State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs-Senate

The Senate bill three sixty three. I want to. Okay. Senator Johnson had to step out to run a bill in the committee so you're stuck with me for for a few minutes. Senator Wallace you're recognized to present Senate bill three sixty three please identify yourself for the record. Thank you Mr chairman Senator Dave Wallace District nineteen. Three sixty three it's a good bill it's a different variation of a bill I had already passed out of the out of this committee which is two five seven specifically. the Arkansas legislative audit currently refers findings to the prosecuting attorneys and other individuals under certain circumstances this bill will require legislative audit to also notify the Arkansas Attorney General the sense findings in the bill will allow the traditional stay more informed be able to better assist the local prosecuting attorneys in the state of Arkansas prosecuting any potential crimes identified. Furthermore the current law the treasury will have to follow up with the Legislative Joint audit committee as to the status of these matters referred we worked this bill with the prosecuting attorneys they agree with the tourney generals have right part of this members it's a good bill and I stand by for your questions. Any questions for Senator Wallace. Anybody in the audience one speak for against the bill. So long as you're recognized close reasonable Sir. Of. The motion from center Payton second Senator flowers on favor. Any bows regulations and laws ensure that human passion bill. We have anybody to concur in the house amendments for Senate bill two two fifty eight or two fifty five. I'll just go down the agenda House Bill fourteen twenty three representative painter. House Bill fourteen eleven. Representative Michael Landon. House Bill fourteen eighty seven from a representative Lundstrum. House Bill Fortino seven representative McClure. I'm tempted to adjourn. Senate bill two seventy five from I know senator hammers not in here I just saw him over B. O. R.. House Bill fourteen sixty seven represent Cozart. Sir Clark looks like Europe. For. Mister chair with your permission I'm more S. for of join the coaching. Hello president these bills please are you are you gonna go in order three eighty three one three two yes okay. Whether you're recognized president Senate bill three eighty Senator Clark Mr McCutchen please we have an amendment Committee. Yeah please go ahead and identify yourselves for the record while she's pass the amendment out along Clark's of. State Senate district. Join the catch and Arkansas transparency in government group. Sir Clark you're recognized to present the amendment. What we've got it here is the requirements of subsection do not affect the obligation custodian to meet would provide to the. Request during any response recurs on active users storage and then right above that The bill two thousand twenty five the. Delete line. Eleven and substitute the following buildings and twenty five nineteen one four for violation of this chapter. And Page two line eleven. Filters. I was wondering the same. Okay any questions on the amendment. What's the will of the committee as the amendment. Motion to adopt. Senator Dotson. I'll second. On favor the motion to adopt. Any opposed. Motion carries Senator Clark. You're recognized to present the bill. Are you have some last Mr coach and president of the Senate bill three eighty as amended. Appreciate you having me this morning my name's Jori McCutchen I'm with the Arkansas transparency in government group it's a statewide organization which supports open government and transparent government Senate bill three eighty is a straight forward bill four years been known as the people's law and this bill is designed to to It. Allow records to be access to high in accordance with the spirit of the legislative intent of for you. simply put this bill allows requires written notice by email or otherwise and if the governing body has no records no responsive records to a for your request all they have to do is simply send an email and say we have no responsive records or no response responsive records exist what is happened is is that that the body the governing body will remain silent on that issue and a lawsuit mayor may or may not have to be filed so I think it's good government that if the governing body has no responsive records they just say we have no responsive records we had a judge in Fort Smith I say that it's not written in the law I'm a strict constructionist so until it's written in the law and. The governing body is not required to do that the second thing it requires is if there's an exemption two four year that the governing body is claiming then they simply identify what the exemption is again it's the people's law the people deserve and have the right to know if the governing body is claiming an exemption. The third thing it does if the governing body if the record request is sent to a particular custody and and that custody is not the proper person maybe it was sent to the city administrator and should have been sent to the water department or vice versa then that person I should that custody and should should identify the appropriate a custodian to the to the citizen as to Where the record request should be sent so. Bottom line is I think this is friendly to the people as for you was designed to do is it seems to me that prevents lawsuits it's fair to both the citizens and to the governing body. Okay survey you're recognized for a question thank you Mr so. I'm just trying to comprehend this real quick if you can help me with a couple things. Three days seems like a very short period of time especially if a weekend is involved and I don't see any language that would. Change that over the weekend but what if what if the Coast custodian's wrong with they say I don't have any records because in such a rush to find out they missed something like an email or or you know I mean I know how this is going to the files that a business to try to find share certain records pertaining to something this request could be regarding something that was several years old so what exemptions are protections do we have for that custodian if they're wrong in in replying in such a short time frame it well the time frame is the exact same time frame that it is under our for you laws now so really that hasn't changed anything and all we're simply asking if you have no records you state so but to answer your question the violation requires that in in the law the law states so it requires a negligent if they negligently failed to to respond so and there is a standard their negligence is not necessarily on purpose I mean. Hello that knowingly wish you something that they did it on purpose but if they negligently didn't look in that door over there I know that there was a calendar or missed a folder in the emails or I mean that could be negligence. Well it's a it's a reasonableness standard and and that's what the law is now the law requires that this is no change this is absolutely no change in what the current for you law states and it uses the negligence standard it even for a criminal violation so this law is a good government bill it's simply if they in good faith. What happens is the people are left out hung to dry if they center for your request and the governing body just doesn't respond the people don't know one way or another are they just not responding to me do they not have responsive records are they claiming exemption so this is a people friendly bill and I in that the penalty is no different than any other for you violation one I don't disagree with the fact that they should respond I I'm just saying that if we're going to make them criminally liable for net for negligently not looking in the right place to find a record that is that definitely seems like three they need one three days to. To be very thorough in that search but all that somebody else ask questions get it can I respond to that it happens all the time if a record request is made and they need more than three times ninety nine times out of a hundred the person requesting the records is going to say that's fine how much time do you need and it's worked out and don't again this is this is the people's law and if if someone has to if if if the governing body does not respond then what are the options I can tell you this ninety nine times out of a hundred the citizen the person who's requesting these records they just go away they don't go to join the coaching and file a lawsuit because they're not looking for a lawsuit they're looking for access to records which they pay with taxpayer dollars for what you said several times if the governing body doesn't respond and and this does not say anything about the governing body this is an individual custody that ain't right the governing body through its through its through its representative whoever that person may be in Fort Smith that would be the city administrator and if they don't say if if if John Q. public files a FOIA request and the city's just quiet on it the citizens left again the people's low the citizens last with two options just go away. ordered an order asked if they respond in writing and that's all we're asking send an email and say we have no responsive documents. Before my of the center Payton of my understanding and reading of this is that you can see here all this. Of. The. If number five the very end of the bill of a custodian fails to respond within three days as required under subdivision a three he or she shall be is subject to the penalties and 25-19-104 while listening this chapter that penalties already there for not responding in three days that's not anything new. And so the only thing that's new is that in addition to responding if you have the information is requiring that you respond if you don't have the information inside we don't have it or it's exempt it's not it's not adding a penalty and it's not of. It is not changing the timeline this is the does that make sense it does but. I can see in my opinion I've had lots of responses for my employees my wife whatever else I don't have it. In a few days later there is land on the corner of the desk you know so I'll let somebody else as well as with the negligence of knowingly I mean is this at all I don't have any problem with with knowingly centre Payton the up I think the same would exist now though if you have to respond in three days and you don't and then found later you had it it would it would be the same and I'm good with the response until we throw a criminal penalty on there but for negligently being wrong in your response. Can I respond to the prosecution I believe that the. My reading of it is the the penalties for not responding the wrist the penalties not for being wrong. But would you agree with that say that in. The penalties for not responding right the the the penalty that the law is the same as it's always been that the the penalty the potential penalty is for not responding in in on this bill all we're asking is that if a person sends a for your request and there are no applicants will records then an email be sent back to this person saying there's no after school records there's no responsive records as opposed to what we're trying to do is prevent a lawsuit here not we're not trying to gin up lawsuits or prosecutions we're trying to make it easier on the citizens to get records and if there are no responsive records just tell us that so they don't have to trot down to the local law firm file a lawsuit and then get an answer that there's no responsive records which happens in for conservative judges good solid conservative judges like Gagner delay and they want something they want to let the legislature decide if there are no responsive documents then then let's put it in writing and say there are no responsive documents otherwise the citizens is gases and either they just go away. Or they they follow lawsuit and then they find out there's no responsive records and guess who pays the attorney fees the taxpayer's. So it I call it a good government bill thank you. I have two questions one is. Yeah I worked on for issues myself quite a bit in private practice I used to work with John told I'm sure you know Mr McCutchen's. And so I'm trying to remember. I know in every for your request we ever submitted we said. If the record subject to exemption please explain why and so it may just be embedded in my brain that that was part of the statute and but it's not and that's what you're putting in basically that's correct Senator Tucker okay yes and then my my second question is. I understand. Everything that you presented here But the the language that you're striking in in eighty three accounts for the possibility that. You sent the request to someone who's not the custodian. And. I'm just sort of curious about that and now there's no. There's no accounting for that because even in in three C. that you're adding it says if the custodian lacks administrative control your so you're still presenting that the person who received the request is the custodian and I'm just wondering if there should be in the code some accounting for the possibility that Hey you just sent this to the wrong person and they'll direct you to the right person and I think that's what we intend to do in in in three C. is that if the request was inadvertently sent to to the wrong person that they're they'll they'll see that. That this requires them to identify who the the proper custody and is. And and and and really that's probably the not the most important part of this because I mean you know most cities and towns are gonna are gonna tell us to the well I'm the wrong custodian sentence such and such and is not going to result in needless litigation and waste of of taxpayer money waste of citizens time Okay your questions from the committee. Now we got several signed up to speak in support of the bill start with Jimmy Cavenaugh. In the. Please identify yourself do we Cavendish represents in this in a I think I can help you out Senator Payton on this. Twenty five nineteen one oh five three B. state if the public record as inactive user stories and therefore not available at the time of service and asked to examine the custodian shall certify in writing the death consented date in our within three working days at which time the record will be available for exercise of the right given by this chapter. If somebody doesn't. It here that then there negligent and then twenty five ninety one FOR kickstand. What this bill is saying is absolutely no difference all this bill is saying is that if you don't have the records just say we have no records responsive. If you do have the records but there's exemption just give me the exemption. And if you're not the custodian just say I'm not good stoning but if you know who is the consulting just simply tell me who it is and if you don't know who it is and say I don't know so the twenty five nineteen one oh for the penalty which is just a Class C. misdemeanor nobody's going to jail over it's a parking ticket is just saying that Hey this twenty five nineteen one oh four applies to this as well because if you're going to put this in the ad then 25-19-105 has to apply to it. And the three day is actually no different than what's in twenty five nineteen one oh five three B. E. so it's really a simple commonsense deal I have had so many people over the years that have had to contact me said you have sent for your request they're not responding there normally then I get involved in this just simply communication that so when I get by with the say Hey what's it would you mean we don't have those records okay would do me a favor and just so this person you don't have the records. Or to say whether exempt us okay just state exemption it's a simple meal so if you think this doesn't happen quite a bit it does I'm not the only person to get these calls you you probably heard from some people us audience some attorneys that do like Joe he's got those calls this is just kind of a simple commonsense deal that helps it helps the citizens but it also helps the government. Can I give some guideline. It is not difficult you've talked about the three days and people trying to find the records. It's no different than twenty five nineteen one five. Three B. it's the same requirement is that. And it's not putting anybody in jeopardy I didn't see anybody yet go to jail over for you violation. In a motion going to get it to earn fifty dollar fine if you negligent if you get that because I how many prosecutions have you even seen on. And so it's not it's not a big deal is it really worth the chance of lawsuits when we can just clear this language of and I'll be happy to take any questions on this. Any questions from the committee. Senate just real quickly I mean this section a code you read you read it to say three working days. This bill does not say three working days it just says three days well I think if you want an amendment on that day be glad to give it I mean I don't think that's a big issue Senator you look at page one one twenty eight it's got three working days on their. Let me get back to those who headed over to. Thank you for correcting me. Any other questions from the committee Senate refinish. Thank you Mr ivory thank yes doc Washburn. Mr chairman I could point out on land line to. Page two line nine. It does not have the working days. I'm not the bill the bill sponsor but my my interpretation of that would be if they fail to respond within three days as required under subdivision a three and it and subdivision a three requires three working days okay wow read. I probably would be clear to say right there three working days I agree. But. That's what thank you I think Senator Payton had a and a good question I think you got to a legitimate concern about you know will make Mr Wiesel please identify yourself and if you're jointly having money doc Washburn thank you I thought you did such a good job and identifying sorry about that I think Senator Payton had a good question of thank you have a link to the concern we all make mistakes but is Council McCutchen said It Jimmy Kavan said. We got a three day time limit on the for you as it is if you do have records responsive and I don't think I've heard anybody say that we need to say for instance relax the for that does stand for sponsor records to five days late unified business days because three business days since you know too short I just think that. You know the responding if you. If just to say sorry we don't have any records responsive to your request it's the same time line for the for the for if if we do But you know we do have seventy five counties I just wrote down some notes walls thinking here in and a lot more municipalities the seventy five counties and we certainly don't wanna casting aspersions on upon any of these thousands of public servants that are working hard every day but if all of them were polite enough to respond sorry we have no materials responsive to your request then we wouldn't have need for this legislation but. Obviously from the anecdotal evidence has been presented this morning a lot of times they don't respond in the the citizens just left wondering. What's what's going on so I again I I don't think anybody is said well the four ally itself needs to be relaxed to maybe five business days the three business days but I guess that's a story for a different day but it would just seem to make sense and of course some lights the best disinfectant Justin no one way or the other in the same time line is as in the the general for. Has anybody has any questions I'll think of and much but. Any questions for Mr Washburn. Thank you Sir thank you appreciate it professor samba. For the record I don't have anybody signed up to testify against but if there is will generally we take turns so there's someone who wants to testify against just just raise your hand but otherwise I'm gonna keep going through the supporters press number please identify yourself and if you're here on behalf of anybody thank you senator my name is Robert Steinberg I'm a professor of law I'm also on the for the task force and I'm also on the fully a coalition but I am here in my individual capacity as a citizen and as an attorney and as a constituent of yours and I say hello to the other senators many of whom I know so I don't want to the the labor anything I do wanna make myself available for questions and possibly answer some of them in advance when you make a for your request to day of the state the governmental entity is required to respond to you within three days the Attorney General has already or behind and nobody disputes that if it's impossible to comply within three days you don't comply you don't have to comply moreover of the statute and the the the Attorney General's opinions have made clear that it's only three working days so doesn't include weekends it doesn't include holidays so there is because it's a fair question Senator pate an absolutely fair question the negligence standard NO one has been convicted of violating the foil for violating the negligence standard if someone. Does a diligent search and doesn't find something and then find it later and by the way happens all the time that is not criminally negligent and criminal negligence is actually higher than civil negligence it's essentially let's call it roughly recklessness so I intend to use the word diligent because that's essentially the standard in the law reasonableness if you made a reasonable search then you can't be a criminally convicted for negligence and indeed no prosecutor would want to even come close to that now if you if you will as a custodian right to the citizen who made a request and said I didn't bother looking anywhere but I don't think we have any records on that well then you might have a problem but absent that you would not have a problem. This bill isn't is actually not about that circumstantial those circumstances that is someone providing records it's when they don't have records and many entities will write you back and say we don't have a record and that's the polite thing to do I'm originally from New York to my complete absence of accent not withstanding And the it in New York you might not expect that but most folks here do respond and tell you they don't have records but sometimes they don't and that's the dilemma this is if you don't have a record in other words you don't have much work to do because you know you don't have a record you gotta write this back and then it just says use that same time frame so it's three days three working days and if you made a diligent search and then later realize you had something you weren't negligent and then you're right back is that you don't have your back and I shouldn't have anything I actually found a record I've had that happen to me I've never had a dispute with the so that's in terms of that's one aspect of this bill and then the second aspect is federally if the government seeks to invoke and an exemption it needs to say so in fact in federally needs to point exactly if it's in human part of a document this is where except in this section of a document pursuant to this exemption none of that is explicitly required in the Arkansas Fauria and we've and and some entities don't comply with it so as a consequence of this bill says if you're going to invoke an exemption meaning you have you found a document but you say you not it and would otherwise be responsive you're going to say we found a document but when I turn it over pursuant to this exemption so there's no timing issue there because you found the document you know what you're going to you're not going to turn it over but you have to say which exemption you are applying so. This does not create any further burdens on the that is the custodian in the sense that they either don't have a record in the simply say they don't ever get or they have a record they've identified in their own mind exemption and they just tell that to the to the request and then finally simply to it as the Senator Tucker asked earlier to tell the custodian if you're not the right to study and and you have a reasonable way to figure out who is just let us know who that custodian is I have not really I think I've heard one or two problems with that that's not a major problem but it's there's nothing wrong with putting that the bill in fact I support that being in the bill if someone writes to me and I'm the custodian I wish I had this once I had this I made a for your request of. do you a system office the University of Arkansas System office and I said I'd like to know if each of the main campuses have these records and the system office follows at what we have the system office records not the campus office I said can you tell me who the people are nice and he sent me a list of the people so this is kind of puts that notion in the. So that's all I have to offer and of course I'm available for questions. Any questions for professor Steinberg. Thank professor thank you for proceed I I'd I did neglect I want to recognize we have some pages in the room with us here this morning we all just stand up and way we want to we want to welcome you all Thank you for being a central I also want to make one up one person privilege my daughter's on spring break in his shadow on her dad today so if you'd stand I believe you. Welcome welcome Olivia okay next time again assuming there's no body here testify against against okay please come for. Thank you please would you cut that one off just thank you yes please identify yourself you hear on the apple yes my name is Anne Richmond I'm legal counsel with the Arkansas Municipal League and here to speak on the bill I was out recently so I wanted full disclosure of not spoken with senator Clark about this just want to make sure everyone's aware and I have not seen the amendment but from my understanding of the bill I I just wanted to clear up a few things for the committee currently under the for you there are three separate time frames so they keep referencing three days that's when a document is in active use or storage so you're typing in documents and says let me see that you have three days to see in three days I'll give the same for two. Otherwise generally you answer as quickly as possible that's just in the for you do it as quickly as you can sometimes shorter sometimes longer finally for personal records we have to give notice to individuals and they have a chance after twenty four hours to seek an attorney general's opinion which will respond in forty eight hours to three days before we even know what to do and that sort of the third time frame so I think currently as it's written creates a set of sort of confusing situation where it's saying you have to do it in three days even though three days isn't required currently for everything and would be impossible for personal record request otherwise I would have the same concerns about referencing a criminal statute when the the punishments negligence only but without more time I'd I'll take any questions from the committee. Sir Clark. So are you saying that the time is extended by possibly having to request an opinion from the AG's office. And is that relative to. Finding out. What the exemption may be a yes ma'am that that's exactly if you get a request for personal records you have twenty four hours to inform the person who their amount presuming you can find them and then everyone has a forty eight hour period to contact the agent to see if you've made a corrected termination about the exemptions as it relates to personal finals so we don't have any sort of conclusion tell them unless you're very confident your legal opinion and we're usually not dealing with attorneys who are the ones getting these request. And so this bill with the adopted language from the amendment. Which cut off that other option of getting canyon from the AG's office at the moment ma'am vote both sets of text would still exist within the law there'd be a lot of tension between them and I I do not know how the court would would resolve that but I would I would have concerns about it is written yes ma'am. So the. This law this bill if passed. Would probably lend itself to ambiguity is that what you're saying yes ma'am especially with the time frames in which we have to respond it would create ambiguity thank you. Senator Hester. Eight thank you I'm I'm clear transparency is super important what what is a municipally getting feedback on the amount of for your request are they like doubling annually like what is that what it since I've worked in this week seven years as an attorney in the volume has always been very high and the problem is the people who send the worst request are the most frequent offenders they're the ones who send ambiguous request ask for persons W. twos are really sensitive information and do it every day they show up and do it every day I don't know if it's increasing I would think it is what I would want to lie to you Sir but it's always been very high and the most problematic situations in the most frequent yes so my next concern is is I'm hearing from my district that you know municipalities police officers you know law enforcement schools teachers they're having to spend like almost full time people on for your request and they got to have legal go through because they're asking for personal like so we're spending huge amounts of public resources responding to these because if they're wrong the mention the people if you're gonna be one suing them right sure spending huge amounts of resources instead of keeping the public safe and get a set of educating students I guess I just locally to to to my area or you guys hearing that all across the state no Sir that that's common all across the state and again not every for you requests is contentious I think everyone would tell you that they're usually easy to respond to but we get thousand page for your request two thousand for a request we don't know where to start for for every document and it takes a lot of time and resources and and my main job is advising people and I say Hey that's lawful under the four you've got to get to work on it tell them you'll do it as quickly as you can but it it may be awhile because it's going to be several thousand pages and I do think that this is just adding more of an administrative hurdle for the cities and. Localities to jump through thank you. Thank you for your testimony I ate you know just have it in my head about the three working days as a response and and you brought a point that I think is has merit. Right now if you look at. Subdivision E. of the of the public records. Section that's where discusses. Three working days. And the and that's where it has the active use and storage language yes Sir that's where we clearly know exactly where it's at I'm either using it or I know it's in this storage bin acts right in three days I'm going to tell you what I'm gonna give it to you and and what this bill is proposing to do is to add that three working days to subsection a so it's a portable to all all records no matter their circumstance that is out interpret it Sir okay. Okay thank you any any further questions. Thanks for testimony thank you. Now Mister Gregory. Bob Gregory. Bob Gregory and I am a citizen activist I would call it from Faulkner County welcome thank you. I'm not on this particular bill regarding notification to me it's important I I guess I would echo senator casters concern regarding transparency the main thing the main use that we have used up for you for is to find out information records that the government is created and and we don't want to use those for whatever particular issue working on so we better understand what what is going on and the the fact that. In in the four years that we've done we have not had an issue with with anybody could responding we've always been able to get a response a timely response the data might not been available immediately we understand that I understand the larger questions and takes more time but we've not had a problem getting the the data getting response because we talk to people and find out so we've we've been successful getting our information within at least getting notification within three days so the fact that it's a that is not getting answered is is troublesome and should be somewhere to get so that the. Person making the request gets some kind of answer back. Other than that I don't have anything to add this year it's been eloquently this bridge to gust about the both sides of the issue. Thanks any questions Mr Gregory from the Committee thank you for testimony thank you anyone else testify against. If not on vide Missy Bosch to come testify. Okay. Thank you. I think the only one I have left is sunny I have no. Welcome Mr writer please identify yourself if you're on behalf of anybody yes sunny over foreign thank you Mr chairman I'm on here on behalf of the Arkansas freedom of information coalition it is a group of Citizens journalists lawyers and some public officials who are supportive of government transparency and the FOR. just for just for your information is not to be confused with the FOR a task force which is a state body that was appointed by legislators. Anyway I just want to echo what most folks have said here but I'd like to do it from the perspective of a journalist of fifty years I've worked in three states Louisiana Tennessee and Arkansas and worked under three different FOR loss Arkansas yes despite some. Exemptions have been added in the years that I've lived here Is still one of the strongest in the country and I think this bill. makes it stronger. Personally I have experienced situations where. Public records requests that I've made or journals so supervised have made up were not answered. and basically can't we've had to hound the custodian for those records I think what this bill does is a good thing it would require a custodian to say Hey I don't have the records. Our. I am yep. I'm not of the person you need to speak to about this and here's who you might want to speak to so I think I think that's a good thing ends the three days issue Is. Yeah I think. Legitimate that people should respond within three working days of. Yes you come up with something later well Hey I think most people are legitimately. trying to do the right thing in dealing with public records. Up. Anyway I'm open for questions if anyone has an. Three questions from members. Seeing none thank you Sir for your testimony thank you. The that's it the from the for and against the. Senator. You're recognized and you can respond and close thank you thank Mr McCutchen look to but responding I'll close. Mr everado talked about the four year coalition uh which you're the brightest and best in terms of transparency in government issues he also talked about for you to task force which is again the brightest minds in for yet this bill has been before the four year coalition two times now and I didn't see the Arkansas Municipal League there it's been vetted it's been changed it's been looked at by the best and the brightest minds in the for your world it's been before the tape for your task force as recently as last Friday we spent probably an hour looking at this bill is where as well as others it's been vetted Senator Clark is amended the bill again I didn't see the Arkansas Municipal League it in that bill expressing their concerns that they come in here today and and it seems to express against the people's will this is a people friendly bill this is a good government bill it's straightforward. Three that was three working days is the same as it's always been the negligence standards the same it always been a change nothing about that I would appreciate your consideration for the people. Colleagues of thank you for hearing this bill today the of the superintendent to a EA reached out to me and said they were touch with the school board association or would be it's been a long time this in with them about the bill Mr McCutchen is brought the municipal league never reached out of if their concern is a concern I would have certainly you all know that I would have. Amended language into the bill to taking care of that concern. If you get a call from a constituent. That they fall for request. And they're not getting any answer if you or your or staff looks into it they're gonna come back with one of three things. One they didn't have the information. Two it was exempt. Three it was the wrong agency. That's all this does. It doesn't change the penalty. That doesn't change the way for your works all it does is common courtesy. You know it is said that ninety percent of all problems is lack of communication I don't know the percentages rock with the sentiment is certainly right Uh this is led to multiple lawsuits it's led to all kinds of disagreements when all we have to do is say just respond and if something needs to change as far as if somebody's an Attorney General opinion that we need language for that I'm glad that that language nobody's brought that to me and so if going forward we need to add that I'll be glad that it but I brought you. A bill that everybody that's coming communicated to me of the we we put it all together and I believe it's a very good bill it cleans things up does a good job for your constituents does a good job for you. And for the these people involved have to work with this every day and I would appreciate a good vote. Is there a what's will of committee. Our. Motion do pass by Senator Teague as amended motion as of when. See no other No second the last for like a second thank you senator Mr I would ask the committee if they would to rescind the vote if you would vote which to adopted the amendment if you don't mind so that will have problems. motion by Senator Tucker three second by Senator Dotson all in favor say aye Senate bill three eighty one. Well an amendment to the Senate bill three one. Explain your amendment yes thank you Mr chair of amendment pretty much explains excel instead of a if you delete two hours and and substitute one hour and that for the amount of training that the bill requires. Motion by Senator Tucker to adopt the amendment. Second by Senator grow all in favor say aye. All opposed Like sign thank you senator. Your doctor your members. I read your of just ask that you of Mr McCutchen all right reserved. This is another straightforward transparency bill that again for you is the people's law if we so choose to to follow that I would say that any for your bill that this committee considers the gold standard is section twenty five nineteen one oh two and that is the Legislative intent that was that was adopted in nineteen sixty seven almost fifty six years ago. It is vital in a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner that the electors be advised of the performance the electors that's the citizens be advised of the performance of public officials and decisions that are rich in public activity and in making public policy if the governing bodies don't understand for yeah our democratic society is in trouble because is the is the intent said it is vital in a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner this bill simply requires an annual training and as I said before this bill is banned before the four four year coalition twice now and the bill is also been before the for your task force and I haven't seen the movie Municipal League the school board representatives I haven't seen the association of county governments but you know that I have seen or the people the people have been there all this bill does is required annual training and we have pared it back so to to not be over burdensome at the annual training required under this session this states that it will be an in person training or a live training by video conference. it requires a minimum of one hour training. I will say this about the Municipal League we just we're in the process of settling a lawsuit with the city of branch Arkansas who is failed to record meetings even though that law was passed back in two thousand and nineteen the Municipal League represents the city of branch and they told me by way of email this morning that last night and two lawyers were going to branch to have a training session so I think it speaks to the importance of a law that that is vital according to the legislators in nineteen sixty seven is vital to the democratic society. Think the trainings important it also requires that the training be open to the public and another important for a concept the the area is that it requires to be covered or newly enacted legislation even though the city of branch four years later still didn't understand that they had to record meetings and we're putting out inaccurate minute notes the cabinet was doing the same thing another huge school district weren't recording portions of school board meetings so newly enacted legislation so that our governing bodies understand what's expected of them at new Supreme Court decisions the requirements of public meetings the requirements of public records and the best practices for getting governing custodian's responses to request for public records Again we paired the bill back and only asking that that are public bodies and be trained and that that session be opening open to the people since four year is the people's law. Your questions. Go ahead senator flowers. The duty of the secretary of State to apprise entities. What new legislation has been passed after. At there's a lot elicit legislation senator flowers that it's past so I'm not I'm not at all clear about that I don't know I'm sure that they put out something on the new legislation but we're specifically talking about. For you laws and I guess my concern is is that when city after city still don't understand representative flowers bill that required cities to record meetings that something slipping through the cracks and It was my question was is it not the duty of the secretary of state to apprise these entities of new laws. I I I I'm not sure that I'm sure they they may apply new laws but this also applies to Supreme Court decisions other requirements of open meetings and open records but I appreciate your question I I'm not at all sure about that and you think that it within an hour. This training can occur. And. Assist entities of knowing all the things that are listed here seems like quite a bit to me. I Senator flowers you and I definitely agree on that point and that's why this initial draft of this bill started with four quarterly trainings at two hours of peas and and we've tried to pare it back to be sensitive to the time that that are folks here giving of their time voluntarily or are spending in training but if we believe in the four year long we believe in the legislative intent that it's vital to a democratic society and then I don't think asking for one hour of mandatory training per year is over burdensome or unnecessary. Senator crawled. Just I am these maybe you may have the answers for these they're just kind of simple but. It says per training my knowledge a person who would be responsible for the training you that's another change that we made we did have that it should be by by an attorney some thought that the four year task force I think or I think it might have been some on the coalition said that look maybe it maybe it doesn't need to be an attorney and maybe a smaller district they have someone who's knowledgeable in fort four yet maybe it's the city administrator maybe it's professor Stein bucking knows more about for you than anyone but we were trying to be sensitive to the to the needs of of our communities and not be over burdensome and we're just asking that someone knowledgeable about for you. Trying to kind of follow. All right it just what it what is the penalty if they don't do this I just don't happen to see that. Well we we don't have that I think that the the penalty would be the same that it it would be be a violation of freedom of information act. Thank you. Senator Tucker. I mean in a Class C. misdemeanor if you do it negligently correct okay negligently and so I really have the same questions a center Cole had so thank you thank you for asking them the answer the first one it questions years leading up to each individual entity as to who would do the training we are in some of suggested that the Attorney General might do that would be a great option but we really wanted to make it brought in that state that is not overly burdensome to you know cities or towns thank you. Reasons. Senator Teague. So you know if Jody we've known each other for a long time and you know I'm a Big Boy advocate I mean I think at one time I was in the house is that I was the most for your legislator by far so I'd means nothing I'm really afraid of that so it's like my brothers on the Concorde you know I mean he served on the school board you know it's like even me when I started out with eighteen years ago or something you know it's like four years to me is almost like. This is a bad analogy but almost like a snake okay I mean a good snake I guess but so it's like you go in this path. And any and it's like you can learn about all this for you stuff and it's so vast and so large it's like looking out across the field and saying Hey you know this is for you out here but to really understand it it's almost like you got the snake bit thank you have to do something even non intentional to find out later about what you did or see somebody else I mean is you know I understand about the training and I mean I want people to know about for you I think it's important but I mean are there some other avenues to explore like. I mean I'm learn I'm old enough now somebody can send me to you to video and look at the situation I mean are there a lot of different ways that we could look at for your task force to do things to look at situations because I think that's where a lot of people get caught up and for you is to know that and I'll be honest when I do I know the you know the bill staff committee said you know you got for you on this or that or something like okay go ahead I mean I I don't so it's almost like you almost have to have the situation before you really start learning about it I mean is there a lot other avenues we can do besides putting something in the law to try to do you two videos things that could be sent out that people can look in watching her home because. Welcome Korczyn in school board shall take their side they're busy they work to do a lot of different things I think that there's a lot avenues we could look at besides putting stuff in law besides button so if you don't comply. I mean I I just think that can you well as. The number of lawsuits that I filed over the last five years suggests that maybe training would would save a lot of time and the reason for we we discussed that in the for you task for we discuss that in the four year coalition why not just put a video and let people go watch two things number one this says that the people are able to attend for your trainings and we think that's important that the people can get on this video the people can come to the meeting and maybe this plants the seed and also this is a minimum of one hour in in in if you have if you have a video someone speaks then you have collaboration amongst the school board members the J. P.'s you have discussions again one hour training is not going to teach. About all the for you laws but as you say the snake that often Vice is a lawsuit and quite frankly I'm speaking is my interest because I don't want to file more lawsuits I'd rather that that folks be trained about for you and it for you it is not important then we can say so today. We can say so by saying we're not going to require one hour of training if fully is important then this is a no brainer in my estimation but it's for is not important and we just want to say we just want to let people get out and say oh forty is so important we've got to strong is for you laws in the country well we'll see we'll see if we have but but if we're not willing to require one hour of training so that folks can learn about not only legislation the Supreme Court decisions understand basics of open meeting laws which you're which you're totally confused right now and we're getting ready to see that battle if we don't know about open records are the best practices for custom audience then. We can say we can say that Arkansas believes in transparency and the democratic Party believes in transparency in the Republican Party believes in transparency but actions speak louder than words and this is a this is a sample this is a simple straightforward. Good government bill proposed by by Senator Clark. I agree that you know for you and it's like you know most people when they know they know how to conduct its not like in in we get the bad actors and stuff but you know so I mean I think a member you know advise and the constituency had a four year and actually for you me I mean at the same time switch so and I think I've been pretty strong on my for you record up here in the point of you know making people mad but I just feel like it's something in a listen I'm often someone if you look at the forestry scandal years ago you know when he found that governor Beebe was of you know using federal funds to supplement state budgets and stuff and somebody was fired you know I was the one that used for you to get the records that actually prove that so I mean I understand about that it's just like I said I mean I don't know what to do I really don't I mean I feel like that you know the for the most people out there that that you're right we need to know about for you and how to conduct yourself and how to do things just works better that way when you know on the front end but sometimes like a lot of things you have to find out later in it's just a really no easy path to understand if you just have an hour on for you I just don't know it's going to really get down to the I don't think you spend the hour on the situation you mentioned that you did get cigar. Would be better than than just doing a general for you at that you know as a freshman legislator I sit through or a long time ago sit through another meeting so well Senator Teague as you well know in your district we just finished a lawsuit in Huntsville Arkansas we're student after student was being sexually abused we use we use for you both the open records and open meetings provision to see that that the school board in Huntsville Arkansas had twelve different for you violations twelve different freedom of information act violations while children in their school district were being sexually abused forty is important saying that for years importance one thing acting on for years and the other maybe maybe if we were to head training years ago the people in this people on the school board in Huntsville maybe it would have planted a seed and they would have talked about for you a issues maybe it wouldn't have but this is a simple measure a a good government bill that protects our children that protects our tax dollars that protects our freedom bottom line or I wouldn't be here this morning this is about liberty. What I would remind everybody the hustle situations a good example of what we were able to find out what we did vote for you in in that situation so I mean I understand that the the pain in the rear end basically the everything going through that but we also have the situations you just mentioned you know we also had a situation I was down here we're you know legislators spent sixty or ninety thousand dollars per taxpayer money to keep the FBI from getting the records on certain few so I mean and I was certainly not for that either but so there does seem to be a double standard sometimes what the legislature expects people to comply to basically but I mean I I agree with you it is like in this series board stuff so anyway I just think that I concede I don't know what the answer is but of of your right to situations like the hustle School situation shows that. We were able to find out and get justice to some kids that didn't get justice for a long time. Thank you the my background was in the city council and the municipality did have training. On the on the forty a situation you know I mean it's been a few years back but no they didn't they did have that I I don't know anything about the school boards school boards have training on on for yet but I know the Municipal Aid in their winter and summer meetings both the have had those opportunities for for people to the to the that were on those boards to the to participate in and learn about and I think that is important for you is a officer in those respective. The offices but I don't know that we need a law for it. Me the law is if you act negligently and that thing's been around since nineteen sixty what is a four. Nineteen sixty seven sixty seven I mean. You have to be had under rock is as the elected official not to not have a clue about the four year but. The is there any other questions from the members. Go ahead Senator Payton just one quick question about whether or not this would somehow subject somebody to the criminal. Class C. misdemeanor not. Is subject them to the same penalties that that the the all the other for you laws have to what would I have to do to be but that is is been stated numerous time processors that prosecutors don't prosecute for you cases there's been is professor Steinberg I believe said there's never been a of for you conviction well if you don't mind amount I wouldn't entering voting for this bill yes Sir I want to know so what will somebody has so is the it award Smith does not go through the training then I would probably call them up and and ask them have you not been through the training by the way like we had to do in Huntsville when you know what when a court order said you had to so the the bottom line answer is Senator Payton it's a great question if they don't do the training I would soon and I would ask that the court find them in violation order them to to perform the training and You know that's probably gonna be be the end of it I was thinking more along the lines of one person this. Raining day here. Or something like that you know well I wouldn't I wouldn't on the malicious rejection of of the law there were thanks. Three other questions. Seeing none we have a some to speak for this bill Jimmy Calvin third Kevin gave. Introduce yourself and you're recognized. Yes Sir Jimmy Kevin again a citizen I just broke my readers of alluvial understand. Of this bill. Is sorely sorely needed in it's not an undue burden. It's one hour year. I get calls I will be back up I did I actually did it for I request in anticipation this and I said the city of North Little Rock. The Norwalk school district a city Conway. The county school district the following accounting. Of the Pulaski County. The city Cabot. In the cabinet school districts and I ask them for all for you training. For their council members going court members and school board members for the last three years. None. Well I take that back Cabot in two thousand nineteen had two members that attended training in two thousand nineteen other than that. There's been no training. Now I can back that up further by telling you. The. School board members quorum court members and city council members from those same same cities in there is. For years have contacted me. With questions about for you. What I do on this Hey how does this read am I doing this right did I break the law. Okay they're calling Jamie Caven. Okay they should be calling me. If you're gonna be elected to a border council quorum court you have a responsibility to understand if we lost in to say their complex is just not true. The responsibilities under those members are pretty simple they're easily read not comprehended. In the accountability into the citizens. they represent and that they're supposed to follow the for you laws is the responsibility is yeah it's not unknown to pardon the sponsor believes it to be trained in it. Did you understand your responsibilities were not asked you to understand everything in for you. We're talking about how to applies to those members and how to applies to them and if you have that simple one on training and and I'll disagreement US senator flowers will be I think one hours fine. For these members and council members because it's not it's not that difficult will not talk about the entire law we're talking about how to applies to them specifically okay in and I think it's just important why wouldn't we. By what we want people trying to we trained everybody else we train our police officer we've trained our personnel and sanitation why wouldn't we want our members of these councils trained. The this is just a common sense approach in the region that should be public and the reason it shouldn't be on you to it's because then you're gonna trust her body to go do their training and then you're going to have to Senate this makes it this makes the waves for you was intended to begin within twenty five nineteen one oh two the business be done in public so that training should be done in public where I can see that they've done it is the accountability and where I can see that the members have done the training where I can get something out of it as well it's not difficult it's not hard to achieve the it's pretty simple and it's common sense I can't imagine anybody in this committee that would vote against. Simple one hour training a year as far as accountability if they miss. Okay I did I don't I don't think that's going to be an issue. If you if their specific training that day and you're sick. Or you are you've got a prior deal I don't see that is the problem that you can't make it up I don't see that at all as far as in people get too hung up on the criminal code on this. Nobody is looking to prosecute somebody because they missed one hour training I don't want to sue somebody because they missed one hour training so just of trying. Just to try it and then we can avoid the losses and what else will board the lawsuit if they understand the loss if they understand the response be under for you then they have no excuse. If it's document they went through training document they got it and then they can't claim then you can say well I didn't really understand law what you were trying to out. You're trying to so how many lawsuits will this help avoid. On training in George right when he talks about the recording laws. There does a data cabin they didn't they didn't record you say you got a record they admitted that they didn't recorder and I didn't realize it okay with they to have the training they would donate his case and branch if they'd had the proper training. They would probably been recording these meetings which is required by law so this is just a common sense approach in all this back and forth in trying to argue and I don't get it. It's just trying is common sense and I'm glad to answer any questions on is for anybody. Three questions members. Thank you Sir. Murdock washroom. Thank you senator moneys doc Washburn on here's a private citizen concerned about these issues in a perfect world all of the civil servants in our state who are in positions that fully applies to would know exactly what the law is in. You know what they're responsible responsibilities are in a perfect world to none of them be calling Jenny Caven or somebody else saying I want my supposed to do here in a perfect world school boards and quorum court's in city directors with all voluntarily has already gotten training but I guess in too many instances that happened and that's why we pass laws so. That's about all I have to say I hope you guys will consider voting for this thank you Sir any questions. The criticism thank you president. Robbers Linebaugh. Thank you Mr chairman my name is Robert stomach I'm a law professor member of the forty a coalition member of the for a task force a pure here in my individual capacity as a citizen and as an attorney I have very little a substantive matter to add to this the question before you all was whether or not you want to require at minimum one hour of training I think it's not an excessive burden but that's a decision for you all to make I agree incidently center can you are a fully a warrior and I appreciate your work on this center Tucker was a co sponsor very good for your bill last session of the one before I can't recall right now so I recognize that people can differ on these things I think the bottom line is exactly that the bottom line one hour is not that much to require of our elected officials as an attorney I have to undergo continuing legal education most professionals do have continuing education in their field so this would be a very bare minimum I forget the numbers but I think for an attorney to fifteen or twenty hours of continuing legal education so one hour is not that high of a bird and finally let me add. Since I'm coming up before what I expect the perhaps again be the Municipal League presenting their arguments I can tell you that the municipal league's argument for the last bill was incorrect and municipal league has done a great job of being the caveman lawyer from the center and live skit where they come up and say all I'm just a simple caveman lawyer and I don't know anything about this but let me tell you what's wrong with this bill and they will tell you what's wrong with the last bill tell you what's wrong with this bill and every other bill because the Municipal League function is to interfere with transparency for the citizens of Arkansas they do it every time a good government bill comes out and they are the enemy of transparency and I'm here to say that in public so that everybody knows that and if you have any doubt you can go back and read one of my columns in the Democrat Gazette what I've said it before and I'll say it again if you have any questions otherwise that's all I have to offer. Thank you. I'm sorry I should have waited. Now no outburst B. as to the thank you Sir for your time or is there any questions my apologies. Twenty nine thank you for your thank you Sir. The Next is Bob Gregory. Sir my name is Bob Gregory I'm assistant act as activists from across the county. And I'm here to speak on behalf of this bill which is asking that elected officials have a little bit of training on for you one hour doesn't seem like very much to me but it seems like a big screen streema useful at least to put the parameters out there and aware make them more aware of that does those for you issues in their requirements there there are a responsibilities under the law so I would support that. Training requirements for citizens especially when you think about new people. Any experience be able first time elected people that have just struggled through getting elected as everybody in this room is that to do the stables attitude and so the FOIA laws one thing is probably not undermine right away with this the citizens have that expectation that we we can asked the government of all questions of what's what they're doing what the records are out there we we ask for so that would be my my comment that I would support this thank you any questions. Seven nine thank her testimony. The next let me see all March March. Hello I miss the vice and I am a parent who has learned all about for you over the past two years I just want to comment on some things that were said senator king had mentioned that there are a lot of these people don't get paid I think it's only school boards the majority of on that run they don't have time to do training to do their job effectively they shouldn't run for that position and that's what we're finding a cabin we had the president last year in a meeting told us I'm retired I don't even look at my emails and he's the school board president and so as a parent who never even heard of four AM I read this in a good fifteen minutes and understood clearly what was required of you know our elected representatives so I think an hour is plenty. especially if you have a good trainer that says Hey you should record your meetings. That's all we're asking because so many things are done in secret right now Just I don't know about the other school boards I've seen stuff on social media but what I have seen a cabin is since twenty nineteen they do not record any meeting except there one required open meeting. This includes all work sessions. And if they have questions about the agenda in front of them so as a parent who can't attend the work session let's say about curriculum or on how they're gonna raise a C. school to a B. school and I can't attend that they do not take minutes and they don't record it and so I have no evidence of what they're going to do to improve the school that my child that and so if they had even the most simplest of training they would have known. That they should have been recording at least taking minutes I mean that's like the bare minimum and so the school boards a lot of people don't think they're very important I think they even also don't think they're very important because the majority of their job is pushed off to the administrator but when push comes to shove if any lawsuit occurs it's the school board that's going to law going to court over it is not the administrator so I feel that this I mean I wish I would spoke now for the first one because they need to have training and they need to you know have more. I'm knowledge I guess over the most basic of things that that they should. Be part of their job I know everybody else gets training here so why wouldn't he needed as well. Any questions thank you for answering questions from members. Three nine thank you for your testimony. Wesley brown. The. The more sentences my name is Wes brown a long time a reporter here at the capitol Of representing the Arkansas press association also sit on the Legislative Task Force and everything's been said to just saying that we fully support to this bill. Thanks your questions. C. nine thank you for testimony. Senator. Sponsor close. Mr. Respond the chairman I'll close. Well I I think training reaches a ton of of people across the state and I think that if every governing body is would be required had in a two hour an hour dialogue on for yet in our training it does nothing but promote transparency open government if that's who we are as a state and I think that is who we are as a state but let's say your vote in this committee's purely symbolic maybe it's just symbolic maybe an hour's worth of training on the most important law to hold government accountable means nothing to anybody in this state. Maybe this vote is purely symbolic. Maybe it just sends the message that we say we value for yeah we say we want open government we say we want multi million dollar contracts on the local level looked at and discussed in public and we want training on that we want insight when our kids are being sexually molested in Huntsville Arkansas and we find out about that through for you we also value mass or we don't value mass but we want those discussions to occur in an open public forum and we want to be able to send the school board or other bodies the governing body for years to find out about whether masking of our children important whether those conversations are occurring in public and whether we can get all the documents that we wanted to public so there's some pretty important issue but maybe this is just symbolic but send a message today that we value even if symbolically we're going to require one hour of training of our governing bodies. And I would appreciate that vote. Because I don't think there's any more important law in this state than four yeah. And we said that for fifty five years now. And freedom matters. And if we don't value for a then as the intent says and I'm going to read it one more time as the intent of the legislative access. I want to read it one more time. The legislative intent it is vital to a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner the electors that is the citizenship be advised of the performance of public officials and decisions that are reached in public activity in public and in making public policy. It's pretty important pretty important stuff. Four years created more good good good public policy in any political body or any political party. Four yeah has because we the people are paying attention and we're an informed citizenry so I ask for your vote I ask for a vote and a second. In a roll call vote. That's what I would ask for and maybe that's not fair but I think it's important. Because I think transparency. Keeps us a free society period. Thank you. Senator Clark thank you Mr thank you colleagues. Four is important in the you know there's been a lot of discussion lately a lot of discussion the legislature about and the you know among counties and cities and school boards about it being a nuisance we'll freedom is a nuisance we as citizens of holding government accountable is a nuisance of I can tell you that we have such but when it comes to child welfare we are one the few states where legislators can find out almost anything there is to know about a case because we can find out almost anything there is to know about a case we can make a difference we can make changes without information you don't make changes in for you of course applies to the media. and that we want to press the whether we think they're doing doing a fair job to us or not we want the press to be able to find out what's going on in government I will always be a state senator but I want somebody to be able to get the information and reported back to me as to what's going on that being said the biggest problems I see sometimes I just shake my head when I when I read the newspaper I see on TV something does happen for you because people just didn't know. Local school board just didn't know quorum court just didn't know of city council just didn't know what the law was. And. The we're attempting to fix that I wouldn't you know if somebody come to me and said you know what with support thirty minutes the ever two years you know Joe we would've got living probably but I said I'll take it because the whole point here is when the training. we need training and and a horrible differ with those who testified with Mr McCutchen is an hour is a really big deal. Of for those of us that have served on the quorum court as I have and city council is is the chair has in a school board of some of the rest of you have. The people who do that. Are generally successful people and successful people or a lot of times working sixty hours a week or more to start with before they take on that are the responsibility and then they have kids they have a family and I remember when I took on the quorum court job and then had a three year old and a seven year old and had to budget my time. To make sure that I have family time to make sure to spend time with them but all my time was it not another hour. I didn't bring this bill likely another hours a big deal. I remember later on missin. I son's football game when it calls for pets. Because I thought I was duty bound to be somewhere else. So. I will tell you. These people that are serving and doing these jobs that our is not a big deal. But this training is needed. Nobody will be prosecuted nobody's gonna be cited because they were sick or because they they missed a date like to do is somebody's is some municipality or some school board just refuses you know somebody like Joe we will come in with a lawsuit because we need to have training and like to have somebody come and said these be less a big group I've been good with that too but no one's testified against this bill of because and training is needed and I would appreciate a good vote. What's the what's will of committee. Motion by Senator Teague said as amended second by Senator Payton. Those any discussion. This question all in favor say aye. All opposed. No the bill passes thank you senator you want to go to do you want to yes thank you Mr thank you members of the committee of. Three eighty two. US. We go to it with your permission Mister. Okay thank you. Senate bill three eighty two Is really where the rubber meets the road. Senate bill bill three eighty to define defines what a meeting is in the State of Arkansas and Right now citizens don't know the definition of a meeting with regard to four year and nor do governing bodies of the state of Arkansas there's a total state of ambiguity in the law. and there will be until we define what a meeting is. But one thing for sure. Senate bill three eighty two. The people's right to know is not for sale to the Arkansas Municipal League. The power machine or any other special interest groups. Senate bill three eighty two is about the people period about the people's law. And if if we want governing bodies to be able to meet in secret email chains in private text messages behind closed doors are out of the you're the tax paying public we can say here today because frankly that's what's happening across the state of Arkansas because of the ambiguity and and ambiguities in the law. Senate bill three eighty two Senator Clark bill defines what a meeting is. And it leaves no ambiguity zero. Whereas the counter bill house bill sixteen ten leaves much saying ambiguities in the law Senate bill Three eighty two says that the convening of two or more members of the governing body To make a decision discuss public business or deliberate toward a decision on any matter is a meeting. It also addresses if to. Maybe a brother and a sister a dad and a daughter on the same board what can they do. Well they can they can may and to to school board members can meet but what they can't do is discuss the people's business. In a secret email chain a private text message or behind closed doors. But they can meet and talk about how the hogs are doing and how well they're going to do in the NCAA tournament where they're going to dinner what they want to do but they can't discuss the people's business and it's a bright line it's a bright line test. Senator Bentley has said that bordering states require and decorum or a majority well this law is fashioned after Tennessee and and. The law simply says that. Two or more members of the governing body. Can't discuss deliberate or decide public business and that's the essence of for you. And I would ask that that the for good good vote. Is there any questions from the committee. Seeing none of the there are. Members to speak for this bill. G. me. David. Mr cave in the I'm going to limit this to two minutes two minutes for per call sure ensure is not going to take a long as I like to start by since previous hardening on bill this important you've got three members just walked out the door and are not even hearing it. That's very disappointing to me as a citizen let me go ahead ask everybody in this room cleaning L. L.. Raise your hand if you think government should be a hundred percent transparent. Anybody on the committee. That's what this bill does that's what this bill does here's a reality. There are two bills before the legislature right now. Senator Clark bill this is That did they basically said we're going to protect the citizens right the citizens right to know regards to open public meeting. Then we have representative Mary Bentley is bill and senator John Payton bill whose conveniently left turn is that wants to kill that bill that wants to kill the language in the Arkansas Freedom information act open meeting law I'm read twenty five ninety one oh too again because I can't I don't think you read enough is vital in a democratic society battle being the key word that public businesspeople form an open public manner so elector should be advised of the performance of public officials and the decisions that are reached in public activity and making public policy toward this in this chapter is adopted making it possible for them or their representatives to learn to report fully the activities of their Polk public office did any of you all here the Municipal League Arkansas county governments or the Arkansas school board association did you go here that in that intent it said the electoral wars. Not them okay twenty five ninety one oh two the open meeting law it is a battle in democratic society that public businesspeople form open public manner selector shall be advised forms of I'm sorry that's one oh two and I was going to read one oh six so. And you pardon me I don't have it in front of me but I want to go back to because of this bill this bill actually embodies the intent of the Arkansas premiums made an intense the language and twenty five nineteen one oh six six Hey which describes a public meeting it actually and bodies that yes Sir I would welcome any questions this committee has. Because I can answer man I can get to you I can I can answer any argument you have your any questions from the members the man thank you for your testimony Misco. The next is doc Washburn. Thank you very much center of moneys don was saying time. Right yes we're for you Sir when is doc Washburn and I'm here to speak on behalf of a bill number three eighty two It is a blessing to be able to speak in a situation like this we are blessed to have a representative democracy one things I found out last year's it Arkansas's forty fourth place for voter registration you know people who are eligible to register to vote we're about forty fourth place of sick fifty eight percent so point that Alaska's eighty percent I think a lot of people don't understand why they should be involved in the government why it should matter to them who their state Rep or state senator is. And I think one of the things that we can do is pass this bill and make it really clear sunshine is the best disinfectant and we need to have everything open and above board and not people of not that anyone here would do such a thing but. The possibility having backroom deals that everything's all figured out before the public meeting happens so I would hope that you guys vote in favor of bill three eighty two The Arkansas Municipal League the Arkansas association of counties the Arkansas school board association they don't represent us but you folks do and we appreciate you thank you thank you three questions. Nine thank you just one. The Robert Stein law. Just introduce yourself used to have the same two minute. Yes Sir thank you Sir my name is Robert stomach type your in my individual capacity I serve on the for the task force the for the coalition and I am a law professor I have very little to add I want to say that the Supreme Court has asked the legislature to address the definition of what makes up a meeting and Senator Payton has a competing bill and it's and while we discussed it and we disagree that's okay We need to come to a decision as to how to define a meeting one way or the other. I prefer this bill Senator paint has it the competing Bill but we need to some resolution this bill says very simply that when government meets M.. The best model of this is the quorum court committee quorum court gets together once a month they should get together whatever's on the agenda they should discuss in a setting like this and the people can watch it in here and then they take a vote. The alternative is they discuss some of these things in parts in groups behind the scenes were I mean it was the ferries I don't mean it in a serious way they just discuss it outside of the meeting all right so the people can't hear what's going on in the coming to the meeting and they've. Committee may have made up their mind understandably and it may be a good decision but the problem is government didn't the people don't get to see the government actually operate so this bill says you all can get together as often as you want and whatever size group you want and if Jimmy says the sale Hey you let's talk about this item on the agenda Sam should say we're not supposed to that's. So it doesn't prevent anybody from getting together intentionally or accidentally and even one of them raising an issue but I think you the other should say this is not the right forum this should all take place at our monthly meeting in front of the public that's the whole point of the bill thank you Mr thank you Sir Senator Tucker. Thank you now I apologize I've had to step in another room a few times I would have asked this of Mr McCutchen Senator Clark but you're obviously qualified to answer this is well I'll find out. You Mr McCutchen mention that there's nothing in current law addressing this in its case loss not in statute but at the polling get where you're simply taking a vote one at a time maybe that does exist in current law again not in code yes I'm sorry go ahead I'm. Only exists so if you if you sort of go through every member in the group that would constitute a meeting but if you have a small property tension even larger group meetings and you discuss relevant material but you don't come to a decision the wait case says we're not going to say that's a meeting and that process the sausage making is as important as the decision making and so the intent behind this bill in the in the language of this bill which the sausage making on display as well as the decision. And so you're right about the polling and that is addressed but these other circumstances are not addressed. Okay. Thank you thank you questions Senator Payton thank you Mr so let's get down to the sausage making aw. I tell the people back on you a lot of people have a negative opinion of lobbyists. And there's major thing that would prevent the lobbyist from stopping me in the hallway discussing any topic and. Trying to win me to their side of the argument. Of and I tell people back home I'm your lobbyist I go to little rock and I worked my colleagues in our lobby my colleagues and that takes place in in caucus meetings that takes place in the hallway and bathroom running up and down the road talking on the phone I have a phone call about legislation I mean it's impossible to put a gag order on all that. And still have good sausage in the end. Sir can you explain to me how. You don't see it is a tremendous disadvantage if the elected officials can't speak to each other but the lobbyist have free access yes and it's a good question in this gives rise to the the distinction I ju between this bill when your bill meeting just two different approaches and so what you're approach allows for is on the quorum court members might say Hey let's get together and discuss this we can do give maybe a little bit deeper will have more time to talk about but the flip side is what happens if too many of them get together and decide things outside the purview of the the local population as you know the quorum court is a very local body outside the purview of them and without allowing them to put essentially participate and as so I think given the choice that is what happens if we push towards a model where people are making these decisions before they ever show up to the court court they just do away with meetings by doing away with the notion of public meetings either we believe in them or not there is no public meeting requirements for you for the for the legislature and that's okay but there is a public meeting requirement for the court court so either it means something or doesn't and if it if they just shall walk and decide just to where the public meetings requirements so far. Follow up is so recently I think it's pretty famous in my county Cleburne County Arkansas voted to go back to paper ballots in that process I'm not I had a couple of members of the quorum court call me for my opinion. With this bill not. Prevent them from calling each other for each other's opinion of me and that they can talk to anybody in the county except for another quorum court member. The decision they're going to be making indeed and and and here's why to be clear because they're allowed to gather information but they're not allowed to negotiate the outcome it's over there talking to each other the concern is they're negotiating the outcome so is it true that if you were still on the court you were in the Concord when I talked about let's say you were in the quorum court and someone said I'm going to call John Payton because he knows about this issue of building a building or something you know in our locality and he's on the quorum court he could be gathering information from. And we wouldn't but these girls are approved through the sausage may seek making process one when those conversations are had and somebody makes the suggestion for a better way to put language in the bill or they point out the errors of of the bill I mean a lot of times those things happen. behind the scenes if we were not be able if we were not able to do that and it was all to happen in this for. We would be a full time legislature we could never come in here and do it in the in the time frame that that we've been given indeed that's one of the reasons that the legislature didn't adopt the the open meetings act for itself I presume meaning the court court operates all year round right and so they meet together they discuss they make a decision or they say let's hold it over the next month they get they meet every single month barring holidays etcetera so you're right if you if you like this body meets effectively for some sort of legislation three months every two years it's training by the way I hope you all extended session then it's perfectly understandable to say we've got to do stuff in the hallways and to be clear this bill and your bill about balancing competing concerts and I think we're better off forcing the analysis into the open meeting but the cost of that is turning the cost of that negotiation yes Sir I agree with that thank you thank you Mr thank you senator questions. C. nine thirty fifty thank you. Tonya yielding. Thank you for your time and your service is as he expressed I'm sure each one of you is. Had the issue of missing them catching winning football moment you know. And just as US citizens that have. Come up here to try to get our our with desires now would you go back and introduce yourself Lanier Leding sorry and I came up with the other thing I'm just a simple tax paying or government funding citizen. So I think that's a pretty good term but I do I really appreciate what you are doing and that you're here and that you want to be here but I'd like for you to raise your hand if you think that your constituents have become more engaged in politics over the last two years. Have you noticed an increase. You have not or have. Yes yes and I would think that in we could take a consensus that that's what's happened. Okay so our government is designed for the people to control the government not the government to control the people and transparency is of the utmost importance to accomplish this the freedom of information act does exactly that in the bills that were presented today and is being presented now which I hope you will vote yes on. Well I just think it will strengthen that transparency that we need so desperately. There has been a horrible disconnect between the citizens and the government for decades wage too much red tape bureaucracy eccentric and we must get control again we all need to be encouraging more and more citizens to become more politically involved. And then. The main thing that I want to share with you is the words that Jesus Christ laid on my heart two years ago he opened my eyes that I was supposed to do more than just vote okay that I'm supposed to talk to you I didn't know that that's not taught in school at least not to just a normal school child like a wish I didn't do the college thing but let me say this please these four points we were all home made for a time such as this every single one of us never ever doubt that you have to choose a side and all of this is good versus evil and our lord Jesus Christ will when all of this. And thank you I hope that you'll vote yes thank you is there any other questions the nine create your testimony the Missy Bosch. Hello mystifies you can I think you can see that this is important and the way the law stands right now are capped at school board does not even discuss the agenda everything is done in private and I I'm only calling them out because I'm not in another school district and I don't go to any other school board we don't know what's on the agenda except line items we don't get the packet that they're discussing huge amounts of money is in our school we don't know how they came to the decision like I said they weren't ever recording work sessions and so if you were to pass your bill they're already doing that they're already meeting in private they true stripes for elected positions for the at large when we went to ten percent minority in private and the people that drew those straws just happened to be two of the three in a certain district so all seven got to be on the school board again if they would have done that in public the local mathematician at the high school said there was like point two percent that those two people would have drawn straws and so everything that's being done. Is so necessary this and there's so much money being wasted and. We can't find that like I've spent hours and hours every month just for being stuff that should be on the website for state board required information and when I filed an ethics complaint the department of education said well if the school board said that's okay then it's okay though the law is completely opposite of that so I think this bill it needs to be at least worded this way because half of these smaller elected officials aren't even doing what they're supposed to be doing and if you were to allow a quorum. A pass or just you know right before we would never know what is going on in our public and like I said before why run for elective position if you don't want to put in the hours like you shouldn't be on the board if you work forty hours a week don't run for school board if you can't even give us ten hours. Okay thank you three questions. The nine preach to us from. The mob regardless. Issues of centre Johnson my name is Bob Gregory I'm a citizen activists from Parker county. And regarding regarding this bill. It is to me it is say. Stark contrast when we started serving the quorum court my wife and I would have been a quorum court meetings for years Senator fifteen years. And it was very interesting in the beginning there were very little discussions there were it was something to be on the agenda something somebody would vote on and a group of all right now is it. And so I began to take active positions to try to. Change out just as the peace find candidates if you will we're just as a piece that would my minimum requirements have a discussion at the quorum court discussing issues in public so we can hear what's going on the public doesn't know when there's a vote everybody comes in read the bill no discussion vote on it obviously something else is going on. So the free of information act laws act does here is to be critical that we keep the discussions in public. The the to me that's just as we just have to have this discussion public and I think it's a freedom of the citizens to find out what's going on and I would agree that it is it is a very inconvenient. Very very troublesome to have discussions of public requires good people asking good questions and people getting good answers and that's that's in my experience the passes that's been a hard thing to do with the changing the quorum court over the last few years and Walker county. They're people on and now the ask questions are good discussions that happened in public at the quorum court that's very refreshing change I think this law this proposed law would would be very useful in keeping that going rather than letting. So private meetings happen by law so I would I would support this log strongly. Thank you for your testimony. Okay Senator paying. I just curious did you ever run for the quorum court or serve on a rental car court place the winner now of thank you. Any other questions. Thank you Sir. Lord justice. Welcome ma'am please just identify yourself and if you're here on behalf of anybody who who that may be in the wrong my name is Laurie justice and I'm here to represent myself and I'm gonna be very brief I think we've heard a lot of the reasons why we need this bill. And I just want to say that transparency is paramount and establishing trust between those who do the people's business and those who pay their salaries the people deserve to know what's happening it doesn't matter what party you're with it doesn't matter your socioeconomic status. We the people deserve to know what our representatives are doing and so I want to thank senator Clark for on sponsoring this bill and I ask for favorable vote thank you. My apologies thank you next we have Andrew Bagley. Inclusions that the fire self if you're here on behalf of anybody welcome. Yes angel Bagley publisher of the hello world in the Monroe County Argus and also represent an Arkansas press association and thank you for your time I know it's hard to survive points are going to school board but let's let's just cut to the chase. We don't pass laws for good people and good actors we passed them to police bad actors and that's why this law is a good bill we don't need a wall against staff if Jacob wasn't willing to swindle Esau. And so I come to you. From home. My hometown I love it but our reputation is not so good and I can tell you if you leave Helena or a school district a gray area in the law they're going to drive a Mack truck through. When I was in high school I will never forget the words of fort former state representative Jimmy Wallace he said you do what you're recognized today. And what he meant was do what you want to do until somebody files a lawsuit which business is like mine cannot afford to do all the time and you've heard the prosecutors will not take on these cases because I've got a backlog of murders and rapes that they need to deal with so I just want to reference a couple of examples. Back during the last session our city council met and like a well oiled machine. Just past stuff to the fun police to a certain extent with minimal discussion. Now common sense says you there was a meeting before me and that's what allow in more than two or more to get together will do with small groups. You can have three or four separate little meetings enneagram the controversial stuff through without public comment or debate. Let's take an example from our school district recently. With. Five members saying very little. They ran through the cleaning contract for city councilman who just happened to push for a raise for a city employee that had to be the daughter in law with the vice president school board secretary. These are the kinds of things that need to be debated in public. And I'm herding I'd ask for you to vote for this bill for that race. And if you have any questions I'm willing to answer. I just have one quick question did you say you're here on behalf of the Arkansas press association it's okay I've been nominated for the board and asked testify today. Nominated by the board to test nominated for the board of directors and they asked me to come testify that they did ask you to yeah okay thank you. We have ten Hewitt. The past. Asked. one. There's none. All right the. Close. Nine. Well Mr McCutchen. Thank you. In talking about local control here talking about local local politics this freedom of information act this open meeting law the next time there's going to be a controversial bill there's going to be a bathroom bill in Conway and it may be a group of liberals here on that school board and not a group of conservatives who want that bathroom bill. there's going to be a sexual assault in Huntsville Arkansas in the boys bathroom there's going to be a multi million dollar economic development project. The choices are clear we have two choices here we have this bill Senate bill three eighty two which says two people cannot meet and discuss what's happening in the boy's bathrooms in the decisions that are going to be made or the multi million dollar economic development project or the bathroom bill in Conway Arkansas on a local level that those discussions according to three eighty two those discussions those deliberations and those decisions they have to be before us the people this is the people's law they can discuss it as long as they want to and you know what they can ask those tough questions that there's that they want to discuss in the in the closet in the back of the McDonald's they can ask those tough questions and make those tough comments before us the people because we are entitled to see the sausage making as a Supreme Court says we not only need to see the decision we need to hear the conversations and why they're making that decision or we have the choice which we've heard reference here which is house bill sixteen in. Which which will allow less than a quorum so in Fort Smith where I come from six out of the thirteen six out of the thirteen can meet at the back of the McDonald's are on a secret email chain or secret texting I and they can discuss our business they can deliver aid our business and they can decide our business and then once the sixtieth finished to those six will meet with four five the others and they'll make that secret decision and then they have the decision it's it's a done deal the multi million dollar economic and we the people never see anything. And I'll leave you with this point here's the gold standard in here's the test or strike out section twenty five nineteen one oh two and let's say it's a farce in Arkansas twenty five nineteen one oh two says it and I'm going to repeat it one more time it's vital in an it in a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner. This the representative of Bentley's bill does it meet that goal standard does your bill senator Payton meet that standard I would suggest not the only bright line test here is is you do not allow to members of the governing body to have conversations outside of we the people it's the only way it works otherwise you're going to have you're gonna have a B. and C. meeting in the back of the McDonald's then see is gonna go to D. E. and F. and the decision is going to be made and the people are going to be happy and that is not a public that is not a public decision that is not open government so we might as well drive a heart through through twenty five nineteen one of six the open meeting law just strike out the whole thing in let's just do what we're gonna do let's just let's just allow local governing bodies to discuss our public business make their decisions and then come in and take their vote without any discussion and. But I don't think that's I don't think that's what we want in a democratic society because for yes and I'll close with this four yeah is not a Democrat issue or a Republican issue for you is not a liberal issue or a conservative issue for yet is a freedom issue it's a liberty issue and if we cannot see what our governing bodies are due and then bad decisions are made in corruption happens. Period. Corruption will happen make no mistake about it if we allow our governing bodies to make decisions in smoke filled room down here it does the place. It will happen in we've seen it on the statewide level over the last several years the massive corruption and maybe it's because we're allowing all these discussions to occur and it does have to occur. Legislative it's a different body the legislature meets the legislature meets two months. It's a huge body and you have to have some of those discussions Winthrop Rockefeller appreciated that and he got this past when they're all Democrats. And and and not only that public bodies are meeting at almost every day there meeting weekly their small bodies but if we allow them to meet in secret email chains are and what Fort Smith called in the weight case which I tried and took all the way this is bring court in the way case made a decision that that unless the decisions made. You can have three sevenths of the governing body on secret email chains three of them making a decision in a secret email chain to abolish our civil service commission is that the way we want we want governments are you address this body thank you. Is that the way we want our government to operate we're in the way versus the city of Fort Smith case you can have a seat at the and and private email chain bar governing body three of them may have discussions and make a decision the other four are listening to the discussion and then we go in and have the vote where the public never knows that's going on and I suggest to you that's what will happen if we don't have a bright line rule we're. All discussions. Every single discussion occurs in a public meeting. Because she will be on the other conservatives. Conservatives this you will be on the other foot at some time will regret this decision because what I want to conserve is the freedom of information act and what I'm concerned about is we will have no open meetings provision. If this bright line test three eighty two is not passed. And instead we passed house bill sixteen ten. Thank you for listening your close. Thank you Mr and the Committee of appreciate your great patience today and hearing these bills in here all the testimony and I'm I mean that sincerely as we're getting toward the end of the session. The the separate country of that people can just come and testify and that we just come and people can be Senators all you know about a come here twenty years ago I would have with thought well you know you all or senators but is now you realize it is just it's really the people and and so people look at each one of you in the vote to make and they think it's too but you represent ninety thousand people and I'm glad there's two bills because there's the representative this represents professor Steinbach said it best we said this is seeking a balance. and obviously this law would have never been passed in the beginning except we had the problem that one of the witnesses talked about of a school board meeting. And then the the member of the press brought a city council meeting where obviously the decisions had already been made you know as a former quorum court member people at least have enough sense to act like they're having a discussion of because that's irritating to people they will they don't they they want their government to act the way government ought to act in so I'm here today representing the people that wanted to be open. I've been a quorum court member and understand the practicalities of not being able to visit with one other person but there was a reason why these laws need to be enacted in the first place because there was way too much of this everybody deciding and then coming in voting and as we've heard today it's still going on and so you have this bill before you and I appreciate a good vote. Thank you senator During the once will of committee. No motion thank you for your testimony thank you Mr chair thank you members of the committee thank you. Senators we really need to take a break for lunch and recess and come back if we can get a little bit more business done since we we have been caught up on the history so if it will be what will try to get through those as quickly as possible this afternoon recess until after adjournment probably twenty minutes fifteen fifteen twenty minutes after German fifteen minutes. All right ten minutes after German. Is he needed in his second something to that. John is the one right let's go.