Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee- House

There's a Wardlaw understanding of billion like to run your prepared to run the house bill seventeen. Forty four yes Sir. Nice little non controversial bill. Don't do much. You're recognized to present your bill. So few years ago we've had some landfill issues in north central Arkansas where they went in and I took a lot of money on the post closure fund about twenty million dollars or little plus or minus there just a little bit of money and. Now that those landfills or are trying to go back into commission and what this bill does it just says if you're if you want to go back and Commission that's fine but you got to pay back all that money you took from the state to get your lan filled up to date so it's just a little little bill that make sure everybody stays right. There was any questions for represent Wardlaw. Resilient when you're recognized for a question. thank you Mr chairman is there any opposition to this little bill not that I'm aware of thank you. Senior for the questions you close for his or her speak for against the bill. Seeing none represent what are you close for the bill I am close with a motion of do pass. Members have a motion to passing discussion on the motion. All those in favor say aye. Posed congratulations you've passed your bill represent Collins see you in the room for you can present your bill. Thank you Mr sixteen twenty two so we have an Arkansas stroke task force it provides recommendations to the state board of health. And this would create a heart attack task force the US for task force is done really good work as helped a lot of hospitals share best practices and is obviously to save lives and heart attacks has forced would do all the same things but it would be for heart attack and stroke no cost to the state to something that we want to get down to try to help happy to answer any questions. Members any questions represent college reserves officer can. Prevents the thank you Mr what prevents hospitals working together today what we have to tell them to in a task force well I mean it's not telling them that they have to do anything it's all Advisory I mean they can work together but with the task force does is it brings people together from different groups department health purposes Asian struck sociais Asian EMS medical salaried so forth and they're able to be in the same room together and. Communicate and See funding together and do other things together and it's just a little bit more functional away for them share information okay thank you. Members of any other questions. C. nine zero Senate speak for against this bill. See no one represent Collins you close for your bill I'll close the bill. A motion to pass any discussion on the motion all those in favor say aye. Opposed. Graduations you've passed your bill thank you. The representative Weiner you in the room and members we're going to go out of order without objection just as I see so as I see people coming in the room we're at that time in session we need to try to hear things that need to be heard so we'll let represent when come to the table the representative when you'll be presenting house bill sixteen ninety two U.. Yes Sir. F. you just identify your name and district and you're recognized to present your bill okay thank you very much Mr Carlton when represent districts seventy North Little Rock in sure would this is one of those times when the public health committee gets to be part Transportation Committee first time I ran a bill on this topic was two thousand seventeen and we came before public health then and and so here we are one more time. In fact the I'll go ahead and ask our guests to introduce herself as well my name is Kelly Wiley and I'm or alternative project delivery administrator for the Arkansas department of transportation. And so members what we've got we actually first we should have an amendment we do have the amendment has not arrived yet. The design for the. We don't have an amendment right now okay if it does not have it is in route so maybe false will step back will let somebody else president will be the next you're welcome to continue to present and the members can ask questions if they look at you if there are no questions obviously you can pull it down and but I would I would say without objection from members will hear the testimony around the bill and then at the moment comes we can but I can't even tell you what the amendment is it's not a complicated amendment at all not not seeing a lot of people in the room yet to talk so I'll be happy to let you and continue okay all righty okay sounds good Members what we're doing is we're expanding the program that the for the construction manager general contractor program that is currently being used by the Arkansas department of transportation for those of you who are unaware of what that. Does is it allows the entire process to be a little more seamless it's not the perfect thing for every project that the department of transportation does but for certain projects it can prove to be very cost effective and it allows the contractor to be involved in the design phase all the way through until it is completed there's there's a lot of overlap and seamlessness that goes through which helps eliminate waste which helps eliminate overages that would be at the cost of the taxpayer and so for instance we had one bill or one project that is almost complete the on the west side of Little Rock on highway ten and because of the usage of the construction manager general contractor method we've been able to save the taxpayers of Arkansas seven million dollars just on the same project and so that was the initial bill that we passed in two thousand seventeen we amended it in two thousand nineteen to be able to add a little bit more and so what we're seeking to do with this bill is to Expand to add five additional projects the sum of the five additional projects may not exceed five hundred billion single project cannot exceed a hundred and fifty million and then were expanding the term of the termination of the program for another two years to go to June thirtieth of twenty twenty six the all these changes are in full support by the Arkansas asphalt paving association and also the associated general contractors of Arkansas as well no no no opposition but that's that's what we're seeking to do and The Amendment that will be coming is just going to add a reporting phase so that we can audit and see exactly how successful these projects are so we got one that is nearing completion and the at that point that you will have will have a couple more on the docket and then expand a little bit more and president Lehman you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman yeah this project is has been in our this. bill has been in effect for about four years now right yes Sir you talked about the one project. Which is where my houses and it's it's been a big mess for four years but anyway save a lot of money but that you talked about the effectiveness in the savings there I think there are two other projects that are in process and I know they're not done so you may not be able to tell us but can you kind of talk about are are they as effective in are we seeing savings or can you tell at this point I can tell you the other two projects that are effective ones up in Fayetteville with the I. forty nine highway sixty two interchange that is about fifty percent complete right now that was started about three years after the one that was in west little rock and then the other one is was just awarded that's on highway five and Bryant that's going to be that's that's going to be the next to and if you have anything you'd like to add on perhaps maybe the one up in Fairfield you know I we are fifty percent complete on that project and we've already seen some really of great innovations from our contracting partners and we've also had about three million dollars worth of innovations that will save money to the overall construction contract that we've implemented to date as we work through that process. You have any other questions some told amendment still not here okay it will be to stick around there and I think they're working on it It is again several trial expected stable keeper I see you in the room repair to present your bill. You're welcome to be recognized for the intelligence in addition self and here we have with you and. You'll be recognized to present house bill seventeen thirty one. Thank you. Have to turn your microphone but yes. You're recognized to state your name for the decision to the micro for the representative Cameron Cooper District fifty seven. John Layton resident rose but Arkansas. The colleagues I have House Bill seventeen thirty one before you in this. Very well may be the shortest bill you've had in your committee this session. But it has the potential to leave help alleviate part of the child care crisis. Especially in our rural communities it's no secret that there's a shortage in the veil availability of child care for working families. In my district in the small town of road but in White County my constituents John and Becky wouldn't provide an essential service to the community. They operate an in home day care called miss Becky's child care and preschool. The nearest towns road but were other child care services can be found or Conway thirty four miles to the west the V. twenty five miles to the south Searcy twenty two miles to the east and humor springs fourteen miles to the north. For single parent working at one of the businesses and road but it's not feasible for them to drive a long distance to these other towns to utilize daycare services so daycare availability in our local community is essential we see the same issue playing out in rural communities all across the state. Now typically when we think of licensing for daycare services the Department of Human Services come to mind. Under DHS licensure an in home day care can provide services for up to sixteen children. But did you know that Department of Health also requires their own retail food establishment license if the day care provides services for more than ten children. This bill rules based off current Arkansas Code twenty dash fifty seven dash two oh one which states the day care center serving ten or fewer children are exempt from retail food establishment licensure. So for day care wants to serve more than ten children they have to required tool licensure they're DHS Lysons and additional established food retail food establishment license from the department of health. Meeting the requirements for this food establishment licensure can be difficult and expensive and prevents many in home daycares from being able to expand their services. This bill simply does one thing if you look at it with me. It means the number of children from ten to twelve so the day care serving twelve or fewer children is exempt from the retail food establishment licensure. Modifying this regulation will make it easier for day care centers to expand their services and provide more opportunity for parents they can provide services for two more children potentially helping up to additional families in their communities. I reached out to both the Department of Health and the Department of Human Services and either one of those agencies has any problems with the bill leave us all representatives from both of those agencies in here when I walked in so if you have questions I'm sure they they might come to the table to answer those. I have my constituent Mr Lynton here with me I like to give him a few minutes to talk in just a described the difficulties that that that they have in meeting the requirements for this food establishment licensure. Well and so moving here we we used to do this and and Texas actually so I retired and we moved up here so to road but we're family is so we decided to bring what we had in Texas going to the state of Arkansas because it was a big need for up here I mean people crying for childcare licensed childcare as the big name. So we started looking into it is okay sixteen so we started looking into the the requirements we made application with the correct permit application for everybody got stopped quickly by the department of health not that I don't blame you for anything but you know we're trying to make this retro are home to a commercial establishment which is most people are going to do that so it's just easier to knock it down to ten or you don't have to have those inspections you don't have to have your home retrofit it and then you can just keep ten kids well. You get phone calls from parents and women that are calling saying I need child care I can't go to work I got a job you know you hear that it gets frustrating because we can't provide that service only and only on a legal basis so. That's what talk to Cameron to help us do something here in our community two of the lease up it to a couple of children that we could have somebody out here all right so that's kinda where read on it was just a big expense for us to go and spend all that money to retro that kitchen to make it a commercial set up when I've got ten kids in care right now and everybody is fine there's been no issues you know we've been doing this for over a year now so that's what I meant on and it's just just knocked down the expense of it also so ladies and people such as yourself can keep the kids that are better desiring to come into care so that we can keep on a legal basis because believe me a lot of illegal care out there German okay there's there's the legal people out there that they don't want to have to meet the requirements the fire department inspections I don't want to meet the the food service requirements it just regular just not messed with at all and just have people bring their children to them to keep the charging port. And then you know it's illegal set up so you don't know what's going on we get background check every year every two years we get we go through a battery of tests thanks so education wise too so. We're trying to do it right and we just we just think it's it's time that that. We could get a couple more children in care I say this I'm not trying Arkansas I'm not a Texan Arkansas but in Texas it's perfectly legal with a licensed doctor home to have twelve children with one lady okay so that's kind of what we were used to we get here of course is to never explain it to you but and I help or I mean I'm I'm retired but I'm you look at it at a chief cook and bottle washer pretty much set in a teacher I teach teaching kids how to respond except that's what I do with my wife so that's our asking for we're asking for an additional two children be kept if you do the math I was looking at I was a parent October for the committee meeting. currently there's two thousand one or twenty license program to two hundred twenty nine family care homes that's in the whole state Arkansas they're licensed so if you take the two twenty nine times to if people want to do that that adds four hundred fifty so my children additionally that the that could be served so. We're open for any questions all I gotta say membership any questions. C. nine The representative yeah we have a motion to pastors and laymen any discussion on the motion. All those in favor say aye. Posed congratulations you pass your bill thank you committee I appreciate you for your patience Sir presents being here today. Are you prepared Sturch represent very favorite sixteen forty six do you have an amendment with that yes bill will be passed now the amendment. Yeah. Interment is okay all last of Gordon Dr for the architects to join me. If you can just come to the table and identify yourself. Members of an at the step out from minimalism Ladyman chair so the minutes being passed out on House Bill sixteen forty six you're recognized to present your amendment thank you chairman. The. Committee the amendment simply just excludes of municipal utilities from this and there in that the municipal June utilities are not required to have the three bits back. Okay representative who is the president of the amendment I have a motion right from representative Gonzalez to approve the amendment. A discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor of the amendment signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. Is have a motion is carried amendments passed resentment you're recognized to present the bill as amended. Thank you chairman representative Richard McGrew District eighty five the. Committee this is a pretty simple bill just about being good steward with the taxpayer's money this basically says on any any project this dealing with public money that there must be a three bit spectrum lighting agencies that serve my background is let go contractors on a big project school the municipal building something like that there's always a lighting package and there's several agencies in the state in just just requires to have representation on on the specification to allow three bids on that may. More available for any of representative up for do you have anything to add to that. Please introduce yourself and the representative have already done that hi my name is Gordon Duckworth I am licensed architect in Arkansas were for large from and want to state that the also I'm here representing the American institute of architects organization for the state and we have no issues with this bill your Mike little closer there so we can. We have no issues with this bill. Thank you. Resented Ballinger question. The you're recognized thank you Mr chairman what happens when you have some kind of specialty lights. And you can't find but one company that provides those lights do you still have to have three B. it's all these lighting agencies ninety eight he's represent several different brands so it's not that they just represent one light fixture they represent many lands a live pictures I have never seen it on the bed in math thirty years in the business we're this was a cut and the only company that had this specific light fixture it may be the other brand maybe a hair different but this institution specs for the fixtures were basically the same. Thank you. Any other questions from committee. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized I thank Mr so help me understand the process a little bit so at this point they would've already. That did they have to fill out the the contract with the. With the farm to start with because the project was going to be so so large because after after project is somebody dollars you have to get bids for the project right as a as a whole and then you're saying that that contractor who won that bidding process is going to have to go bid out the. Lights no this doesn't affect the contractor this is on a project states it's you know a big school the architect designed the building the electoral engineer designs the electrons in place and all the light fixtures on the project the electoral injure also puts a set of specs together for the contractors to bid that so when such they prepare this spec and then it goes when electrical contractor starts putting the price better he goes to the distributor the supply house and says I need a price the lighting in the lighting agency supplies that price to the distributor doesn't affect the contractor at all so what's happening now is some leading agencies are able to block the other. Competition by working with the engineer. And so when the latter can when the distributor then can only take one price because that one. Leding age is the only one specified this just says in your specifications allow for three leading agencies so that this distributor can't accept those three presses. What's happening is they've been limiting the competition and this just allows. The competition to be there. A representative Pilkington you're recognized for a question. Yes I read this bill and to me it seems like what we're doing is we're we're trying to micro manage. the engineer here I mean if they've got a certain lighting that they once and there's only one game in town where we gonna say we needed to others if they're if they're not available I just at if if they designed that way I mentioned they have the freedom to do that it's not it doesn't affect their design it does affect their ability if you need ample to happen with me. Let cool there was there was a a lighting package on a big job who the engineer went to the I mean this leading agency went an engineer says Hey hand me the draws let me lay out all the lights for you let me do your job for you and all I want for you is to take out that or equal. And specify only me. It's not about using and so when that happened it came down to because of my knowledge I went to another line eighteen said can you meet this speculation absolutely we can meet all those. They gave me a price directly the price was fifty thousand dollars cheaper. When I took the prize in got the job that was still going through distribute everything that lighting agency blackball me and kept me from getting prices for six months from the because they're trying to control the market it happened multiple times that's what this bill is about it's about the stop to add. Competition especially I was able to stop that in my industry when I was in with the private individual because I could go shown the money when you deal with public money nobody's looking at the money. So that's what this is is to make us to be a good steward with the public money is not is not stopping their design or changing their design if you go ask leading agencies they represent you know a huge brand of lands they can meet the specs there there was some things they tried to do. To change you were the someone could make this bag bass thank all pain after fan to the painted a live picture after fat and this can be painted before fan million you or the public would never know the difference but it was a difference in the spec just to simply block. The competition. What this does is allow competition in one without affecting their design. That you can follow up. Imitated It seems like the issue with this. Story about you in the lighting which I you know you are able to find out you were able to fix the issue that there was I don't think any of the government being in between two individuals who are both consenting to an agreement the issue seems that that they blackball G. not that we need to force them to give more competition are give more more options if they don't want to I I guess I'm confused I feel like we're we're. You know we're aiming for a target on the left hand target on the right that makes sense well that's not the way this to Senate bill this not because I'm due to any example what would happen This is happening every day on public money were excluding competition out and driving the price up and we're doing it with taxpayer money this is not about me or about it's about taxpayer money being used in an appropriate way why do we want to limit competition you know whether it's blasting or whether we're bidding for a police car one or one we want to say we only want to use one. You know it's it's being a good steward with the taxpayer's money it's not about me or about what happened my experience does tell the story you know and and what I can tell you is sometimes you can stop in private money you could never stopped on public money so to me it was about taxpayer my money's. Going to make that got rich because he was able to exclude the competition. The I got a question clarification I guess on this so what and I don't have a bill in front of me in the House as from off base here but so what your bill does is it would it would basically require a clean spec. And could the comparison what what what was the term used or similar. What would requires a three bit specs so when the engineers are preparing the bid they had the the bill the bed where they work for they could not limited to one agency I'm happy to report they have to leave it open for three agencies can bid on the project so we want to clean specification that other people can give other people the opportunity to bid absolutely which that competition should reduce the price I believe it does in most cases and I'm not your bill is due and I might say when I went to the architects association with that they were very where this problem very open to this bill okay. any other questions from committee. Representative Allen recognized. I'm still trying to. I understand what you're doing our I'm a contractor the commercial contractor to. And I put. A set of plans out for B.. We run with sub contractors and other contractors. They have the option what I do I don't have just one person looking at the plants I have two or three people looking at the plants looking at the electrical the plumbing H. back and what happy. Then at that point in time what I will do I will actually make a decision on the person that I'm that's going to provide me with the services. So what would prohibit you from doing this why do we need the law to do this when we can when we can do this automatically every term SO albeit this without the current the prime contractor puts it out so everybody can be used on it. With the the architect firm puts it out right and they they say will serve a place in every engineer every letter issued a requirement that wants to be an only can be handled but let me explain to you this way if you were designing a house okay and you were designing getting you were giving it the house builders to build out and you say you know you go by your lumber were you want to your shingles are where you want to but because I'm designing the house you can only by your light fixtures from this one place. Now you can buy the same light fixture several other places but my bid says you can only back from this one place that's what that's what this is fiction say you can get your your price for many supply house you want to. But you have to be able to buy those light fixtures anywhere you want to I'm not limited you to one place that's what this bill does so Arkansas follows I'm sorry. So our architects do limit now seeing that you can only buy from one place not the architects engineers engineers are doing yes Sir. The other questions. Seeing none we do have people signed up to so that please let them make yeah you're recognized I just wanna state that a from a as a design professional what we do typically is is we do what's called a basis of design will of most manufacturers can cross reference any light fixture most liked pictures all way across the board all these different distributors have the as as the representatives members said they have the the they're set manufactures that they can supply fixtures from and and so if you have three different you have a a a a basis of design and then you have to others that have already been vetted and the architect in the electrical engineer and sometimes when we work with the construction manager early on they can also get involved and have input and feedback so when you have three separate packages before a contract is signed it gives it some more equal and more fair and it's also easier to determine which package based on price and also on on quality and performance is is better for the for the climb from the taxpayer. That's it. Thank you. we do have people signed up to speak for and against the bill. So signed up to speak against the bill Robert Shiels. If you would come to the mind. Of members I'm going to hand this off to co vice chair Here that the run the meeting and I'll just set up and help him so. Your own. I'm here to speak different. Sorry. Oh sorry. So we have. One person signed up to speak for the bill I believe. Was that you had already okay. So we have no one else signed up to speak for against the bill. So representive you're recognized close. You're closed yes Sir. I was will the committee. Seven do pass by representative will Ridge. As a of the voting on the bill as amended and any discussion on the motion. Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. Is habit bills passed. All right. Next up we'll hear from a representative McCollum are you prepared. H. B. seventeen forty two. Some. Identify yourself a letter read. All right thank you Mr chair thank you Committee scan to see you all represent McCollum here H. B. seventeen forty two We felt like this is urgent matter we being conversations among legislators governor's office felt like that when it comes to the urgent matter of getting people back to work in Arkansas promoting economic stability. Maximizing the. General effectiveness of our workforce development in Arkansas that we needed to move the tennis program From the department of commerce and over to DHS it's pretty straightforward in terms of what the language of the bill does we do have a. I believe our secretary from DHS here if if there are any questions but a pretty straight for bill. Sorry Committee on trying to find the bill on. Are there any questions from committee. Rep Jefferson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair of. It didn't the tenant program used to be a DHS several years ago my memory serves me right yes Sir that is correct not sure how long ago that was but. It wasn't at one point yep probably two thousand five yes yes two thousand five somewhere around six oh seven I think it moved to workforce services. And so what we want to do now is move it back to DHS because it was a DHS why don't know how long. We was called something else the and so that's my question what was it called me. I am not certain that was before my time you're going to introduce for those that don't know. It was what Kristi Putnam secretary DHS I'm not a hundred percent sure what it was called in two thousand five we may have some folks in the room who I can call up to answer that is the transitional employment assistance program yeah I know what it is yeah okay that's okay I'll ask you about that your question specifically is what it was ten I've called before it was that that you see is the aid to families with dependent children is that what you're yes the I. see mark white yeah okay that's what it was okay all right what thank you students only. All right any other questions from committee. I'm closed. Were closed got a motion of. All in favor say aye. Impose. Your bill has passed Sir. Next up we have. Represent lane are you here. H. B. C. H. B. sixteen ninety two. Yes Sir all right let it rip okay this is the continuation now also we are I have the amendment to pass out. We'll make sure we. Dot all the I's and cross all the teas. All right the The Amendment that you have is just what we explain just a few minutes ago it is just requires gets that reporting audit so that we can measure its effectiveness and make adjustments as needed moving forward to under appreciate a good vote on the amendment. We've got a motion to adopt the amendment a discussion on the motion. And none all in favor say aye. He opposed say no. Is average your your past the amendment now you're recognized present the bill as amended okay so the bill as we discussed before I think we've gone over all the details if anybody has any additional questions happy to answer them. Okay questions from committee. I like this. You're a. You're recognized close for the bill close for the bill and I would appreciate a good vote. All right as. There's nobody signed up to speak for against so. We have a motion for generation thanks motion do pass all in favor say aye. As amended. All in favor say aye as amended any opposed. You pass your bill thank you thank you very much thank you Mr chair thank you Committee. Next up we have. Exam makes a general. Representative Brown are you ready to run your bill. Okay. Identify yourself committee you're recognized run H. the seventeen oh five. And I believe we have a handout that's fixing to go around. Thank you Committee representative Carolyn brown District sixty seven here to run house bill seventeen No five. And I felt a hand out to go out first. It's making its way around. ACT I believe everybody has a hand out you're recognized Mr brown. Thank you everyone this is an amendment to the telemedicine act the To establish that a professional relationship for physical therapy services shall only be established if the healthcare professional conduct in person examination of the patient and this unfortunately the Association could not be here this morning they were planning to be but something came up but the letter simply states on behalf of the Arkansas physical therapy association I am writing to express our support for H. B. seventeen oh five which amends telemedicine act by clarifying that a professional relationship. Requires an in person examination I think this is just kind of common sense you know if you've been to physical therapy you know that they have to look at you and. I move things around and see what's working and what's not and I think that this is a common sense bill and I'd be. Glad to answer any questions. Leding questions from committee. One one thing that I think is important which I would just informed of this morning is it out of state companies are taking advantage of our telemedicine bill and So. We don't want to lose business out of state. Companies for one thing and we do want people to get proper care and we want our physical therapist to be able to do a good job. Okay of. No questions from committee I don't see any questions of I'm sorry go ahead you're recognized. Thank you five Miller representative Miller Sturch Caroline I I will be clear this is it out of the companies are taking advantage of the telemedicine bill. But my understanding is these are licensed providers who are work Arkansas licensed providers but are working for an outside company they're not out of state providers is that correct are out of a provider you know I'm not I'm not deeply informed on that topic I just was received a business card for and that was sent to me by a physical therapist and I have a company by the name of ash Care and they do for virtual physical therapy and occupational therapy and they are Out of let's see if I can figure this out. They And I can tell where they're from. I'm looking at that got a front back to this card let's see what here it is San Diego California. That that the company is over the provider is. Well that's where American specialty health is out of action well I'm just saying because we think about it it's like we have mercy facilities here in Arkansas he's telemedicine in you could say well their corporate office is not in Arkansas it's it's in Missouri but yet they have Arkansas providers are using telemedicine in Arkansas which is way the telehealth mills to telehealth bill was designed I guess is so. Aye aye aye aye I just to that statement I don't I mean if if there. I guess I'm saying aye these are. These are providers who are licensed with the state of Arkansas most likely they are I mean if they're professional they probably have to be licensed in Arkansas to be able to offer their services however the Arkansas chapter of the American physical therapy association would prefer are that of people have a hands on exam prior to being taken into care. Any other questions from committee. Saying no we don't have anybody signed up to speak for or against the bill region brown you're welcome close your bill I'm close from a bill. All right of. Plus we'll committee. We have a we have a motion do pass All in favor was there any discussion on the motion. All right all in favor say aye. All favour say no. I will say aye ayes have it. Thank you Mr chair. represent Wooten are your in room. Can I. Descent into an Arab state. Represent what is not room representative Eubanks is. Of. Two. Yes Sir. You're recognized Sir. Thank you Mr chair House bill thirteen fourteen I was running that on behalf of the optometry association a conformity that they would like to send this to an interim study so with your permission I will. Would like to do that. Jane discussion on this from the Committee or questions or anything. With six seven nine I'm your request is approved service happy to help. I will turn this over to former chairman Ladyman I'm or run a couple bills. Sixty. Members while representative Miller's getting down to present the bill if there's anyone here who wants to present a sent a senator's bill that we have on the agenda let us know and we'll recognize you representative Miller you're recognized did you want to run H. B. sixteen eleven. Workers compensation bill. Can you read the title for me because I can't two men portions of workers compensation law that resulted from initiated measure nineteen forty seven number four and to allow attorney's fees to be awarded on medical benefits or services awarded under the workers compensation law. I can run that first at bat all right you're recognized thank you of the representative Josh Miller from district forty one you Michael. It is but I'm a long way from it and I don't know if they're getting closer. Movieposter too and he would. I try like this is this better yes that's better you're recognized anyway this bill is. Fairly self explanatory right now. And workers comp cases attorneys are not allowed to bill if there's a if there's a a dispute over whether or not Workers compensation insurance should cover certain medical. You know if somebody gets hurt at work they break their arm. These these insurance companies may not. They may not pay for up front think we've all heard stories of people being denied over and over attorneys get involved it goes to court insurance companies decide to pay currently. Our of our attorneys are not allowed to bill. Four the medical benefits that they might get someone awarded. They got fifteen or twenty thousand or more dollars worth of medical benefits awarded they they can't bill for that I'm not here to try to put money in the pockets of attorneys they. They're they're able to do that well enough on their own but what I am here for is to try to get our insurance companies. To straighten up and quit yanking people around okay that's a problem sometimes we have to go through some circuitous matters two of the routes to achieve what we're trying to accomplish and that's what I'm doing here I'm not here you know trying to make a lot of money for insurance company are definitely not for insurance companies but for attorneys but but I do I do want to see us do a few things to make it where these companies will stop yeah I can our constituency round and that'll take any questions. The questions representative Richardson you're recognized for a question. At. Having never filed a workers comp claim I'm. I'm assuming what you're saying is that I would have to if I filed a claim I would have to pay my lawyer first separately and otherwise they don't get reimbursed are they don't get services so an individual that's injured has to come up with the money up front to be able to actually take care of that whether they're. Whether they have actually able to receive any compensation is that is that correct well in some currently in some cases I mean if you if you if you follow claim is being is being denied of people you know sake litigation to force their. The insurance carrier to you know to cover whatever they. You know or whatever the claim is So and and now. You know whether or not people have to come up with one that's between the at some attorneys you know mate may not charge until they won the cakes are some no so that's all that's all up to you know how each attorney wants to do their. Conduct their own business this bill would be this doesn't force attorneys. The bill for this at all. It just simply says they can't and then you know the goal is to their insurance companies to. Today to do what they're supposed to do you're going to go you know your lose a court case and they say well I'm so wait wanted not await them away. And then they can take us to court or whatever and then we'll pass. We all know that goes on and it should if you say you're gonna provided service provided and go on. I hope I answered your question thank you. The representative Gonzalez you're recognized for a question. Thermistor surges Warren try to. Get this clear my head you want to. Punish insurance companies by rewarding attorneys. Well I'm not trying to a ward reward. Anybody. Nariman necessarily trying to punish anybody okay I'm trying to get the insurance companies you want them to act right but I one ACT right attorney and And like I said is there's nothing in this bill that that we're not putting it in the law that says attorneys must make more money for what they're doing it is it gives it to the next word is possible okay so can they still only collected up twenty five percent of the compensation. What what is it that if a. I believe in the I believe it's in the workers comp law. Where they can collect twenty five percent if they reach a a financial settlement or whatever thank you know what they're they're fees are capped at twenty five percent the father. I. That's the. I believe that's correct okay thank you probably know more you're looking at it I'm not. Senate pair you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman representative Miller so. This is the twenty five percent part of the of the amount awarded or is that in addition to the amount awarded. Again what's currently in place to twenty five percent is on is on financial settlement only okay if you're injured and you have you have to hire an attorney to get your workers comp insurance to do. For as they should. Your they're only going to get paid twenty five percent of whatever. Financial settlement has been reached correct so five hundred thousand dollars settlement does its twenty five come out of a hundred and seventy five go to the claimant or not I believe that would be the current case yes or okay okay now this and we're not changing the twenty five percent this bill. So it be like if you had had twenty thousand dollars worth of Medical bills that that. A judge said that they had to cover. That would allow them to bill for up to. Twenty five percent of of of that value as well okay thank you Mr chairman. Representative Ferguson did you have a question. thank you Mister chair I think my question was answered by representative Perry but I do have another question representative Melanie what exactly. Does your bill do does it make the insurance companies pay when they're supposed to. I'm a little confused Well. No Sir but I'm not going to say that it doesn't address that but that is that is that's one of the goals of this bill it would. The bill simply just allows an attorney the bill if if the Attorney. Does litigation or. And in that work they get their client. Medical bills covered. Portion of the all of them whatever that was being denied the claim. Then this bill would say that the attorney could right now they cannot by law they cannot bill for anything that they get their client awarded as far as medical. Bill's being covered is concerned and this is just changes that says that they could doesn't say if they have to. Doesn't say that you know we're not put in law the attorneys make more money or or whatever and. Anyway that's that's what the bill does okay thank you Mr chair. Resent Eubanks and you have a question. Thank you Mr chair representative Miller do we know what the fiscal impact might be with regard to this. Fiscal impact to the state. Yes Sir. I can't see how it would have any. Mr chairman can we get a fiscal impact from. The F. and nine. The the Legislative. The representative Miller I believe in this case if there if a request is made for fiscal impact statement the normal process is to request one. so without objection I think we need to request a fiscal impact statement and then have you come back in. And present your bill again. All else fails. Request fiscal impact all right thank you thank you for present your bill will will do that we request that a fiscal impact statement to get you back to the run it again are you ready to run HB sixteen twelve I am you're recognized. All right thank you This one you may read that it it says to amend portions of the law regarding certain workers compensation payments under the workers compensation law that resulted from initiated measure nineteen forty eight number four that's the only description of. This is a simple bill I'm probably going to complicate it with my explanation. Currently. And. Workman's comp. If If someone is injured. They receive two thirds of their gross pay. In a workman's comp claim. I thought this was just true very by fifth third employees paid for your players paid for workman's comp insurance you get hurt. You know and your claims approved you get two thirds of of your gross pay come to find out it's not. Of these payments are capped at the weekly average wage in the state of Arkansas so if you are a higher wager. You don't get two thirds of your wage. You get. The weekly average of but now if you're at average or below you get two thirds so what this bill what I was trying to do here. Is for people who are. Permanent. Total disability cases. Only I will be very clear about this only permanent told me. Disability click cases. They would get. The two thirds. Of their back. I know a little bit about what it's like to be totally and permanently disabled. And I've I've been I've been very fortunate. But. Not everyone is and when you spend a. They're part of your career and you work hard. And you have a a family and you have a life based around. What your earnings are. and then and then you're injured by no fault of your own. And you get your you get your income cut I mean it's it's a tough to I'm not a listen. I'm not trying to. just give away the give away the house or anything. We're talking about. On average over the last five years fifteen cases that this would affect a year. Fifteen individuals fifteen families right talking about thousands of people. Right about the majority of the claims to about fifteen only the only people that this is going to affect his permanent permanent total disability cases of where they are earning wages higher than the weekly average in the state. And so again this for example that's what I'm trying to do trying to get these folks will better deal. now we have to take any questions. President Gonzalez you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr just reading through the bill that strikes through a lot of language that has some some old date sentence going back to eighty seven. Does this change things for people who are. currently drawn payments from old injuries. Is my under. Excuse me. It my understanding. That. Need. Get some water. Yeah. Of this my understanding that it does not I've asked the bill pay the intent of the bill is is only to change things moving forward of this is not retroactive and that's what that's what I've been told From the from your. Okay just looking at the language I don't know why they would strike that if it wasn't retroactive. You try to figure out the representative Miller I met another request for fiscal impact statement on a straight. I mean it your bill really sounds like it has some good benefits I really like it but I believe the fiscal impact statement would be a good thing to have in your pocket for that representative Bentley for what reason as you can make a comment okay I just a question I thought every now and public health every bill went through the fiscal review before was allowed to be heard we received a fiscal impact is that not is that not true I've I'm just curious I don't know I think there are limitations on which bills do I believe I'm saying that off top of my head. Is that correct so I was I was it's been a long. Whether certain classifications okay I mean the general rule is if someone on the committee request that they had already been all review that was not the best fit into a category okay thank you for the front thank you for that clarification from excited right the representative Miller I I'm a take that suggestion I think it does need to get an impact and you might wanna check into the retroactive question of that I will do it I'll do it again and I look forward to the very expedient fiscal impact and and seeing you all again it has been requested already so they're working on so. Thank you representative will. A representative hall could you in the room. Okay okay are you prepared to run H. B. thirteen oh five yes Sir. Good morning Mr chairman market committee Delia hock District seventeen I have with me Jenna Coleman from mercy hospital please introduce yourself and who you represent. Janet Goldwing with mercy health system you're recognized to present your bill thank you we're prevented our bringing to you a bill this morning that came to me from constituents last about a year and a half ago when they receive notification from mercy hospital that under federal mandates for covid they were being required in the billing system of their insurance to. Basically turned a switch on or off for twelve years and above. that parents of a twelve year old and above would not be able to see the doctor notes of their child or choose the doctor of the church of the parents choice if the child did not want to do that and the reason for this and the only state where mercy had to change their billing system to be difference was in Arkansas because we have a very short phrase that is problematic and so what this bill does it just Replaces the current. Line of. The bill to any on anticipates an emancipated minor of sufficient intelligence to understand and appreciate the consequences of the proposed surgical or medical treatments or procedures for him or herself that is construed to be twelve or above. To any on emancipated minor who is sixteen years of age or older for sexual assault domestic sexual or physical abuse or substance or alcohol abuse. And one of the other changes that we've added for the department of health is to add wording that includes the mature minor doctrine or an emancipated minor of sufficient intelligence to understand and appreciate the consequences approve proposed surgical medical treatments for him or herself will receive such a merger corpse I'm so sorry surgical error or medical treatment from the department of health that local health units the only kind of surgery they do it local health units is on. A patch for contraception and with that I would ask if bonus Goldman could explain kind of what this dilemma how this dilemma came about. Yes thank you and I I do want to say this is mercy is neutral on this bill and but we did have when the twenty first century cures act passed we had to redo our patient portal and Arkansas is low it says and that if an adolescent is of sufficient intelligence they can make their own medical decisions with those two combined we had to change our system and we notified all of our patients that the changes were coming. And how parents can access patient notes I am due to all of these laws together and of course parents were very upset they did not realize that their children could consent to their own medical treatment in Arkansas a so they contacted us and a lot of them actually contacted Womack and cons office and which we determined the cares Act was not. Really why they were upset it is the Arkansas state law and because it currently says of sufficient intelligence that doesn't have any age limits and and that's how we ended up here today I would be happy to take any questions. And I would add that BLR did a survey of surrounding states on minor consents compared Arkansas to Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Oklahoma Tennessee and Texas and we are the only state that has that particular exemption. And that was actually put into law about fifty years ago so it isn't something of recent. A legal description but something that is now become much more problematic in terms of insurance and parental consent issues that with that I will take any questions. Do you have any questions from committee. Resemble you Mr I guess my question would be for mercy maybe so can this part potentially be harmful I mean I I I want to present what if scenarios and and the worst case scenarios but I do wanna make sure that there's nothing unintended so a fifteen year old that's a week from B. and sixteen comes in and all of the same things apply they now can't consent because their under sixteen were before they could have because obviously if they're of sufficient intelligence sixteen. According to this now that's the line in the sand they would be sufficient intelligence prior to this right. We'll we did not actually determine that ages I am well so when we set up our system we had. Because Arkansas's law is so broad we had our legal team pediatricians and a psychologist kind of help us because in the system we had to put age brackets and determine how this will work and so right now just because of the limitations of our system it is. Age birth to twelve is a proxy of their parents account to age twelve to sixteen is still a proxy of their parents it accounts but they can it's a little bit different on They can determine all or nine access to the like provider notes sixteen and up they can create their own account and parents the under the twenty first century cures act parents can still call and get their patients their child's medical record it was just in that act that we had to change that is and then we had to look at each state's law and Arkansas is a law does allow children to consent to their own medical treatment and because the law was so broad we just had to use providers and legal to kind of determine how we broke up the system in the nose and because it's not that specific and federal law either follow up. You're recognized so I understand the difficulty in an iron in and out and and navigating the system and that's unfortunate I understand that but my broader concern is of patient care. Is it does it works efficiently to allow a provider to determine if this person is of significant intelligence to to consent to care. Yes right now they can is that working effectively was my question. We have I've asked a lot of our providers we've not actually ever had children come in for their own treatment this is not been at issue right so I don't have any examples of where a child receive their own treatment without their parents consent okay I have one more follow up and I'll be done Mr. Okay go ahead thank you so I didn't have another question but now do so if it's not been an issue why change the law. Because parents came and said I'm really concerned that I have my child has the ability without my consent to go to a doctor that I'm not consenting to and seek treatment that I'm not aware of and I can't access the notes and what that means is I can't access the discussion between my child's doctor and my child so that's from twelve to sixteen years old and to your question of what is the consent age I'm sure that there is some way around you know being close to being I have seven grandchildren their ages are twelve to twenty and they vary in maturity and so on but all of those would be able to go even the the ones twelve to sixteen to their doctor of their choice and make any medical decisions on any surgical or medical procedure and treatment without their parents knowing that's why I heard from many parents who when they heard this ability for their child to do this became very concerned and said this isn't and that's why the title of this bill is a parental rights bill right yes Sir. Thanks so I did want to clarify that we this is not mercy ma'am pushing this we just upset a lot of parents and it was because of the laws and how you have to limit access for the parental rights section I agree with you know I'm all for print rights had two little boys and I want to be I would have a say so in their care but then why sixteen and not eighteen. Because they're still minors thank you Mr. Okay the representative Eubanks you're recognized for a question to a question. resin Wardlaw your question. Thank you Mr. I think I want to follow the same line of questions represent will ridges on their one of my one of my issues with that is. Is because you're set at age of sixteen what do you do for the fourteen year old who's in that bad situation where they're being molested or something's going on between them and that parent and now you're making that parents the person has to consent they're never going to consent because once that evaluation of that kid goes through they're going to see the abuse and that person's going to prison so one of the reasons we haven't had this is so that if that kid needs to escape needs to have a way to bill to go to a physician or hospital they had that but now you're saying they can't because they have to have this consent no it's first degree with a hundred percent what you're saying for great parent. But it's that unintended consequence that we may be putting this person in a in a tight box and taping it shut no I I understand that and that's why it also says for sexual assault domestic sexual or physical abuse or substance or alcohol abuse. So there are exceptions to that and they can also go to a A health mobile unit to receive services as well read read that to me and show me where it says who is sixteen ages and older for these things it doesn't include the ones that are younger that's my issue. So read your exceptions again and show me where it would take in someone that younger than sixteen not older than sixty. I can't to answer your questions that have that's that's where we're we're putting that tape on that box and if I could ask Matt Gilmore from the department of health to come up and and also those who is neutral on this bill but could maybe answer that question as to who can decide. As you're more you're recognized to come and take. Former health Matt Gilmore I've got a couple of folks here with me. Charles Thompson attorney Arkansas Department health. Casey Carter and deputy director public health programs Arkansas department of health. I'll start in representative hawk was the. Kinder just enough to amend us out. due to some of the things that we have concerns with that you know we may have to do a local health unit with a minor that. doesn't have final supports that sort of thing but as far as. The issues that you know I think that was mentioned about someone younger than sixteen I think that could be a problem so I'll leave it there not sure if I'm addressing the question or not but. About seventy a questions for Parma Health. Rigen Allen you have a question. Well say no further questions. Represent Wardlaw you're recognized. I ask for thinking time okay. So explain to me and how those people under sixteen Matt I want to hear it one more time. The way I read the bill I think someone under the age of sixteen is going to have a difficulty seeking but that's my point okay thank you. It outside of work outside of the department of health's languages in there I mean no I understand everybody's saying you answer my question but you you did but it didn't give a way around that thank you. Any other questions from committee. And Mr Gilmore how many health mobile health units are in the state. Serving the state we. We don't have any mobile health units we have some local health units around the state that provide some services. For some You know for the citizens and and and youth with whoever that come in needing help you know around a prenatal care or STDs things like that but it is about ninety nineties two or three local health center in the state. Thank you. Okay similar questions from committee we do have somewhat I'm sorry service to Richard bill you're recognized. Sorry I didn't I was late to I just was thinking and I was curious so for these minors under the age of sixteen I mean they could still. Is and Taliban they can walk into E. R. and try to seek treatment that way is that I mean. And like I said I'm just not super familiar so and this just came to me so but if I make here and on this please correct all of the hospital John was mercy speak to that I think that is possible or that should be feasible I think the concern we have is that sometimes we see individuals that may be involved in human trafficking or maybe have some issues a home with possible rape or incest that sometimes control health units we have to require mandated reporter share otherwise we wouldn't be able to. Let law enforcement know what's going on so I think that's our concern but as far as in tall and the hospital alleging to speak to that. So we would be able to treat them in the ER of the and we are mandated reporters I know as far as they're concerned when we see something With the change. It gets a little more complex but under we are required to treat anyone that comes to the R. yeah I guess yeah I think my confusion on this is the part the representative Wardlaw bata about sixteen in You know there it's for sexual saw things like that those records get locked. So that is that the fourteen year old consent E. R. to get treatments it sexual. In nature there's no way to lock that parent out of that note. And I'm I'm sorry I'm kind of working as I'm thinking out loud right now. So. Because I I think the issue is like a you're just not gonna have this people show up randomly get treatment I'd like a normal clinic but you will if they walk into the arts that's just how they operate but like Senator represent were laws point my concern would be. That that fourteen year old parent would have access to that record is that correct yes unless we reported it and they did go into foster care then they no longer have access to the records we would change it and I don't it but if. It depends what happens in the E. R. if if it was a case like that and we couldn't prove that it was they were then they wouldn't go into DHS custody they would still in their parents custody and they would still see the chart the chart okay okay yes. The president Wardlaw you're recognized reserved bill to I think. I think ultimately the answer there with having those exceptions I think that parts great but I think the age being sixteen is just too high I think if you brought that age down to twelve or thirteen. Then you would encompass no sexually mature kids in those homes for those same reasons I think that's my point is we put in that box out too high and not bring it down. To your concern for those twelve and thirteen year olds that are sexually active they can get birth control at the mobile health units from the department of health. I would just add to that a Louisiana Mississippi Missouri. Oklahoma Tennessee and Texas all have the age of consent as eighteen or twenty one years of age with these exceptions but not including the mature minor doctrine that Arkansas has we would now be in line with the other surrounding states all of those with the exceptions to consents. Okay one more time there any other questions from committee. Represent Arkansas school for. Thank you Mr. So if you had a minor under sixteen that fit any of these categories of sexual assault assault domestic sexual or physical abuse would and they walk in to any clinic any clinics is a mandated reporter or the people in those clinics are mandated reporters clinics or hospitals or whoever else right so at that point would you not have DHS involvement and Department of Health involvement. And they would be able to get those treatments without the consent of the parent. Yes if they took custody of the child. It's my understanding but the second part of this bill doesn't say anything about them taking custody it just says well if they're receiving medical treatment from department of health and then it goes on to say at a local health universe of the so would necessarily be at. Anyway trying to work through that. Parmon healthy getting answers on the. I can't speak to the custody issues and that sort of thing. Sorry president of. I think the whole purpose of the services of the mobile health units from D. eight eighty H. is for cases such as what we're discussing right now. That. But I think the only the only issue I see there is that it would have to be at the local health unit for solidity and we maybe may actually be causing a block if they if they're at a hospital or any other. Clinic. They would have to go into. The local DHS health unit. All right just trying to figure it out I support the idea that I think it's it's a great idea what you're what you're trying to do but. I do have some concerns about that. I would just add a statement from Austin gains from mercy government relations It so trying to maintain the professional relationship between the physician and the patient without disenfranchised in the parent or guardian and that's the whole purpose of this bill. It again hundred percent for the purpose of the bill I just worry that were not leaving some kind of hole. There for treatment. In these. Very specific circumstances the. Okay. Any other questions from committee. I say none we do have of one person signed up to speak against the bill miss Anna strong. Okay if you would identify yourself for the record please absolutely good morning all I'm in a strong I'm with the Arkansas chapter of the American academy of pediatrics we represent pediatricians in Arkansas and I just first want to tell representative hawk I really appreciate her she's talked with me several times and we tried to come to some I don't love to get up here and testify against bills but we have not been able to really come to consensus on on this our members are really concerned for some of the reasons I've already discussed Arkansas has a weight right now for adolescents to access care without their parents in certain cases where their parents are not involved or engaged or there's or sensitive issues going on and I will just say that that is the rare case right most of the time all our our pediatricians across the state are working with families working with parents to address the health needs of their adolescence but unfortunately there sometimes that adolescents may not feel comfortable sharing some of their health needs with their care giver or like representative Wardlaw mentioned they may be in an abuse or neglect situation that is affecting them and they're trying to do responsible thing and take care of themselves and survive and they need that option and the pathway to care and I'm just gonna list kind of the three reasons that we are not in support of this bill number one is you know not all kids are as lucky as all kids not all kids have involved parents not all kids have caring parents and for those kids who do not have that support system in place you may depend on an older sibling to bring them in for care he may depend on someone who's not there legal guardian to bring them in for care if they are trying to do the responsible thing and take care of themselves or even treat something very get something very basic like a strep throat taking care of we don't want them to end up in the emergency room for those kinds of things and we know that mental health concerns are intergenerational often and sometimes a parent or caregiver with a mental health issue may not recognize that. Their child needs mental health treatment may not be mentally and physically available to help those kids get in and especially when a mental health care crisis is looming we do not want to have that check box for parental consent to be be there and again like representative Wardlaw mention we have major concerns for those kids who are under sixteen and are experiencing abuse and not having an out or pathway for them to get care through their medical home and am very lastly the third thing is that I know we all want healthy babies in our state and we would like for for use who need preconception care or one preconception care or early prenatal care to be able to get that at their medical home rather and we are very glad for the amendment that wraps in the department of health for some of those services but that might in many cases be a stranger who they don't know and has not provided care for them and we would really like to make that that option remain open help that option remained open for kids so I'll just wrap up in respectfully ask for a no vote on this to help keep the door open for use taxes care that they need in a timely way through their primary care offices and in cases where they are experiencing abuse and neglect and a parent is not available if that provider deems them mature enough to be able to make those decisions so again thank you for your time I'm happy to take any questions on. Okay do we have any questions from committee. Represent Bentley you're recognized. Thank you were always trying to grasp this deal with and and think through it so is there anything this happened on the federal level they feel that had a cause represent apart to bring this bill for use on some new rule changes on this made it made which you brought this for what's the what's the conflict let's make this happen so if you have an understanding of that I'd appreciate my understanding is the twenty first century cures act required open inotes and so that is where not only the records like you know so and so when and you know your dog your child in and to see their physician but that the notes that the doctor actually rights had to be available to patients and so That issue required providers who have and an electronic medical record something like my chart to be able to to or other electronic medical medical records to have to decide at what age parents and children accounts talks account to be separated are not available in all available to the parent and so that to my understanding is the rate of where this comes from so it in my eyes it feels a little bit like we're trying to solve the wrong problem back cutting off access to care rather than fixing at the state level as much as we can and ability for a caregiver to access notes so there's kind of two different issues here and we can maybe be a little more narrow in the solution to this and still remain leave that door open for kids and used to access the care that they need. One more follow up okay you're recognized so thank you so much you really helped me to think through this the other thought is so do not require a parent thank you for parents insurance for is going to be charged do not require that parents of permission to charge their insurance plan I guess that's what I'm trying to wrap myself right yes so you know our clinics kind of some collects consent in different ways throughout the visit some some clinics will do that once a year for example or some clinics have all said that they for you know sixteen and up they do request that parents give permission for that child to see Caroline so that they you know if they can drive themselves that they could go get there step tester their flu shot or whatever they're they're coming to get done on their own without the pair in the rain that day most places have an option for that that to be signed off on so yes I mean that the billing piece is all is going to come back to the parent and so this is not something where. Knowledge of the visit is going to be withheld from the parents it might just be the notes it's just the notes that are not facts accessible to the parents so they will know about the visit a in most cases if that has helpful. Okay. Right any other questions from committee. Seeing none we thank you for your testimony thank you all so much. There's no one else signed up to speak for against represent hawk you're recognized close for your bill. Thank you committee for your time this morning and this is a really important issue and one that I know many parents that I of my constituents are very concerned about wanting to make sure they're aware of what their doctors are saying to their children and how they're treating them I would just point back to the law section twenty dash nine dash six oh two there are seventeen exceptions to. The only change and this bill is number seven on the exception list and that is to. Change it from a mature minor doctrine which is twelve and above in Arkansas has had to be determined by insurance determination. If they're if they're pregnant. They are exempt if there are and on and on. Emancipated minor they're married they're in the military they're homeless they're. on their own they don't have they are exempt as well under this bill the only change is number seven out of seventeen that makes it Gives the parent back the right for their twelve to sixteen year old to be able to see that the the notes the discussion between their child and the doctor which they always have assumed they have the right to. Without a child's consents they cannot do that now whether they know it or not because of the situation that our. Insurance billing and other cares Act for cures Act excuse me monies came and from the federal government. So I would just ask that we would find this bill is in favor of the consent of parents for twelve to sixteen year olds to be able to know what their doctors are saying to their children and their select the doctor with their child that is the parents consent not the mature minor consent of a twelve to sixteen year old there are sixteen other exceptions on this list and we've heard today that if there are sexual assault or abuse cases they still have access to receiving medical care at an emergency room or the department of health Mobile units and with that. I ask for a positive vote. Thank you was the will of the committee. I have a motion do pass is there any discussion on the motion. Same none all in all I'm sorry Christian Gonzalez recognized. I don't know that has much discussion on the motion is just more questions now because of what she's saying and all these other exemptions are currently in law and I know it's too late as questions at this point I hate that but of all those other exemptions are currently in law that may address the concerns that were brought up here If that's the case I can be for this but. Like I'd like to. I see that I guess I'll. I don't know where I'm at thanks. President Bill Clinton. you know I thank I think a Mysteron said It best like there's two issues that conflict in here and I think that's great all of the confusion as I like the parental consent part. Departmental issue with that I was unaware of until this morning was about capping the sixteen it you know I'm just thinking twelve year olds to fifteen year olds you know the way this reads it sounds like that their parents are able to see them despite the fact they're being sexually assaulted or things like that or there's alcohol abuse or substance abuse going on and so I mean. I know where the in the session I mean gosh we could just get an amendment to to take that down from sixteen to lower I think that would that would provide me a little more comfortability on this because that there is two issues unlike the parental consent part. It's just that part of having I just you know if a forty year old getting sexually assaulted I don't want their parents actually solve them to see that note you know what I mean and so I know you can't answer and where a discussion I'm looking at just I'm sorry for that but that's I think your confusion I think that's what we're all really confused and unsure how we want to be on this one so I don't think added anything in this conversation. But I just I will people understand. I'm struggling with this as someone who works in healthcare and I think all of us are really struggle with this Representative voted you're recognized for discussion thank you Mr chair not just one follow up on our plane of bills and I agree a hundred percent I think the premises good I think the intent is good I think the intent of this committee is we all want parental rights we want parents to have access to those records but I share your same concern I think there are situations in which we're going to open the door here or create a box I think is representive Wardlaw said maybe tape it shut and intentionally that we do cause harm I'm in though as it's currently written I think there's a way that we can amend it we can make it right we can make it better but this is not it so I'd appreciate a no vote. Is there any other discussion. And right well we are. That's what we're going to vote so all in favor say aye. All opposed say no. And may I know seven. represent hall I will tell you of. There seems to be quite the discussion here of you this bill is eligible to be ran again one more time so if you wish to get with some of the membership and make amendments. You're welcome to come back you bet all right we have the next representative makes you're recognized to light it up Sir. Very good use terms Mr. so I have an amendment for the committee saw last staff they'll pass that out. This is a representative Meeks district forty two so my second bite at the apple care So while one way only last Matt and I presented the bill the coops or the ones who spoke against it and they the testimony was basically our people just don't want to and so they weren't working willing to work with me the other concern that we had was from members of the committee related to related to cost and so I've had this amendment drawn up and so what the amendment does is that addresses both of those it concerns. the the first part of the amendment is language that entered you provided to me and it makes them where they are accepting of the bill that they can live with that the second part the excessive cost protection is the part that Kind of calls the utilities are the coops in the question here so what I'm what I'm asking for this what this amendment is if it cost even one cent more to install the responsible lighting. Then what the utilities will do as they will go before the city council and provide information to the city council this is the responsible lighting this is how much it'll cost. This is the nonconforming lighting this is how much it'll cost provided that it information and then at the next open meeting let the city council decides it's of local control The you know the main concern with cost I I understand that you know as a conservative I'm I'm I fully get that. But while it may cost a few cents more electricity are are not a few nine electricity is actually save electricity all may cost a few cents more because of the fixtures they choose may be a little more expensive you know as we heard from the call officers actually. The difference between the two is is almost nonexistent but. If we don't do this there's also a hidden cost I appreciate the last time I was here and I mentioned the increase cancer risks representative Rosen he researched it that by not doing this we increase the cancer risk to our citizens by not doing this we increase the detrimental effects to the environment that we love so much here in Arkansas researchers found that The trees are affected by light pollution. Again don't let me go Light pollution entries. Fireflies we all love to see fireflies on or spring night. Light pollution is driving but not necessarily the extension but we're saying a lot of negative impacts of our flights. The light pollution of facts. All sorts of other wildlife. So there is a cost to doing nothing no I'm asking what this amendment here as. Allow our people to make the choice that's best for them because if we choose to continue to do nothing that cost to human health and the environment is only going to continue to grow over the years and again all I'm asking for is let our local people have the decision to do what's best for them and with that I'll take any questions. Do you have any questions from committee and this is on the amendment. Repression rex you're recognized. I guess my my basic question is why can't they have that conversation now. Like in the utility company and the the city's I have the conversation around I mean if the utility company should be in favor of it if it's a law that and reduce electricity so should the city's so what so why what's what's the hold up so so theoretically yes I could have that conversation now and yes they could to do this on their own they just simply choose to not acknowledge this problem and they just for convenience they just want to offer what they want to offer to the the the the problem that we have is utilities are monopolies. So the utility is servicing a city and the city has no choice but to go with whatever product the utility wants to offer so if the utility doesn't want to offer anything to address this issue the city has no option for example the city of Gilbert what which is up along the buffalo river that mention last time they wanted to install a nice guy friendly lighting up there because a right along the national preserve their and it took over five years for them to try to get something worked out because utility just didn't want to hassle with that. And that's the thing that's the problem. Follows. You're recognized but they did work out a solution and it took the intervention of a state senator but yes eventually lead and that was entered G. energies been pretty good to work on this issue. The the others not so much. Okay. Thank you. All right of president Waldridge you're recognized for a question thank you Mr thank you Mister chair Mister representative makes again Preciado you pursue you bring this but I think that I would probably share the stance with representative Richard said I mean. I guess the old standing joke the legislature meets for sixty days every two years and it probably should be for two days every sixty years I mean we continue to put things like this into law when a conversation or a path to have that conversation already exist. It feels like overreach I it doesn't exist though they can't have this conversation well they can but they're utilities are not willing to except that conversation. So so we're forcing them to have that conversation that yes exactly the utilities are saying we're going to do it this way and you have no other choice so the cities don't have an option so if the city went to a utility and say Hey we would like to pursue this. Sorry we're not gonna do it we we we've got these lighting fixtures and you either take it or leave it. So how does that impact co op then the same thing co ops. So I so I'm using your word utility I'm being brought I'm I'm I'm complex in all of them so the utilities Eads you know at like in the. This is kind of a side side bar trip here. We pass legislation here in the state to try to encourage the adoption of solar energy the. a lot of the coops they just don't want to deal with that so they fill up all these roadblocks and barriers to the adoption of solar and so we've just passed legislation this term to try to address that it's kind of the same thing here. You're right if if it were a open competitive market where the the city's had various options I would agree with the fully but because we're dealing with a monopoly the cities don't have a choice and so what we're doing here through this is what this amendment is what we're saying is. Let the cities have a choice and let them decide what's best for them so the question is we want making the choice for the citizens do you want the city in the elected officials doing it or do you want a electric utility that has no incentive to provide what's best for the citizens the only incentive they really have as a financial one and if there's not a financial incentive to do the right thing they're not going to do the right thing. And I'm may done thank you okay we have any other questions from the committee on the amendment. Represent Ladyman go ahead. President Meeks the question comes to mind when I hear representative will Ridge talk about this wouldn't the cities have an option to pass an ordinance or even the counties the JP's would that be possible. I mean I guess I could but the utilities not offering that option then I guess I get no streetlights to that point. Well I believe I have a call up in my city and I believe that's that's a contract with the city has input into that they basically authority over I believe maybe misspoke on that but I believe there would be local legislative ability to make this decision if necessary I I believe that I may be wrong. Okay of represent region recognized for a question. A kind of following up on that same thing and. And then. Looking into the The Amendment my my question revolves around. That that you said that the co ops are seizing the the utility they provide the lights correct so the city doesn't have the ability to install their own lives and have them fed from the utility as of right now they cannot install their own lights on like the utility poles and all that now. I actually had another bill that was trying to address that but my hope was is that. This one was a much more reasonable solution that and than the other now that I do know and thank you for that answer on the utility poles that makes sense have the utility poles owned by the individual utility company and and obviously there's some pieces to that but what about. Their own health. So theoretically yes of the city wanted to they can go out installer on poles and install their own infrastructure essentially that's what they had to do up and up and Gilbert for that but in order to do that that's a much bigger cost to the city. Because now the city has to go out and invest in you know I care in the City of Little Rock I mean there's final twenty thousand street lights so and if the City of Little Rock wanted to do something like that they would have to invest in Saudi twenty thousand street lights they would have to invest and putting you know connect doing all the electrical connections so the the the cost becomes prohibitive so your position is not to not to interrupt you just to kind of cut to the the chase your position as. Without this amendment and ultimately the bill that we're not going that cities just aren't gonna do that because it's cost for it but. Correct okay so this. What the what the what the bill you know kind of cutting to the chase what the bill would would far says. For utilities to give the city's a choice between you know whatever their standard lighting is and putting in more responsible healthier lighting for our citizens without that that you we're just not gonna get that. And you know I I I now say this if the utilities were or we're doing this and they were doing it on their own and they were addressing this issue I would step back I would say great there's no need for this they're they're handling it. But they're not to the detriment of our citizens so what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to find a way to allow our local municipalities to make a decision. To have the opportunity to install the the responsible lighting which they don't have now. Okay of president Kenneth Ferguson you're recognized for a question on the amendment. You Mr quick question to representative makes a I have a cloth in my district but so this is an agreed upon amendment with the call option you so this is a great upon with me and energy. So not the co ops now so that so the story there is. When we had our our last visit the gentleman for the coops said to publicly that they would be willing to work with me on this. Also afterwards hi I grab him on the hall and said you know you've told the committee you'd be willing to work with me on this is that really true and he said the only way we would work with you if you just exempt us entirely so in other words we're not willing to to work with you at all is basically what their stance was and unfortunately the coops are in the areas that are going to be the most sensitive areas of our state to light pollution. And so that's what why did this bill are I want to call him out on and say I do believe that there are people in cities that do want to avail themselves of this and so I had this drafted well when I came Tuesday to try to present the amendment they realize this amendment was here and might get us to the place where the committee would actually adopt it and so you know they were of the mind that you know if the committee is not going to adopt and take any action we just don't have to deal with that we can ignore this issue one they learned that this was out here in this actually may garner enough support to get past the committee they came to me and said you know we may could will work with you now and so much to the credit of the the lobbyist she looked at it and she said you know this is something we may could live with because it allows for that that choice she went back and pulled all the the coops and they still said now. So all right I do want to give kudos to the the lobby as she did try and she said that they would still try to work with the area and I even told her that I would be willing to make some more concessions in the bill to try to get to where they could be capped least live with that and they decided now we're not gonna do it. Yeah what one last question to steer if you. And it requires this question it get portions of my district this rule and some of the members of some of the people who receives services from this particular Cooper was concerned at the electric bill could go up if this bill is put into action now now now now so the House only talk about streetlights here okay so this is not going to be yeah it'd be affecting anybody's electric bill I don't see how it would affect anybody's electric bill so this only street light so if the cost went up to anybody it would only be the municipality and it would only be because the municipality voted to do it through a public hearing I'll get back in the queue I just have one last question there you you are the Q. R. okay okay well that was concerned that if there was an extra costs and that would be a surcharge to them all the utility bills but you saying that would not happen no no no I'm not going to cut off would do that well no there there would be no reason to do it because that unless a citizen is installing streetlights. But then if the citizen decided to install street but the street look the there's no by I can't think of any scenario where I was a citizen and I'm gonna by street lights from my neighborhood. It was my only concern that I heard from. Some of the residents okay yes No Way what that should not affect residential cost whatsoever the the only if there is a cost increase it would be to the cities and it would only be because the cities of agree that that's how they want to go after a pub you don't have to be an open public meeting of the city council. So now that the citizens would never under this would not see any increase. Okay. There are no other questions from committee on the amendment what about. Average sorry it just brought up one more questions for Jeff are when I'm looking at your rates and and you're talking about Lecter cooperatives and and the rates associated with that in your in the amendment so just just to bring it back around what you're saying is if the co op. If a co op has much more than just as a specific city and there are it in Benton county we have street lights on lots of roads that are not necessarily in city limits right so it's outside of that so if they decide if the city municipality decided they wanted different street lights and then you're not gonna United this is not to be changing all the street lights it just would be within the city limits of that specific city and you're on a bill that specific city to the correct would only kill that St it's only when you're installing a brand new system. So it's not like tomorrow we're gonna the city's gonna vote we're gonna change I'm all out. This is only when you know new subdivisions going in and we're installing street lighting for that subdivision or if we're gonna replace every street light on main street we're putting a new project there it only applies at that point that's all about what you know one of the concerns the co ops racing again this is where some of the mis understanding is that they have a you know an OCC an inventory of of current fixtures that they have and they were afraid that if you pass this will suddenly will just waste we've got a bunch of lights that we have no use for that that's not correct all the existing infrastructure is going to stay the exact same as it currently yes so you have that. You know inventory that you're gonna used to maintain the current infrastructure and if the city decides they can use that inventory on new projects but give cities the choice that they want to go to the more responsible lighting to allow that more responsible lighting that's all I said again that's what I'm at this is a local control issue do we want to give the local cities the option to be able to do the more responsible lighting or not. Members of the other questions on the amendment. C. C. nine. We've your I have a motion on the amendment. His resume speak on the amendment. I know some of the okay so right now I think the actions just need taking a motion on the minister motion then that motion to pass all those favor adopting minutes say aye. Opposed graduations you've adoption amendment you may not receive with your bill so I think we've thought thoroughly discuss this and so I would appreciate a good vote on this to give our cities choice where they currently have time and I appreciate y'all's time. We do have some incentive speak against the bill Mister shields you hear. If you say if the committee with. I'm Daniel retail I'm vice president of engineering for first electric cooperative Robert shields asked me to speak on behalf of the seventeen distribution later cooperatives that they represent over one million citizens and rule Arkansas we were opposed to this bill two weeks ago and we are still opposed to this bill for the reasons that I stated two weeks ago it is important to make the distinction that this bill it does cover residential security light as well as floodlights at barns and farms across rule Arkansas is not just a street lighting bill as I mentioned last week our members are very satisfied with the white LED lights that we have chosen for them based on our research and based on their acceptance in perception of those lights I can tell you when the industry changed from mercury vapor to the orange sodium lights we had a lot of complaints about visibility and clarity from those sodium lights and since we've adopted the natural white LED lights in the rural areas we have received very popular response from our members we are member owned we want to do what our members want us today and I'll just mentioned in regard to the cities all of us have rates that allow the cities to install the luminaires of their choice and we just bill them a charge based on the electricity they use that assumes of course that the city purchases that luminaire and then they also maintain the luminaire going forward. And with that I would to ask for a no vote on this bill and I'm available to answer any questions. We were there any questions reserve Bentley recognized for quite. Thank you for being here today so do you offer to your cities now that are in your Where are you Cooper thirty offer to the cities the availability for them to choose to use this last representative makes this document do they have that option to put those in their street lights in the cities that you cover. They have the option to purchase and own their own street lights of their choosing. That's not my question do you offer these lights that fall within a represent mixes bill do you offer those to the season you're stressed out for those current lamps for them to choose from in their city presently the LED lights that we are offering for both roadway lighting and for security lighting is the four thousand Kelvin which under this bill would not be allowed to. certainly the residential lights the limit is twenty seven hundred Calvin which is more the the yellow glow instead of the white glove so the only luminaires that are currently installed that actually meet the standard of this bill is the only sodium lights which most of the industry is getting away from. This may be representative makes a question I wait But so you refused to offer these lights to your folks that will fall within representing mixes. Bill I would not say that we refuse we have a good relationship with every city that the co op service and we would be happy to sit down with any city any city council or any mayor that would like to discuss street lighting in their city. What do you offer those one more time do you offer the senior citizen they could choose to put those on their sentences on as we offer one luminaire just to avoid confusion because to be honest about it most of the public doesn't understand the color temperature rating or the lemons and it's it's easier for inventory purposes to just stock one luminaire that would that we would use in any city in any of any part of our service territory okay so you don't you do not refuse to offer those that would meet representative mixes bill I'm not refusing I'm just saying presently we do not offer but one luminaire thank. The questions. Senior the questions thank you for your testimony members of the represent Ferguson you're recognized yes one question of. Going back to the calls and I know we talk about the lighting and for the city's but in some of the areas of the coops where. People sort of at the rule area. What is there any possibility that any of these calls will be charged back to your members. Or just to the. The municipality well I'm glad you do have some members right outside the municipalities in this rule areas well let me make this tension as far as being a co op one of our objectives is to have a rate that is fair to everyone so when we chose the LED luminaires with the wider light we selected a rate structure that was comparable to what they had already been paying we did not want to see an increase on their electric bill our concern about cost comes from having to stock multiple luminaires so that the inventory we have today would be put aside for replacements in for maintenance and we would have to basically double our inventory with these different type of luminaires so we know that adds cost to the co op overall as far as individually how we would assign a rate for those luminaires I could not say into we had a cost of service study what that might be. Thank you Mr president Wardlaw. The representative like you're recognized for a question. Follow up to represent persons question but any cost of co opting Kerr's gets played out to the rate to the patriot true from that it that is correct yes so if we have thank you thank you. Is it any other questions resent Bentley you're recognized for a question AS one quick follow up so again we asked about the price difference of his or any pride was a price difference to our constituents with these different ones that are lower limit which was surprised. I did not get a quote because until two days ago I thought this bill was gone. So do you not in this one quick follow up does not intestinal I said there was negligible that is correct I do not believe it would be it would be significant if we chose a different color temperature where the cost comes from is having to stock multiple inventories presently we have three to six months of inventory in our warehouse because of lead time issues right I'm when I look at first electric alone that's about three hundred thousand dollars worth of inventory so I would easily estimate the coops have a million dollars worth of lighting inventory on the shelf right now which is as I mentioned we have the one option for that reason because of the cost of stocking multiple options as far as lighting temperature. Thank you chairman. There's any other questions thank you again for your testimony represent makes I see no one else signed up to speak for disability ready close your bill I am thank you chairman thank you committee colleagues I appreciate the time and and and the opportunity to buy a bring this concern to you as the gentleman said we chose so they chose what they think is what they have thought is best. What I'm asking for is allow your local communities to choose what they think is best to give them a choice. The other thing that he brought up was the only cost real concern that I heard was the cost of. Stocking multiple. Well fixtures. If. The you know if they've got a paid up to the House of thousand fixtures and we go to allowing this choice. That means that. Over time instead of having a thousand one fixture they could have five hundred of one and five hundred of another. How does that increase the cost maybe I'm missing something here. And if there is a financial cost to this. Again I think the city should decide. Colleagues as I mentioned before there's a cost to the see the way. There's either going to be a there's a potential financial cost. But I think there's an even greater cost to our health to our environment The I'll give you a perfect example I'm gonna I'm gonna point to represent Wardlaw here just because just because I'm on inotes he's a good good person to pick on he's the chairman of our sportsman's caucus right he's that advocate for hunting and fishing and in the past we've we've actually I've I've been to Meetings where he's shown that over in the stock our area there is been a major concern because over the years there has been invented to climb in the dock population. That is actually driven by light pollution believe it or not. The decline in fireflies light pollution if lighting is not done properly one of the things you hear about is safety and security they are actually very well settled studies that show if you put them proper lighting in their safety and security is improved but if you do it too much and irresponsibly crime actually increases of basalt study just couple months ago that overly let areas increased crimes of opportunity by almost fifty percent. Vandalism goes up in these areas. I'm not saying we need to get rid of it I'm saying we need to do things more responsibly and this is the path in order for us to do it like I said there's a cost to the way the choice before you as what cost do we want to look at do you want to spend a few more pennies potentially on for city on their electric bill or is the cost to human health and the environment. The property here in my mind that should be the priority and with that I will last for a good vote. Members represent makes closures bill was supposed committee. The motion to pass schedule on the motion represent Ladyman as amended do pass as been represent Ladyman you're recognized. just in response to a representative Bentley's question. in my district the city is the fifth largest city in the state at the it's powers provided by coal up in in that city the city council has agreed to replace these lights and they're doing it on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis and that's all done at the local level the count the council as approved this and then to go skating with the co op and they've done it in their their plan is to go in and do this on their own at the local level so I believe this can be done at the local level one other clarification that I think needs to be made is that. the call up talk about the cost and we have to realize how large this call up is they serve a million people and they have a lot of inventory. the coop in my city who only serves the city of a eighty thousand people there inventory area is huge and if you've ever been out to the co ops building here in Little Rock it's a large campus and a lot of inventory it is not only the space the cost for the space but the cost to carry that inventory I don't know the co ops business plan but but I do know if you have a business and you have to carry more inventory there's a cost. The carrying that a mentor you have your money tied up but not only that in many cases you're paying interest for that investment that you have in that inventory so I think you're everybody needs to consider that when we bill thank you Mr. President Wardlaw you're recognized for some discussion thank you Mr this gonna be relevant because he brought up the ducks. The reason we don't have the ducks in south Arkansas and in central Arkansas anymore as the efficiency of the pharmacy farm equipment we use here in Arkansas is ninety to ninety eight percent effective in gather not great now the sealed farm equipment they used three states north of us is still from nineteen seventies and eighties and it's about sixty to seventy percent efficient but they have a tax credit on the books for habitat which I have filed here in Arkansas that that gives them some of that rebate back of that stuff they're losing that way they can keep the ducks have that economy in bill to go forward so that's Rick lights really not our big problem my problem is efficiency two three back on representative Ladyman comments he made a comment at the other table that when you went to five hundred and five hundred there wouldn't be any cost there is a cost to that and it it's somewhat mid represent Ladyman said but it's also a volume calls when you're buying a thousand something you usually get a little bit cheaper we split that down to five hundred five hundred you're not getting that is cheaper and that's also a cost that inventory so if we had to split the inventory out because this neighborhood voted this one and that neighborhood voted this one in your increase in those costs exponentially to those folks out that may not even live in that neighborhood but may be a patron of that co op so we usually take all this into effect it's getting late in the session things are going to start getting amended and members need to pay close attention. There any other questions or discussion. Seeing none all those in favor say aye. Opposed. It does have it. Thank you. Representing more do you have a the bill that you would like to present you're recognized president house bill sixty sixty seven I understand you have an amendment to that bill in. Members right now looking at our agenda I do anticipate us meeting and hearing some bills this afternoon is an important thing for us to get through as many bills as members want and we're just trying to get to all these this morning so what I'd like to do is go ahead and adjourned after this bill give people time the someone's take a break you for come back this afternoon we're coming back it's I expect this the. Here you have five to seven Bills this afternoon. so if there's no objection to committee will try to adjourn after this and come back here the rest the stuff this afternoon. With the exception of one Amendment. Yeah I got one that when what they were going to hear we. At one forty two thanks thank you represent water to represent more you're recognized feature Amendment. Thank you Mr chair representative Kantor more district twenty three I'd like to present an amendment to my bill first please. Recognized president amendment. Only a copy of the amendment. The amendments pretty simple it just deletes the word any and substitute the word aggregate on that page two line three. Members of a motion on the Menin motion to pass all is fair say aye opposed the faster minute may proceed to present the bill as amended thank you Mr chair and with your permission I'd like to have miss Phyllis bill with the Arkansas residential assisted living association join me please yes you can come to the table and just initial for the committee thank you. Good morning my name is Phyllis bell and I'm the executive director for Arkansas residential assisted living association. You're recognized thank you so house bill sixteen sixty seven is amended provides legislative oversight annually of the assisted living cost reports required in act one ninety eight we heard that a few weeks ago in committee the data will help to identified gaps in those services and increase decreased access to senior living choices. Members you have any questions represent more. Seeing none. The motion to pass as amended all those in favor say aye. Deposed congratulations you pass bill thank you for thank you Mr president Richard recognize understand you're presenting amendment to represent eleven bill this is a bill we've heard before but pulled down to be amended this is house bill. eleven seventy three and I think the minutes being passed out thank you Mr. A committee I'll go ahead and explain the amendment while you're having it passed out to you can review it all answers many questions are a few questions as you like I think I'm the only thing standing between you and like so keep that in mind eleven seventy three the original legislation that was presented had some language in it that was concerning to currently practicing LP eyes that's a psychological examiner that has independent status this is agreed upon language it amends out the concerning factors and also creates a deadline for independent status and with that I'll answer any questions. Was there any questions. Seeing none I make a motion of the property motion to adopt the amendment. Follows favor say aye. Post. You've passed your committee now that may not present the bill as amended thank you Mister chair I will this bill has been actually presented to this committee passed in this committee the problematic language came up before went to the floor representative eleven pull this down we worked with all parties I became a co sponsor on this bill this is my area of expertise in the field I feel good about the amendment I know that the LP's the psychologist all parties involved support the amendment so I'd ask for a good vote. There was any questions on the bill. The one speak for against the bill seeing none I have a motion members do pass any discussion on the motion to pass as amended no discussion all in favor say aye. Opposed congradulations you pass your bill members again I'm looking at the agenda The it looks linked the there are several of these that happened at my name on that I think will be pretty quick there let's be at least one was some discussion but I I don't think it'll take us. I don't wanna say it'll take you some time plan to be here a little bit this afternoon we'll go as quick as we can everybody knows renew the end of the session appreciate your time this morning we're Jr. Recess. Recessed.