tennessee have been state agencies from using the J. I. drones by executive action Tennessee and Texas have introduced legislation this session one with Mississippi California Washington and why so. That's good thank you guys senator Payton. Thank you Mr does this bill say that you have to buy American made drones or can they be for source from anywhere other than China anywhere from China other than China or Russia federation so that we can have them from our allies so there's only one drone manufacturer in the world outside of Russia and China. There's one American made in but it ended the day it doesn't say it has to be in order made agent as you can this is not limit us to one supplier that's right and Furthermore if we don't start buying drones that are not subsidized by China Russia then we're not going to have that and this is a serious infrastructure issue this is the surest. I mean obviously they're using drones to check all the power lines and all the water road ways and things like that so or whatever bridges and over passes out of the okay I appreciate it thanks thank you. You're the questions sing none we have. Two. To speak against this bill Marel one thirty. It is at or okay. Senate introduce yourself and and you're recognized. To mark. Hey. More could you push a button. My name's March wired in a camp in the Pulaski County sheriff's office I'm also the commander over a drum unit or agency is owned and operated the job products since two thousand seventeen and some of them are still in use today we use them to support critically important public safety missions because of that I'm asking you to oppose house bill sixteen fifty three this bill stand to prohibit departments across the state from using drones best should it suited for our unique mission by setting limited options by small fan him for the domestic builders we are forced to pay more for something that does not meet our public safety needs we have a fleet of nine drones that fly weekly and twenty twenty two lonely logged eighty hours of flight time these flights were completed on suspect searches accident reconstruction crime scenes missing person special operations and events and and I'll warrants search warrants protest the water trillions the drone that we currently utilize can't be operated completely offline with no requirements to connect to the internet the drones can be updated completely offline with files that are loaded on to flash me the answer to the into the drone the update runs locally on the drone and does not require internet connection are standard issue drones are not require any applications to be loaded on to the Department property such as I phones or tablets these applications run locally to the remote controllers and come with the drone if the drone is connected to the internet no date isn't shared unless the operator option to sharing it. If data is shared our current drone manufacturer uses Amazon web services A. W. S. which is also run on infrastructures for companies such as apple Scotty Netflix the is the in the United States federal government and others our current drones use infrastructure that keep the data in North America and western Europe our current drones are compliant with the National Institute for standards using FIPS one forty that's to standard which means that they're cryptography uses standard recognized by the United States federal government. During operations all media we capture the drones are stored on flash media cards and removed and handled other devices that we capture on crime scenes as they were made uploaded to the drone or even the drones clout even if operated connect to the remote control internet damages last thank you Sir your questions go ahead Senator. You're in pretty quick but I'm. Minnesota five I'm sorry I thought I heard in there the you said it would force you to source your drawings from the met domestic suppliers have you heard the testimony a minute ago that that's not true that doesn't mean that we time out on the sorry you're not have to buy your drones from domestic suppliers there are other suppliers in the world that are not Chinese or Russian right but they they don't. The deal with these challenges it they meet what we need some of the drawings that you can't they don't have all the correct capabilities these do these comply not they can have their lights turned on and off we do swat missions for which is critical for the swat team when they make entry to houses okay how many drugs did you say operate we have nine around right now and what's the age of those strong I have one dating back to two thousand seventeen and then we we bomb you know we've had some bird strikes Reeves had about replace some of the we buy some new ones as the newer models come out so you just learn three last year so if you look down the road for years how many of the nine that you currently have would you expect to still be in service it with with with the care and maintenance somebody could still be working it within the past four years some of them what about bird strikes Burch trying to get a bird you're going to get it's gonna crashing right to get a replacement you reasonably speaking out of the nine that you're currently operating maybe half at the most would still be operating probably handers down or okay I have thank you. Red center. So if you had to replace those today. With the ones you can currently buy any and replace what this what this road going to do what would be the cost difference okay okay so if we wish to replace these today with the let's just say the American manufacturer that's back in this bill drone from just got io we would have to pay about twenty three thousand dollars apiece with including the license software fees because that company making the licensing agreement we got to have software to father license their father Quitman rocket pay seven thousand dollars for what we have now so would be about three times the price. Questions all our stuff is that allowable anything that we do on our drones can be. As I got to that's what we had to give to there's nothing that were trying to hide we don't fly over critical infrastructure or anything like that I mean order of course and how many companies are there in the world that are not Chinese or Russian that that supplied drones I couldn't answer that question the only out so how could you know that the lawn company you mentioned is the only one that can supply that is the only one he has he asked that would let me ask the question the with the one is back in this bill is the one I was talking about so when you said back in this bill in what way lobbyists going across United States trying to trying to run for somebody to go to the American made drones like this. Okay thank you thank you Mr. All right one one were first to speak against this bill Jimmy Fallon. Introduce yourself Mr Calvin you're recognized yeah Jimmy Kevin citizen in as the father of a law enforcement officer and firefighter. In I gathered understands that the need of this to protect people I was just thinking that. I get the whole China thing because nobody is more entertaining than me but I think what we gotta do is stop before we rush to say just because something is made from China and when we focus on providing these gaz. The tools they need or the funding they need to pay that extra cost or to get the drones that that are not from China. These guys go out every day in the use these drones in a very effective manner. To protect citizens find missing children and to protect my both my sons. And so I think there's a better way than just saying Hey let's take the axe. And cut their tool off let's look in we spend money every day let's look we providing them a pass to get the drones that are not may from China and supplied the funding to help these guys N. gals go out and do what they do to protect us and so what I do say list don't cut our nose off to spite or fax. And thank you I'll take any questions thank you any questions right center plating how long the path B. Sir you said create a path how long should the pack the I think that's up to you guys out I think we I think we can I think two years is is a reasonable path to get this done here again I'm not going to be on the smartest guy in the room right got the answers I think this is a very smart body I think the whole legislative body in this cabin is very smart and I think there's just a better way I think you guys clotbusters or answer because the bill has for years and it but right anyway thank you. Your other questions. Seeing none. Thank you Mr thank you guys. Grocery bill yes please so you know we heard apple we heard Disney and we heard you know Hey I got a cell phone these are American companies these are not Chinese companies they're subsidized by the Communist Party of China this is about American security and if we don't start developing these markets in America we're going to continue to be dependent on. China and Russia for key things and just like fuel any other thing where we're having to depend on the medicine I saw that with the pandemic we were to pet so depended on China this is a critical thing we now we have now integrated drones into so much this is one small step that will send a strong signal to the market so the market can readjust in build accordingly there's going to be competition I believe in American markets I believe in the you know free economy but when you're using subsidized. Products by your adversaries that's not a good situation for Arkansas and not a good situation for America with that said I ask for do pass into a good vote thank you thank you what's will of committee. Motion by Senator Payton. Thank you senator boy no that's relaxing thank you for here to fill. So we have. Sixteen sixteen oh one. sixteen ten. Thank you Mr chairman if I could ask representative Bentley to join me. And members of. I do have an appointment I have to get to it eleven twenty five so if I leave in the middle of this bill while you are still hearing testimony stuff I apologize. I'll be very brief because I think representative Bentley can probably explain the bill but and I can. But they came to my attention when she called me about this topic. That the the current for you a law that was written in nineteen sixty seven states that all meetings informal or formal should be. You know open to the public public notice given. Notes taken course that has become recordings like this meeting is recorded the video and audio both I never dreamed that some judge somewhere had made a ruling that two members of a committee. Discussing policy outside of the meeting would be considered an informal meeting and therefore subject to public notice in and recording and all that I can't imagine us doing our job down here without vetting ideas among each other before we come to the floor of the call that representative Bentley made to me before she filed this bill would have been not allowed. Under the court's interpretation of of what a meeting is so it has become incumbent on the state to define what a meeting is now. Roberts rules of order and masons and and any parliamentary procedure book that I've ever seen would say that a a meeting is wonders a quorum present not one two members are discussing policy or vet an idea. So. I think it's kind of crazy that we're in a situation where we have to define a meeting because the courts have have defined a meeting is being between two JP's are to city council members in Cleburne County we have to J. fees that are brother in laws cannot attend attend church or family events and and have and have to be extremely careful that they don't mention anything in the way of policy. The Bible says that there's wisdom in a multitude of counselors. You know we fell nearly two thousand bills down here every session can you imagine how many bills would be filed if we didn't vet those amongst each other first I'm in a lot of ideas are flawed and when you bring the idea in front of the multitude of counselors you find out is flawed and you never file the bill and course you can't perfect policy in perfect ideas without sharing with each other but there's another another problem I see. With put a gag order on your J. fees your city councilman your school board members if I will have a gag order on them. And the mayor or the council judges the superintendent is free. Tuesday to speak to each one of them individually. And it becomes very easy to convince the members everybody supports this idea. If if I'm the one lobbyist a guest to talk to him and they can't talk to each other I'm convinced of everybody's on board everybody supports it and then you get in a meeting and and people are a little embarrassed a little shy about being the one person is going to speak out and vote no when in reality if they could have collaborated they might have found out that there was more than one person opposed to an idea or more than one idea. What the hell to tweak those ideas and and make them more effective and more come out. I'm shocked to find out that R. J. fees that are in our city councilman or school board members. Are afraid to talk to each other I know and one of my counties and and it's crazy that can't sit here and say the county but I don't wanna get people in trouble but I I don't want my counties the JP's three or four of them have breakfast on Saturday morning at a local restaurant and the community knows they do and if you're sitting at a table around the table there so that you can hear the conversation or not being quiet it's not a meeting. This is just. Neighbors and community. Working together to vet ideas and and improve the policy that they pass I can't imagine doing our job down here without that ability. Now I'm in business and so I relate a lot of stuff to business what I higher shift managers or assistant managers and put him out there in the business and tell them they can't speak to each other without me present. What I tell him I can't speak to the employees without me present. I have got to hire somebody that trust a little bit more than that and I do believe that there are bad actors. In elected positions. And and just like I've got a a constitutional amendment to be presented before this committee were there it would establish recall elections for a loop for elected officials folks the way to address these problems when you have untrustworthy people in elected position you've discovered that they're bad actors is to unelected the ballot boxes that you're not a gag order. Thank you from from communicating with each other other than open form of course they can't. Make decisions or make policy or past policy without being in a meeting with a quorum. If they're running out there with preformed ideas and rubber stamping on. Of you should on elect on. If if you're asking questions about how they have a policy and they won't give you answers you should on electing. But if we don't define what a meeting is. Then we've essentially put a gag order on every JP every councilman and school board member forty seven other states have defined what a meeting is and they went with what the parliamentary procedure let's say a meeting is a quorum I think this bill started off saying a meeting is a quorum but it's had a lot of backlash and so representative Bentley has amended the bill to say one third of the members. Up to one third would be able to discuss the policy in a very small board may only be two people maybe three people but anything more than one third would be a meeting you'd have to you'd be subject to public notice and recording it and taken minutes and and all the all the requirements under forty I love forty I support for you I think it's important that we have open meetings and I think it's important that we answer to our constituents in the last five or six days down here's has tortured me because I'm I'm overwhelmed and can't reply to everybody yet soon will be session I'll be trying to give answers all the questions have been asked by my constituents but the. If you if you have bad actors. That are representing you then I think you're that the ballot box and I'll turn it over to a representative Bentley. Thank you senator thank you centers for let me here today I just wanna give a little little history about this bill again I had some J. please come to me and I really didn't wasn't aware of the fact that they were under a gag order couldn't talk to each other and helped me to realize why in Perry County where I am was two years for the quorum court to get the situation resolved with our ambulance service and now I understand why because it couldn't get together until they were in a meeting and could discuss things that really prohibited from taking care of their constituents so I know that you as your as a senator you do all you can to take care of your constituents and I do the same I think it's would be impossible for me to get my job done if I could talk to the legislators and do a good job and make sure that we're betting issues even now the tornado when I went to the flood in our districts so poor for me to talk to the my fellow colleagues and guests and get things done and so that's really what brought this bill forward. So like Senator Payton select I came to committee with what forty seven other states consider public meeting which is a quorum of the body so they can do take your business take votes and that's where it needs to be official public meeting my colleagues asked me the speed of the bill that's me go back and compromise with the for task force and that's a so I came back with an amendment the I will you'll I'm sure you'll hear from the for task force of they don't approve of this they want us to continue the way it is now that we know we can talk with another member of that body in western of open public meeting I read this amendment forward which is one third of the governing body which will limit the number of people that can get together visit without it being an open public meeting pass to the committee and off the house floor just want to again say that I think every minute is so important when your legislator to do it when you're on the phone driving a ticker of so many things when I'm driving in here even the morning talking of the legislatures and get and get things done it was so much that we have to take care of it's really important that what I think is removed the gag order take the hands of our our JP's our city councilman and or school board members we just we pass a very big learns Act and this can be very important that our school board members get to talk frequently and talk to each other in and do they can to make their schools better so that's the purpose of this bill comes to make sure that our people that are duly elected by their constituents can take care of those concessions that they have under their care and I think it's really important that we move and bounce a parent take the gag orders center Payton said and with that we'll take any questions that you guys might have. Questions. So. Just in the quick mass. So if you got a board commission whatever hello seven. One person. Hi B. two. It was a board of six a third would be to. Six. So for board of five it would then this bill wouldn't help him at all you don't ever get third that's what I mean right. What seven. Six if you have a board of six two people would be one third. Okay if you have a board a seven two people is all they could talk a board of eight two people is all they could talk a board of nine three people could talk. A board of ten or eleven would be three people. A border twelve go to for people. Okay. So. My message is don't ever get to you don't ever get to that number of search and with six seven. You don't ever get to that third with two people. Two seven same way on the other side you have to have three people would be T. M.. So maybe the need to point out a word. In the bill it says more than one third so the the ban on them the gag order kicks in when there's more than one third. Not not at one third but more than one third okay so if you have six two people could talk. If you have seven or eight two people can talk if you have nine three people consult. And. Is there any other questions. Go ahead senator Ted senator flowers. The person is current law with two members of the board or commission on or whatever can still talk even about issues in the city. You can't just start polling for votes that's the one thing that's prohibited under current law is that different from your understanding no from what I understand what what status of a past two people cannot talk even can pick up the phone and talk to each other discuss policy what what is that based on. The court ruling certifying that. That. Again I'm not a lawyer service mental what I've been what I've practiced. What a bit of for awhile myself and polling is what is commonly understood as and The four groups that I've been a part of and my understanding of it and again I've I've litigated this and my other job it basically indicates that you can still talk about things because it's impractical not to talk about things but if there's going to be an issue that's going to come up for a vote. You can't say Hey senator Kaine what your position of being a senator flowers which a position once you start doing that you're basically replacing the public meeting at that point and that's what's prohibited but it's not prohibited just to have a conversation about something so that's my understanding of the current law well I think enforcement throughout the state that's not been was been in practice and people have been sued for just visiting in public in the bleachers talking to each other just discussing so and other parts of the state that's not what the practices and so in response to that people have been very cautious and did not want to be sued or not want to be perceived right S. polling in that and so it's really and this is because of that across the state it is gagging people because they're just would assume would just rather not be assumed to be entered in the wrong thing so they refused to talk to each other and that's what's happening with my with my district. So I'm not an attorney but I do have a little bit case law here I'm not sure exactly how to state these cases but the mayor and city council of elderly diverses altering the board this is a group meeting of members of a city council even if less than a quorum is subject to for you if members of the council discuss or take action because we know you can't take action without a quorum but. This is a group meeting so there again it's not defined whether group would be two or more or three or more or for more but then in another. Decision which is Heris versus city of Fort Smith one on one discussions between the city administrator and the city board members. So that was challenged because it was a one on one and it was the city manager and board members it was found. That the city administrator did not violate the open meetings law. But that's not to board members that's that's the city manager and board members that's the case that establishes the polling doctrine actually and so it doesn't matter the distant but the point that that case is making is it doesn't matter if it's a member who's doing the polling it could also be a staff member who's doing the polling and they can just call up all the members and say Hey how you plan to vote on this in which case that's that's when you're really substituting a meeting so you'll appreciate this I'm I'm looking at page twenty seven in the. In the handbook for him the yep there's a dozen. Cases where people have challenged whether or not something was a meeting or not I think that the hooves us to define a meeting maybe this bill is not the right definition maybe we should explore what that definition should be but I think it behooves us as much confusion as much case laws out there about what was a meeting in what what an amazing I think it's pretty important that we define a meeting. Senate if I could also add to I know that we've heard repeatedly that we're the only state in the nation that doesn't define a meeting and so I think it is as senator Payton is it's important for us to do that to get rid of the ambiguity so people are concerned that they know as long as it's not a third it's okay for us to talk and discuss entities you're the fear allow them to do their job I think that's really what it's about this behooves us to make sure that we get rid of some ambiguity with this answer that's really what it's all about I would like us to not be that one state that doesn't have a definition may be cleared up just a little bit. My personal position is I thank you the polling law that is in existence right now strikes the right balance we have another bill in this committee early this session that would moved in one direction I did vote for that and your bill is coming on in the other direction not open unless I hear some the persuade me otherwise I don't plan to vote for this one because I think the current law that we have really strikes right balance if we codify that it is K. admittedly case law if we codified that I'd be good with that but that's that's just my position for well that was gonna be my question back to you which I I'm really not supposed to question you but I didn't realize we had a law and then you were referring to it as a law but it's not what you're saying is that's not code that's a decision correct that's what we're saying something needs to be codified that defines. The meeting Wetherby five members present subject matter you know the tough topics I don't know but right now there's just too much uncertainty out there and you know when you talk about a city council or in our rule County the quorum court school boards and we're talking about neighbors and family members and and community that goes to church together and goes to ball games together and I mean there's not on moral wrong with them being in a ball games with each other and sit next to each other unless they've made somebody mad that wants to sue him and say that they're having a meeting. Are you don't have a recording you don't have a record of what they were discussing yeah so paranoid I can kick in. Yeah but you could follow suit or anything for any reason thank judge evident have merit judges pick it out so you thank you. Any more questions we have a very extensive list to testify. Begin with the best conger. And. If you're recognized. I'm and I've been having trouble hearing over there so that that is is okay my name is Beth Coker I am and I live in fable and then the other grandmother I'm also justice of the peace for district nine in Washington County I love that job is a lot of fun I'm here today to speak against a house bill sixteen ten Arkansas for your law also referred to as the sunshine law other people's law because it provides citizens of Arkansas with access to to the conduct of public business and as a J. P. I've never felt like I've been under a gag order that shows because in Washington County we we meet and we get things done but we do it in front of the public as it should be because we we we represent the public they elected as a as an elected official I don't see that it makes my job harder I've never feared had any fear of opening an envelope are talking to another JP. I just think that the law we have it now gives a public the boots on the ground people a way to hold us accountable. In Washington County we have fifty members on a quorum court under this bill I could meet privately with for my colleagues and discuss perhaps the twenty million dollar infrastructure projects to be funded of course with taxpayer dollars I think again the end of may with four other colleagues and so on and then I could bring it an ordinance to the county attorney and asking to draw that bring it to the court and because we've already been we meet the been meeting behind closed doors away from the public is pretty much a done deal. And there be likely very little debate it be more like a matter of rubber stamping the public would know what was said in those private meetings and so it would be hard for them to hold us accountable This bill doesn't solve anything because there's really nothing to sought to solve under present law and there's an easy fix the fire my colleagues want to tour a county funded project or visit a proposed building site for example are if we want to discuss public business outside a regular meetings under your time as a lapsed three questions. C. nine the going to the next one. Travis Browning Mr Mr yes if I could reiterate I will have to leave I will be back probably in thirty minutes if they're still debate going on and we have a vote but I trust the committee with their decision on this thank you. Or. To make a decision without me thank. Travis Browning Mr I. Okay sorry about that. The. Robert Stein bill. Thank you Sir my name is Robert Steinberg I'm the author of the treaties and the freedom of information act I consider senator Payton representative Bentley good friends I call them John and Mary hi my Senator Senator Tucker is on this committee it may be a little upset with me right now but I consider him a friend to So I think the Marion John have done a good job of explaining why they want to pass this bill and I think their position is eight is one that one can reasonably make I happen to disagree with that but you don't need to hear my opinion on that I think if we're going to pass a bill like this we need to have some guard rails and the most important guardrail for me he is my concern that it said you have a twelve person committee and so persons one through three me and then number three mentions it to number four and then four through six meat and six mentions that the seven and so forth I'm concerned and then at the end of the day they all come to a decision in their little separate groups I believe that's permitted under this change and I don't think that the polling restriction in the current case law would prohibit that so I think with a little more guardrails this is senator and representative could achieve their goal one that I don't want to pursue I was in favor of that other bill that Senator Tucker mentioned I tend to hew very strongly towards transparency side but you don't need to hear my opinion on that because you that's a judgment call for you all to make that's all I have unless you have any questions thank you for the questions C. nine thank you Sir thank you ma'am. Enjoy the kitchen. You're recognized thank you join the catch in Arkansas entrance transparency in government group I compare H. H. these sixteen ten to a like a single loan engineer fresh out of law school trying to design a steep mountain is dangerous highway without guardrails in the speed limit. Ranching is the intent in unintended consequence the amended version of this bill was not vetted by the for your task force and quite frankly it shows the task force voted five zero unanimously against this bill the if we take one third the standard of one third there ninety four school districts in the State of Arkansas with five board members out of two hundred and sixty four school districts under the math that's one point six school board members can meet privately can't you imagine the situation where the school board members go to their lawyers and they say can to have this meeting Cave Springs like they do in Bentonville and he says well it's one point six that's kinda confusing if he says no you can't do that so that that's not fair to the ninety for a smaller school districts if he says yes I can guarantee you that's going to result in a very costly lawsuit where the Supreme Court by the way has been case by case defining what a meeting is I've been involved in two of the series two of the seminal open meetings cases in those cases one of the guard rails is they said you can't make decisions this bill has no guardrail can these folks are meeting in secret I can they make decisions or can they just discussed Mr Steinberg talked about serial meetings another guardrail that is not mentioned in this bill is whether or not a chance or social meetings are a meeting that needs to be defined that's why people like the for your task force need to be involved in the drafting of anything that changes our meeting law I agree for ten years I've asked that the legislature defined a meeting we also need to know whether or not as you'll make a change your time is elapsed thank you. Shares. Thank you. The. You may given. Senate issues of. Jim Cavan citizen it's like I think it's obvious mean miss Bentley totally disagree on the intent of this bill but I want to take that out of the equation of because what do we talk about is what I spent all day Saturday doing I would spend hours going to school district websites. And as governed that ninety four of the two hundred sixty two school boards or five members. Which means ninety four. At the two hundred sixty two school district school board. Will not benefit from this bill. So the language in some peoples that would Jimmy roundup well languages everything right. There's no language in this amendment that addresses those numbers so what do you do on others words more than one person it's two thirds okay that language is not there but I think you have to look at like this how can you look at a hundred sixty eight school boards in this district in this state and say Hey you can do this. But then you look at ninety four school districts say but you can't. I don't think that's fair even whether you agree with the intent or not now as far as the the the gag order stuff what you need to do is look at title fourteen local government laws in approach it they're not enough for you if there's a problem with the balance of power approach it in title fourteen under local government distribution of powers address it there but not in for you and that's all I'm saying more than happy to take any questions. Your questions. Thank you thanks Sir. When I ask we are getting short on time. If you have something new raise your hand if you signed up and you have something to. If you don't. Remove one. If you're compelled to come speak come to the table. Reduce yourself you're recognized. My name is Courtney rolled in I'm a parent for Cabot from Cabot. I'm here speak against H. please sixteen ten is personal to me because of the parent who has seen the lack of transparency and even ran for school board like Senator Payton said we did try to elect them and we lost three of us ran none of us one so the couple things I've heard supporters of the bill say that I'd like to mention mention. A lot of the conversation has been about justice of the peace and city councils. If this really affects our school boards and if you some of you may have served on school board but if you haven't cents twenty twenty I can assure you that it has changed drastically. This is how our meetings go. If you want to give public comment you have to have it approved three days before the meeting. They don't even know release an agenda until the day before therefore you didn't get to speak on anything that's on the agenda they introduce it and vote on it within minutes and then at the end you get to vote on your pre approved topic from three days before so. This is not like the legislature shall have the house the Senate committees you listen to hours of testimony and even if it's something the government wants to be toshi can we don't get that if they're not doing this in public meetings half the time we don't even know what's going on. If this bill passes it is going to be a huge loss for parents who just want to be part of the discussion of what's going on in their schools that's all we try to do for the last few years I have I really liked representative Bentley I've even spoke for one of her bills and I would much rather be doing that but this isn't one that I can support because I know what the consequences will hurt parents the ones I know she has fought for and we do appreciate everything she's done but this bill will hurt every unelected person in Arkansas. And so have to say the members any questions. Seeing none of. restructure restate there is a list. Of people signed up to speak for against this bill. If you want to do that if you have something to add that we have not heard them do that if not this committee needs to move on to other bills. Because we're getting at the end of the session. Come forward. Introduce yourself you're recognized my name is Ryan Cobb I live in lone oak and I'm very involved with the. Politics on a county level so misspent like keeps referring to the quorum court's and comparing it to how you all operate at the legislature and the senators and it's comparing apples avocados it's not an awful alike R. J. bees have subcommittee meetings that meet bi monthly. And then in addition to a quorum court meeting everything that and I've listened to every interview misspelling is put out about this bill everything that she is saying she wants to address they can already do. They can go to church together they can go to ball games together they just can't lobby one another to. Endorse decisions that are going to be funded by our tax dollars. Corruption is a nationwide issue Arkansas is not exempt we know there are bad actors the question is is how many millions of dollars from your constituents is it going to cost our Kansans when this bill passes we just had one of the worst tornadoes that we've had since the late nineties how many sweetheart bills are gonna get past in back rooms because one third of members can meet and then go split up and go take on the other two thirds we're gonna turn a quorum court or city councils in our school boards into a rubber stamp policy making how are we supposed to measure the effectiveness of our JP's of our council members of our school board members if we can't see why they want or or against a resolution. You know senator Payton talked a lot about fixing it at the ballot box well in smaller communities it's hard to fix it at the ballot box. As most people that get into politics they're they're fluent I live in a very poor of our state it's hard the same families have been in power for generations this bill is going to make things worse for your constituents thank you ma'am thank you siders there any questions. C. nine. Murray state. If there's anyone that feels like they need to come forward slash. The signed up in forty now if not we're going to move on. All right. Representative Bentley. Your welcome close you bill. Thank you chairman committee again I simply want to get rid of some ambiguity because a Tucker said some people think you can't talk others thank you can't talk and I think R. J. peace to a lot like we do we take care of our institutions we hear from their concerns I want and a couple of you have to go to visit to their share if they need to or visit with their county judge I'd simply want them to be able to do what we do and take care of our constituents that and now I think this answer for you by any means of a huge fan of for you want people to know what's going on this will simply allow R. J. P.'s to take care of the constituents like you and I do I think that We really need a definition of meeting with the only state in the unit does not define what a meeting is and so we sit here and ambiguity of the Supreme Court has asked us to come up with what the definition of a meeting is and to me this clears up what it is will have people to be able to freely freely go to church and talk to each other and not be concerned about somebody coming up behind them and taking a picture and trying to Just harass them on social media as many have done and file lawsuits unnecessarily so again I want to free up RJ piece to do a good job and take care the concessions just like you and I do and I think it's a a bill to balance power in our local communities and do a good job I thank you all for hearing testimony and debate on this thank you the representative which will committee motion do pass motion by Senator Hester. Second by Senator crawl all in favor say aye aye All opposed like sign. The sorry representative Bentley your bill shall. So. Senator. You're going to go up. We got five oh nine. This is a short short little will export will. No non opposition at this time thank you Mr chairman Senator Scott Flippo districts twenty three. Belinda Harris Ritter general counsel for the department of corrections. Right. Hi Mr at the service of the phone line very simple thing it does is it's going to increase a stipend for board members department corrections from eighty five two hundred ten dollars for a meeting and that puts them in line with other boards or commissions here in Arkansas. Three questions. C. nine is there anyone. No one signed up for against this bill you will closure I'll close my bill appreciate a good vote. Motion by Senator flowers second by Senator crawl all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign thank you senator dressed your bill thank you Mr chairman thank you Committee. Senate bill five fifty nine all right. Senator Steve Kroll District three I'm running this for Senator Dismang I can have a. The gentleman come and present force. She introduce yourself and you're recognized. Good afternoon J. Lewis said Director of Arkansas state parks I we have a bill before you today making an amendment to a definition of design professional contract for remodeling projects changing the dollar value from one million to two million dollars for those projects. just to give you a quick background information on this we work with the Division of building authority on projects that include architectural and engineering projects are for projects throughout Arkansas state parks we have two processes projects that are greater than one million dollars in projects that are considered minor projects of less than one million dollars and so what we're proposing here today is. Shifting that value amount to two million dollars to give us flexibility when we're going through the design process for the standard professional services contract we often find things like hidden damages were pushing up against that million dollar value amount we have often. When we're going through the design process expanded scopes of work we received bids often that push the limits passed the one million dollar value and we're also just experiencing what everybody else is experiencing with the increased cost and realized a change in in in actual projects that we're seeing as well that needs this change to be effected I this will impact other state agencies as well for this improvement the military military department also has support for this as as well as the support that we have from the Division of building authority. Any questions. Go ahead Senator Clark. What what's the do you know why do you need this what with. If it was a million dollar contract. And I understand part about heat and stuff. So I mean what. What's so big about a minor project so the the reason we have our own call architects is often help with projects that were planned or unforeseen and so what say an emergency happens for example I project at mount magazine state park where the the chiller which could add chills the entire lodge suddenly goes down that way we don't have to go through the four month RFQ process for replacement for that. Process yes okay thank you good question. Your questions. Seeing none of the no one signed up for against this bill your clothes your bill I would like close make a motion to pass a motion and a second all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign thank you senator you pressed your bill. You wonder on that board. You're going. Twenty years. Yes we house bill sixteen seventy four. This introduce yourself You're recognized so far Hester state Senate district thirty three and I'm going to hand the ball off to Mr Ryan Ousley to present this in an effective manner House Bill sixteen seventy four. Tutored inducers of Mister Ousley and you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman of the committee right now is the deputy Attorney General in the opinions division so that the main purpose of the purposes of this bill is to correct a confusing codification with the way the attorney general's the regulations on the attorney general's use of settlement fees and then to add some clarity to to that process so I'll elaborate on both of those purposes right now the set of rules that governs the attorney general's use of settlement fees that a set of rules as contained in title for in a sub sub sub section of the Arkansas detect deceptive trade practices act. And that goes to the confusing codification piece because when one looks into those provisions it's clear that even though that section of the the DTP a. I even though it's codified there actually covers the use of all settlement fees regardless of whether those settlement fees originated from DTP a actions so there's a confusing codification there and so what this bill does is takes that that language from title for moved that that's what the majority the bill is a strike through moved that language from title for and puts it in the tunnel twenty five which is the the title that contains the Attorney General's general powers so that's the first thing it does is correct this kind of confusing codification since the codifications the rules themselves govern the use of a settlement fees wherever they arose makes more sense to pull it out of the deceptive trade practices act and put it in the title twenty five which they said contains Eternals powers the the second piece that does the second thing that it does is it what happened in that time that sub sub sub section of title for over the years there's been sort of a patchwork quilt of amendments that have created some ambiguity in a way that the age you supposed to receive these funds and report them and so that's the other piece that we're we're trying to do we believe that this by moving this over in the title twenty five we're we're increasing the transparency through the process all the G. settlement fees I have to be reported on a quarterly basis to the the legislature how those who you fees were obtained and how they were disbursed so by putting it over and title twenty five or making it very clear that all money is governed by the same reporting requirements and some and a good example would be you may have you may have seen recently our office led a coalition of I believe it was every state except Delaware I may be off by one or two states there in an original action in the U. S. Supreme Court having to do with money that's unclaimed through money Gramm and and similar companies. We won that ninety zero that money eventually it's being sorted out now we'll come back to Arkansas and some of the other states that money was obtained outside of the DPA context it was an original action and so what the bill this bill would do is make very clear that the reporting requirements for that money are the same as we would do for all of other someone fees and correct that codification with that I'm happy to take any questions. Three questions. Nobody's. Any questions nobody signed up for against this bill your grocery bill. Close all right motion by Senator flowers second by Senator Hill All in favor say aye opposed Like sign thank you senator. Senator. Thirteen oh two. The Amendment on thirteen oh two. Thank you Mr Clarke Tucker Senate district fourteen the amendment just to address some concerns raised by the Arkansas association of counties which is now has no position on the bill. I'm happy to answer any questions on the amendment but otherwise moved do pass on the amendment appreciate a good vote motion motion the second all in favor say aye. Those lights and is amended thank you share members I would be very saying given the timeline this is really outstanding bill to help firefighters police officers in our state as we know our first responders are subject to seeing dramatic events just like our men and women in uniform overseas because of that they can have some of the same mental health concerns that are men and women in uniform overseas can have on PTSD and otherwise and so what this bill does is it says that if they this is all defined in the bill but if they do engage in a traumatic event then they can have up to twelve visits to a mental health counselor afterward to to get treatment for that this is a very serious issue while we have firefighters and police officers first of all who just suffer on a daily basis from PTSD or whatever the case may be from from the work that they engage in but even beyond just the day suffering we do have firefighters for example who committed suicide and and we just need to make sure that these men and women who serve us have an opportunity get mental health treatment for the work that they do so this is this is really a wonderful bill you know we've we've worked with everybody to I'll say this it this bill is really like a pilot program it doesn't take effect until January first of next year and then it sunsets on January first of twenty twenty five so ready to take the information we learned during the twenty twenty four when it's implemented come back in the next session and try to do something more permanent but this is not permit will sunset on on January first twenty twenty five but we got to do something for these guys and we've worked with everybody as much as possible to make this out to you know absolve everyone of their concerns and so that's what the bill does have to take any questions. Senator. So what was there any concern about what control of fiscal impact is to be mean I agree that is seven right necessary things of any discussion on that none of the state the way the bills right Nash intended to say this so I appreciate you asking the question the way the bill is written as the employer has to cover the cost so all the employers largely our cities counties not the state and also the way the bill is written is there liability is capped at the deductible Choquet would copay which pretty much is going to be twenty dollars so if you have someone it also this this doesn't again try to limit this as much as possible so it's only full time paid folks it's not it's not volunteers but if you're full time paid person and and you experience a traumatic event and you go to get the mental health treatment and you go to twelve sessions on the total liability for your employer whether that's your county or city where the case might be it's gonna be two or forty dollars. Your question. We have multiple speak people to speak for this bill. We have a limited amount of time. You are welcome to speak. We have firefighters and police who were here I think that be open to taking any questions but otherwise they're here to express their support for the bill. Stand please. Three questions from from the Members. Thank you thank you Sir for your service Russian. The York lotion bill I'm close I appreciate a good vote a move do pass. As amended all in favor say aye All opposed Like sign thank you senator. The representative ray. What what what you're us all one in here. Fifteen ninety five. In addition you're recognized thank you Mr chairman state representative David Ray District sixty nine this one hopefully will be easy this amends the procedures for registering a pack political action committee so currently political action committees have to be renewed the registration is to be renewed every single year by January fifteenth. And if you fail to register within that fifteen day window between the first of the year in the fifteenth you could be doing for an ethics complaint this just changes the default so that a pact that is registered with state registered either until the registered agent of the pack terminates the registration for if the pack goes dormant and doesn't file reports the secretary state could terminate the registration due to an activity. you know there's nothing really unethical at all about keeping a packing operation for multiple years that's how most of them work anyway and so I think the benefit would be would get rid of extrait NO frivolous complaints and things like that. Be happy to take any questions questions. Go ahead Senator flowers. So now do they file quarterly reports. Yes access to file quarterly reports in this would not change this would not change that requirement. But. They wouldn't. Be subject to any ethics. violation or. No you you you they would still have to file their quarterly reports there's an extra thing that you have to do each year which is renew that registration this just gets rid of that extra registration I'm looking at page two at the bottom lines twenty six through twenty eight. If the political action committee does not file any quarterly reports for a period of two years yes the Secretary of State shall terminate right and and that's that's in the bill because when I presented it representative Collins asked we'll what would happen if someone just stopped filing reports and you just had all these dormant packs so when to put in a mechanism there so that if they became inactive or dormant or however you want to phrase it they could clear those they could they could terminate those registrations if they're no longer active. But otherwise the. They have no duty to file a quarterly report for two years before some action is taken against no they they would have they would be were any pact that is active hacer that is registered is required to file quarterly reports if they fail to file a report then they could have an ethics complaint brought against them but the way the way our system currently works is in the ethics commission doesn't go out and police people who don't file their report it's of it's a complaint driven system so. This two year period of nine filing the quarterly if. No action would be taken unless somebody filed a complaint. Eight is that right that's right but that's that's the way it exists today. If someone fails to file a report I mean we just ended the first quarter so the first quarter reports would be due on the fifteenth of next month I believe if someone failed to file the report for their pack by that date they would be in violation I did they would absolutely. And this bill doesn't change that. Well it seems to limit any action being taken against them. For two years no no it doesn't they they could still stand what this last paragraph is in their own Page two line twenty six to twenty eight it was added so that if a pact essentially becomes inactive or not doing anything it doesn't just clog up the secretary of state's website over the course of several years it's just a mechanism to allow them to clean now dormant dormant packs are doing anything and haven't done anything for over the course of the election cycle Senate. Senator Tucker has questions okay seems to be the. Discover NO round the requirement of. What. Diseno activity report comes report of mine if the pact still wants to maintain active status but they don't really have any contributions or distributions over two year period they follow no activity report that's still the still continue to exist they will be terminated that's right that be filing for yes Sir thank. Your questions. Seeing none don't have any may speak for against building or close Bills in closing out to say to to your concern senator flowers this does not change anyone's requirement that they file they still have to file quarterly reports it is does not change that at all this is only dealing with the annual renewal of registration so with that I'm closed in. Did you have some sponsor. I do it's it's not a bill the center Gilmore aye is agreed to run just make sure you're covered thank you Sir yep. what's really committee. Motion by Senator Tucker. Second by Senator crawl all in favor say aye opposed Like sign thank you senator a representative right. The senator Dodson. The last bill and we're gonna have to handle the seventeen thirty five. Close to his house bill seventeen thirty five. You're recognized thank you Mister chair member's house bill seventeen thirty five by representative Wardlaw is a it's inefficiency bill that benefits not only state agencies but cities and counties it It allows the office of state procurement to negotiate with retailers for for a government pricing on on on. On items that they can they can negotiate on I do have the state procurement director here if there any. Specific questions related to it but. I know what we're limit on time so I didn't bring up. I'd like to know who is the state procurement Mr at Armstrong all right. I'm closing motion to pass. When the. So we adopted on the third to thirty yes the this amends this is going to replace that it that Amendment so move we adopt amendment one on SJR fifteen. Expect expunging wondering fungible explains that modem all right second all in favor say aye opposed Like sign all right we have a new amendment one and two S. J. R. fifteen. Members at all I'll tell you A. R. requested top to. Top to from all the committee members and this is the only bill that had consistency across the membership. So this is this is a bill that will handle and and vote. Mr chairman yes do you intend to have it. You know what with what are through there it ended up being another conscious member that this body. The other five members wanted it would you be willing to have another meeting with you for that get signed out would you will how would you to like to go through the a committee meeting process we're only out here Thursday or Friday Friday whatever yeah. So let's go through the amendment Senator king. Senator king District twenty eight so members last time I discussed of. That of the current commissioners terms within and they would have to be re appointed by the governor if this past would confirm with the some of the commissioners and several people that's been involved in this process it is been better determined to think that we need to do a roll off rule on approach this so you would have certain dominoes fall as this goes who would not impact this amendment would not impact any current commissioners term Highway Department projects take a minimum of seven years so it would not impact any other terms that we keep the term staggered. And then we're also in this amendment cleaning up some old language if you wanted to the removal of the highway commissioner in the amendment forty to the Max back like will amendment. There were some language that to remove highway commissioner the governor would have to go to chancery court we no longer have change record so this just kind of clarifies how are you the. It brings up to date what How a highway commissioner would be of removed if you go to. Page two. We actually outline the district so senator Johnson I will for example are airy would be district one you can see the counties in that that would be represented in that District two. And district three and district four and district five. So we put some language in there commissioner would have to reside in the district that they represent we had to put some because of the three fifths nature and won the big things this bill was to allow breathable flexible way to deal with or highway situation we know our population our state has changed a great deal so this would allow as the original bill says a three fifths vote after the census is draw that the legislature could take up to redrawing means so This just goes into some language about how to if for some reason the body through a district state senator Dotson was probably Commissioner Benton County I'm Highway Commission Carroll County to different districts then basically. If for some reason legislature changed it and they put Carol in with Benton County then the governor would I would no longer reside in that district so the governor could have a process to of declare a vacancy and this actually has some other language in it that makes it we're if there is a vacancy so like commissioner Hage in center Krause District is been appointed he would serve ten years if for some reason he doesn't serving only serves five years then the vacancy is filled it still continues to do the process to the senators in each district would be responsible for the approval process of the Commissioner. So. So I appreciate a vote to adopt the amendment. Motion to adopt the amendment Senator flowers. second of my Senator carrying all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign thank you senator. If you want to wrap up S. T. A. R. fifteen I don't know if anybody wants to speak for against the bill to their morning welcome to but basically. basically this does it sets up the districts as you can see in the map it allows a breathable and flexible ways for the legislature to make sure that of the citizens have some impact in the way the highways or represented in who represents them it also centralizes and localizes the senators that have it it also includes house of representatives because they can read district process I mean like I said we never know what the twenty thirty one census will bring but it could obviously bring some changes it also provides a key if somebody thinks this map it can be done different I mean we you know we draw congressional maps and people have opinions either way on congressional maps this just allows that to change would only change at after every ten years so there's not a lot of changes keep the timing of the highway commissioners but yet has more count ability to people in the legislatures. Thank you senator go ahead Senator. Dotson. Thank you Mr chair so this amendment basically replace the entire. This bill in its entirety or the original it it did because it had to when you had that when we went from the appoint all new commissioners to the roll off roll on approach with how we commissioners and it also kept the staggered terms with the commissioners so in that part it kept the same it did not change the part of the senatorial approval process it did not change the three business to the legislature can change highway districts after the senses it did not change the map so it so. On of the original unamended version on page three lines nine through eleven sage three. Ninety. And I mean this went from a this language should be three page amendment to a seven page amendment brought with us and I haven't made it all the way through it and so I know if I'm ready to vote on something that the in in you know we're right in here the and we're trying to do I just was over there with Matthew this language. Should be struck when it's engrossed if it's not it needs to come out because this that section would only deal with the if it was with the bill before we write off on it so what I'm I guess my question is on that language on page three of the old version I don't lines nine through eleven. That's not in this new version you're saying it should not be it should not be but we're trying right now my name is Lawrence about what's that I was on my favorite part about the amendment was those three lines and so if they're gone I'm. Little more nervous about the amendment Well we had to I was gonna have to process it more than I'm not ready to vote on it but if we're gonna both in. The last I don't know. We can get your questions answered by Matthew that's why you know he's trying to start this Matthew Miller. You know I've been amenable to email you in that so you're saying active sessions. You have that. Where it says you know we're we're testify when the terms of newly appointed commissioners shall commence on the terms of prior appointed commissioner shall be cut short and terminate yes that's if that should in the gross part that should go away because we're actually outlined in the terms in the amendment. If you go back to the second page of the amendment. Then the commissioners will be appointed for that port in the county says same counties and then if you go. So go over to Page. six and looking for a for example so we deal with each commissioner because we have to go to the roll off roll on portion. I'm sorry go to page. Go to page five this will go with with the one. So the change the members of the State Highway Commission in section one should be improvised filling the vacant so this vacancies. I'm. If you look at this I may be able to get to our I like this just as well as the other I I just don't know when the. Three minutes of added I understand well let's get this engrossed okay and then but to answer your question what will happen is of. Okay look at look on page five this will show an example and it's Miller Pitsch the Commissioner certain effective date of the member which expires in twenty twenty seven so Commissioner Talento will expire in twenty twenty seven so with this amendment. He will serve until twenty twenty seven and and upon the expiration of his or her term so an example of Commissioner child he will be replaced by a commissioner who were residing represent district five so then that would transfer to district five which would be senator Krauss District. So it's it's a part of the language we had to change to make sure to to conform with the roll on roll off portion of the highway department. If we want to as we discussed earlier I think in the hallway so you have commissioner Teltow who roll off and twenty twenty seven you have commissioner Gibsons will roll off and twenty twenty nine you will have Sturch holder will roll off in twenty thirty one in commissioner Hage will roll off in twenty thirty three. Right. Thanks the key is going to be once we get this engrossed I think it will all come together and we can see and that's why I wanted to have the process and I will email as I did the earlier with you And copy Matthew Miller to trying of get in an exact answer because this is a constitutional amendment. But it will change that I mean but once again your a lot of northwest Arkansas people did not want to see the terms disrupted they wanted to see things as a roll on roll off rule on approach not not with the total new approach. No I've Senator Dotson will see it soon as I get done I will email you a copy of Matthew Miller we'll get answers your questions will get the billing gross and then we'll see what the language comes out after that like I said this process is being right here the and trying to throw things in it's better to be careful than it is to to go ahead but I will say this for time reasons. You know I hate using this term but you know if it does go the house we can make more technical corrections but you need to have your answers questions before you vote on the floor. So We have to vote today to have any chance of that happening yeah. So. What's will of committee. I have a motion to pass a motion by Senator as amended as amended as amended. Second by Senator flowers all in favor say aye hi All opposed Like sign. The. Roll call. Senator flowers. Senator flowers yes Senator Hester. Senator Hester. Senator king hi Senator king yes Sir crow. Senator crow yes. Senator Payton. Senator Payton. Senator Dotson. Senator Dotson. Senator Tucker. Senator Tucker yes.