Education Committee - Senate

With representative Cozart and his bill house bill thirteen thirty six. You will identify yourself to be recognized. Not working. The president will. Thank you this okay okay thank you representative Bruce Cozart district ninety one and I have with me all literature self. When the wrecker education Arkansas farm bureau federation. And we'd love to present this bill to you today I want to kind of give you a little bit of the title part of it is created agriculture X. education pilot program in a public elementary schools and work in this would begin and two thousand twenty five twenty six school year and the developer of the Division of elementary and secondary education may consult with industry stakeholders without including without limitation a part of agriculture and the Arkansas farm bureau federation to establish a pilot program. To provide agriculture education in elementary schools in the state of Arkansas the pilot program required by this section may determine whether or not to implement the elementary agriculture education program statewide I want to I'm not original bill to be able to give you a brief of it and but it would it would establish six districts in the state and would have stayed up in six areas and it would have one policy to each of those areas they would have to. Draw for those I would ask that will be in it that would put him in the act and roll those out I don't know that process would be established by the Department of it I'm gonna turn this over Lindsey she does a lot more about it so I will let her explain more about it than I probably think about. For this bill and this idea is great by yourself for the record okay let the record education Arkansas farm bureau thank you for that bill and this idea generated out of Georgia department of ed and what they have done is they have established a pilot program that isn't exposure curriculum to elementary age kids And grades K. through six we plan to do a three year pilot program with a minimum of six schools across the state of Arkansas in three main points about this curriculum that we want the committee to know is that is supplemental it is not meant to replace any type of curriculum that your kids are already being taught in schools it is supplemental it is free and it is voluntary so those are three main high points about this curriculum and what we want to do is we want to expose children in the grades K. through six to the agriculture industry in the state of Arkansas it provides sixteen billion dollars to the state's economy every single year and it's estimated by twenty fifteen we're going to have to feed nine to ten billion people on the planet so if we're going to do that we're going to have to educate our future generations on how to do that so that's that's our goal with this curriculum right now. It. What you know get the same back just let this is This product program is fully funded by the farm bureau association is no cost to the state I will totally up on the curriculum for the only cost could be if somebody decided they wanted to hire a teacher and I teach or somebody teach this but they do not have to this is not mandate anything and nobody is mandated to do this they have to apply for a will to and I will tell you I've already got people calling me across the state love this and are willing to do that we've got to get it we got to get to the Senate to to get that pass to get the governor to sign it will be glad to get a question. The other questions from the committee. Yes. Senator Rapert. Yes I brought my new. Thank you thank you madam chair so only six schools. A minimum of six minimum of six and the reason we did that was because at the farm bureau federation we already have our state divided into six districts with representatives in each of the districts so it won't cost anybody any money we won't have to hire anybody across the state to do that we already have personnel that does not with the minimum of six are you gonna try to Arkansas one of each of your districts we are and if you have fifty one apply right could could you find that yes thank you. Are there any other questions. What is the will of the committee is are they speak for against the bill the audience the thanks to be signed up what is the will of the committee. Do pass. Senator Hammer. Second. You senator Dotson. All those in favor. All opposed. Thank you to pastor bill thank you madam chairman or chairwoman and thank you committee I appreciate that thank you senator Hammer for being the sponsor of this in and handed off to you. So do you want to do that that that transportation bill. Ninety five. You know my name it's it's his bill to that I would love to help him with that. This is House bill twelve thirty eight. Representative Cozart and senator Hammer. No the. All right measure the would like this bill this is the or supplemental funding that we do every session to deal with our matrix and funds are are schools are rules schools from sub sub rules and even a few of our of. Town schools for the extra funding that they need to make their transportation work out of some schools that have a very large population of buses and kids that they bus every year run short of money so for the transportation what we fund and some schools make a lot of money on it and so we're trying to balance the bill out were we don't give too much money to a school that doesn't need of transportation but we try to bring that back and give that extra to the rule schools and wants to do it so the formula. And I I try to tell people that formula but for what is the. Everybody always asks what it is it's so average daily membership in an average number of riders average daily route miles in addition to allocations or the impact of the group wish to trek District transportation costs are paid with funds other than foundation funding could keep them out of getting some of this money if they use other things to pay for their transportation funding some **** of well I don't get any. I said well how what age would you use your what you pay for transportation well I used or funds or something else you know last year that wasn't wasn't supposed to be used for transportation could be but didn't use a crash placement so that moves things around every year is a little bit different also same schools are always on their summer different so if your school did not get funding there's a reason for it we can just leave them out they didn't need it is what so that's why we do it you I have a list of the bill of all the schools that do don't the change from last year to this year things like that and Everything that. All right I'll be I'll be glad to address questions for. Other questions from the committee. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak for against this bill. Nobody signed up. What is in the center right. Share I just noticed in the fiscal impact they give up for ninety nine thousand increase in twenty four in the. Thousand twenty four. I probably will have the the difference would you build number okay you have okay. For the fiscal impact and twenty four of the reason is the money goes up from the amount of in there it is seven point two billion the first year this subplot seven million in the second year so that's the reason for the rise This Is over above the other years that's how much of the impact is above that so that so add those together that's the increase it would be for two years that would be the occurred for two years. So the first year the increases of five hundred thousand dollars and the the second year it's eight hundred thousand basically so what's the first year where we've we've we've moved up I think last year was six million something and and are made but seven million we went seven two of four twenty twenty three twenty four and have for twenty four twenty five we moved up to Of the seven point seven so those of the increases over the prior year as well so that says FY twenty four twice I know that's a misprint okay. Thank you sorry you know how they do. Are there any other questions. So what is the will of the committee or should do pass. Senator Hammer. I can do pass Senator Leding is on the second all in favor. All opposed thank you bill very much thank you okay. So moving right along here. It's Julie Mayberry here. Accern. Looking stations out there. She. Representative Mayberry you are up. Hey if you will identify yourselves you'll be recognized. Or. Yes twelve fifty four house bill twelve fifty fourth what we're looking at right now. Forty manager Kim Hammer state senator district sixteen. State representative Julie Mayberry District ninety two. But who. To get. Thank you okay. Thank your water superintendent right schools. You're recognized thank you okay members many of you are well aware that the cost of everything has gone up tremendously. And the construction especially has gone up tremendously and our schools are really trying to understand how they're going to build the facilities that they've promised the people in the the district that they need to build have to build and so superintendents are trying to figure out what can we do and this is an idea that has been brought forward and I think it's a great idea I'm gonna letter school superintendent and Bryant how to explain what this idea is. Thank you representative Mayberry and Senator Hammer for bringing this bill as I said I'm Karen Walter superintendent Bryant I think it's okay madam chair have a handout is it okay if I can feel the. I think the hand that will make it much easier for everyone to understand tweet. So. So on the handout that you have you will see there's actually two sides to it there's one side that shows I gave the example for private schools. So we have two projects right now one of them was in the twenty one twenty three cycle it is been approved we know of are finding the second one is junior high additions we have been approved for that we will find out may one by may one excuse me if we are sitting thank you for that. So we submitted our High School ditions in two thousand nineteen it's kind of a delayed process in two thousand nineteen we submitted our application for additions at our high school the cost was projected to be between nine and ten million dollars. We are we're told that we are getting three point four million dollars from the state our participation for that year was about forty two percent that the state paid forty two percent of the total cost as you can see from the table of the top there it started out between nineteen million dollars the cost of construction COVID and other things it is now gone to seventeen million but then we had an additional factor that is raised the cost and that is the new requirement that school districts have to build storm shelters for any new project and that went into effect January one. So are estimated cost today for this project that was supposed to be between nine and ten million dollars is now twenty three million dollars. So this bill what it does is instead of looking at a number which is currently two hundred dollars a square foot needed it was a hundred and seventy five for many years and then went to two hundred dollars. But this bill does is set of looking at just setting a number it actually looks at the actual cost factors. Now that that is going to mean if we raise what we fund districts as far as the amount per square foot. Posted three fifty or three seventy five. With the amount of money that we have we're not going to be able to find as many projects. But we currently I believe have seventy five projects that have been approved and we're in a position right now that. We may be able to say we funded seventy five projects but it's seventy of us have to turn the money back to the state because we're not able to build the buildings because of the cost. You know we're not gonna get to build buildings so what this bill does is says we're gonna look at those actual cost the cost per square footage that the state anticipates will be based on those factors again it right now this bill has no fiscal impact because the amount of money is the same. It may not be as many projects are funded but my hope is that I may not get on this first round. If I'm you know if I'm denied because I'm too far down on the list if these other people get to build their projects and hopefully the next time I would be able to build not because you can see it's going to be very difficult for us to build these projects with the inflated cost that we have. If you look at the bottom of that page it talks about our wealth index again as I said it was about forty two percent that should have been the state's cost when you look at the new factors of the storm shelter and just the inflated cost of construction we're actually going to be getting about fifteen percent from the state for those projects. So on the other side of the page you'll see at the table our district to use Baldwin and shall I for a construction manager they provided me with this information these are actual cost of recent buildings that they have built you will see at the top there and twenty two that had to elementary schools in middle school and this is before the storm shelter but there was a three hundred sixty seven dollars square foot in at three hundred eighty two dollars worth the cost. So. I also have a table that I even use United table but a spreadsheet. That list all the school districts in the state and I I've ranked by their space ranking from the facilities division so if you look at your document you'll see that Maynard school district is number one so they they are top if they were to submit to this state an application to build a new building then they're going to be they'll be the first to say yes because their number one. I did not get through the whole document but if you look at the last column. I could want you'll see one hanging four eight. I think one of the concerns with this bill is that it was going to negatively impact our smaller districts I think the thought was the larger districts like private bill already take up all the money because they're gonna get all the space money so I wanted you to have this document so you can see this base rankings and I used classifications for athletics because that's what we all know for at size of districts so that's what that I want a into a means so I went to the top fifty school districts and you'll see the distribution at the top. So the top fifty districts for space rankings twenty two of them are one eight districts the smallest twelve or two eighty seven or three eight five or four eight three or five eight zero are six eight and there's one seven eight district. So I don't think it will negatively impact our small districts when we talk about facilities funding there are two different parts of money there's a pot for for space to build a new building because you have growth and there's a part of money that is for warm safe and dry so it doesn't impact the districts that aren't growing their projects will go under the warm safe and dry and so that does not impact space rankings so. I think I have covered everything. We have questions from the committee. You senator Leding. I think I know the answer to this just to make sure I understand what you're saying like I see my school district on here but I grew up in Springdale I don't see the spring the school district on here I know that they are growing but that's means they they they don't have any projects at this time or they fall outside eligibility when yeah this this doesn't have anything to do with project submitted this is is there the space rankings there out by the facilities division okay so Bryant is a hundred and sixtieth on this list I'm glad you brought that questions Senator because. This I'm so far down on the list this is in a self serving idea for me as I'm I'm going to be really far down on the list as far as getting a project at Bryant but it goes back to what I said earlier if we don't raise that cost per square footage none of us are gonna get to build right okay thank you hope that answers your question. Bring down one hundred and eighty two on this list right now. Legeno centre Dotson. Temperamental. Thank you madam chair So this. Just look at this bill this changes formula funding factor and I know there's been there's a lot done with this creating a whole wealth index in the funding formula that was established four years ago maybe I'm not sure How does this funding factor. Change from the formula I mean if we're eliminating the formula. I guess I needs more. Anything that I am just not sure how that's going to change any of the percentages in the formula that were established a few years ago so I I'm going to answer your questions Senator I know that Mr Kane he's Director players Division is here if I misspeak I'll ask him to correct me this does not change the wealth index of school districts this is only changing looking at the cost per square foot so that the wealth index the formula we put in it I believe it was two sessions ago as you said that we changed and that created I would say more fair system for our districts that weren't going but needed to replace Bryant lost or wealth index we worried about fifty percent and we were going down of that's when that took place so this bill does not change that it only looks at the cost per square foot that this state is going to give when projects are approved. So so it doesn't change the percentage of the projects a a district would qualify for if their project is approved as an thank you. This became ten game would you like to introduce herself yes madam chair I'm I'm Tim Kaine I'm the director of facilities and transportation with the department of education. Thank you senator Davis did you have a question. Thank you madam chair I just curious I mean I am concerned that there is now no cap and did you guys look at having some type of cap I mean stories me for a few different reasons I guess just because if there's no cap and who knows what costs could end up looking like and then you know maybe additional fees I know and it's become sort of trendy I think to hire retired superintendents and and have them try to get and jobs for school districts and and so I worry like is with this maybe eventually leads if there's no tax on square footage and then there's additional I contracted these or something like that and where maybe it's going in the pockets of retired superintendents who are hired by companies like this to get school business and I don't think this is the intent of your bill at all I'm not trying to say that please understand that I just saw that being a trend whenever I was on the Russell school board and leading that was sort of like a thing that was starting to happen because they have relationships with superintendents from their time and doing that work and so I'm just curious like how do we protect against things like that and and why didn't you maybe look at raising the cap but having some type of cat. So it does not have a cap and that may be something in the future that we need to look at I think as far as. It being wild wild west I think the I think the free market will take care of that if that happens and it's looks like it's very inflated I think that districts are going to reject bids are not gonna build those bids I think our construction construction management folks in our contractors I think that that will take care of itself I think it's something that we're definitely going to need to monitor I have the same concerns that if there's no cap you know what is that going to look like for contractors but again hopefully the free market will help monitor that I think it's something definitely that we need to keep in mind. Senator Rapert. But I'm not the only one that has you answer so sold me with what we're doing here is we're going to lessen them out of school districts we can help with the pot of money we've got yes. So if you if you had if if it's bright bright schools so Brian schools has to expand and build elements school at school. Yes X. amount of dollars and foundation funding funding which has a cap currently if you had a build its you just increase your mileage to the yes Sir and and so right now we're in the situation actually have a meeting on Friday with our and fiscal agent we use Beardsley a bright schools we're looking at some second lien bonds just because we don't want to go to our voters right now with what we're looking at winning in our economy in the near future not a good time to go to voters and ask for a millage increase so we're looking at some other options Secondly bonds to the board a little bit about what interest rates are going to look like with at our second lien bonds but yes if regardless we're we're gonna have to come up with part of the money because we're not getting all of it from the state but. The increase in looking at the square footage but less than that for destruction and not have to be as much so that I can ask so you have a current and current project that you are struggling to get this bill. How many times you go back to to your architectural engineering teams and ask for value engineering to remove is that what I'm seeing a trend of his school districts want to build the biggest and the best to attract people into their school systems because they've got the nicest schools but then you have a five hundred million dollars or five hundred dollars worth of school instead of a two hundred eighty dollars the school it may not be is as stressed out and L.. But it is certain the function of the people which is educate the kids that's a great question and so the projects that I have on the sheet today these projects we have not gone through the the process I don't have plans for those yet to the high school addition we found out in April of last year that we receive funding so we just found out in April so. We didn't have time to get plans number to start in the summer and because of some of the factors because of the high cost we have waited kind of to see what was going to happen we are also looking at what would our enrollment be the beginning of the school year because during covert you know we conductit so we are not at a point where I have paid an architect you know to do detailed plans and things but what we're looking at is just a classroom additions so ours is forty six thousand square feet it's only gonna be classrooms it doesn't have any other space in it and it's it's just for because we're full and we need to build some classrooms for kids so it's not anything. Which you know since I've been at Bryant we tried to we want things to look nice but not face we have done value engineering and all the products we have had since I've been there but we're we're not looking to you know the Taj Mahal we just we just need to get classroom space I don't also would like to I'm sorry thank you hi I'd also like to add that there is now requirement for safe rooms and I don't know if that's come up on on this in conversation and so you had a safe rooms in here and that cost goes up drastically and we need to allow for that or we're really gonna put our school districts in a bind. Senator Hammer did you have something you want to say. Yes ma'am I'd like to do in the form of asking questions phone bill if you don't mind okay whatever thank you. The the discussion of the the requirement of the safe room. Was imposed by federal requirements state requirements Department data requirements at what time frame did the safe room. Conversation enter the conversation. Tim Kaine director facilities and transportation. it was a it was part of the Arkansas fire code so it was a the in game a piece the Arkansas farmer Code hate international building code in it. And so the farmer sales office. Recommended to state adopt that so it's it's not an apartment of a. Rule or regulation but as far as are you asking Senator when we found out or when yes when did that become when did that become is a recommendation or requirement it's a requirement okay requirement my understanding is and I might be off on this a month or two a back in may is when that committee approved that for it to go into effect on January first okay this year and that would mean that the requirement came. After. The schools had already submitted plans and had already been approved to spend the money so we added something in after they had been approved which now as a result of what we did has attributed to driving up costs per square foot to build buildings if I remember the conversation rights that's correct Sir okay Ma'am manager thank you. to superintend Walters of like to ask the all your projects are put out for competitive bid is that correct yes Sir so as far as any. Discussion or as far as the discussion because I I hear what Senator Davis is saying and and I and I agree in principle with what she's saying but. If you as a district state we want this when we want a but B. would really do but we want Hey that's were after the competitive bid process which multiple contractors can bid on that that's how you have to square foot price is that correct correct okay and. To the point of a this is just a side bar thought to prohibit you pretend it's from going to work because I share your concern a lot of people leave and they go to department if they had or they go to coops are they going to private sector maybe one thing what I do is put a moratorium like we have on us as legislators that we can't go be lobbyist maybe that's a side bar legislation we look at to say you can't go to work for this so as to build a barrier in that's just a side bar thought but thank you manager. The questions from the committee. Senator Davis did you have something yes all right. I do like I understand the purpose of this I I am very uncomfortable that there's not a cap like I feel like if we could and work three trying to find a reasonable path to ensure that we're keeping an eye on staff because everyone's busy there's a lot going on in and that would make me feel a lot more comfortable at with this bill because I understand building cross on that and we want to make sure that and you know we're accommodating that I think that's completely reasonable and I just like to the like there's an accountability measure in that have a suggestion on how we come up with that cap. what that cap might be well if I mean if right now I mean I don't know that there's like any magic number but if it's two hundred dollars right now for the said to fifty to seventy five three hundred I don't now I'm just saying that so the building the with the safe rooms it's five hundred dollars a square foot is what it is so that it's and no one's actually built those yet this is a new requirement so it's really kind of hard to even say exactly what that is and I would hate to set the cap and then we find out the safe rooms maybe are higher than that. by the time the projects actually take place. Thank you. Other questions from the committee. Senator Rapert. I would just like them our facilities director. I know that you there's a lot of schools that have plans to get foundation funding and then all of a sudden. The schools come in bigger than they want to afford as far as the cost which is have not been in my area so what they've done is is they they pull that down there just I guess no wait it out and see what the to the population does the with the words act as but as far as the requirement for. And the state rooms is that something we looked at the scores in the state interject and say we don't what does that look like because it doesn't have to cost you know five dollars worth it is in is that just for the safe room construction or that spread out over the entire school or the whole school safe room now. That question last four. It's only safe room only for the square. Same. It's not gonna be five hundred and something dollars a square. So. Thank. Right now in Senate bill in this state last year's. Yes. Yes Los. This is because what what is the how much square foot per child is needed so if you have a school it's built accommodate five hundred students what's what's the square foot per child that safer. Well. It's kind of complex. but I can say that right now it has the lands stand. Either has to be a second pass the school. Order Cassidy. The same. Which for most. Right. Capacity. I believe that. As far as per person is five. The stock of the. I. I believe needs to hire. That number. Senator stone just a question for clarification I did I couldn't hear exactly what you said what was the call to make the calls just a bill the state troopers were put. It's safer in square footage cost right now is there is it averages around five twenty five or five thirty square foot okay you saying we've seen some down around five hundred using the larger ones Arkansas larger the building is usually the cheaper the cost side. Thank you yes Sir. Senator Hammer. But direct this question to Director cane the the numbers that you're throwing out so if if superintend Walters has a building that's going on it comes in at three hundred square foot the numbers that you're caught talking about is that on top of the three hundred or is her three hundred would it be wrapped into those into those numbers the. Five hundred plus dollars per square foot is just from the area safe from. So the rest of the school when meeting that. Right so she had that construction costs for professional that's not to say in which a requirement to include say from that requirement to build safe rooms is that. Is that a prioritized item above what is currently already approved to the school district to be built is it like a you guys gotta stop and reconsider what you're doing because now we drop this requirement in on you and not only do you have to pay for the cost of the classroom space you need but now you have to include building that safe from what you're building those other classrooms. But the fire marshal's office did is they said the cut off point well as it plans were approved before January first of each year and they would not have to do this. But. Then they had to have. Change. All right thank you for J. Walters like to weigh in matters the Speaker down there. Thank. So I would like to verify a couple of things so and you know typically rules that affect school districts go through the rule making process in the Department education stands out commissions memo and lets us know these rules are out for public comment. This may have happened with the State Farm on Marshall's office in may the first time superintendents were made aware of this it was in November. So. The director can is not wrong when he says if your plans were approved by January one but it's hard to find out in November and it's what expect to have plans done for building and have them approved by January one so the timeline of when we got this information was very problematic as well. The other piece to this is that I think there's a misconception and we are trying to get some clarification right now my architect has been working with the state fire marshal's office. My high school at Bryant has twenty two hundred students on that campus. We're trying to build forty six thousand square feet of classrooms. We're not wanting to build a separate safer make it's a separate safe room for twenty two hundred kids twenty three million dollars is on the sheet is not going to touch it okay what we're hoping the State Farm Marshall says is that we can build that building and the classrooms themself will meet the code for a storm shelter we're not trying to build a separate. Building if that makes sense because we feel like that adds cost and so we're trying to make the building to meet now when you do that it makes the the costs go up per square footage it doesn't really make sense to try to build that standalone shelter for one edition so I hope that can clarifies Senate. Brian. I just want I just want to just so I make sure I fall on if you take your your estimated cost that you that you provided for your proof facility project list. You're actually making all forty five thousand five hundred sixty seven square feet cost five hundred dollars a foot with that storm shelter requirement. Yes Sir we're we're and because what director came was saying to you he's talking about a standalone storm shelter if I do a standalone storm shelter the square footage it would have to be Senator would be a hundred million dollars will present my kids I have well that's five that's five square feet per students any of the students well for this what we're what we're trying to get from the state fire marshal is that we can make this building meet those requirements the new building. So it's forty six thousand square feet and so to make that building meet the requirements for an F. five tornado it's going to make the costs go up to five hundred dollars a square foot and that's just an estimate and I understand that but if it's if it's how many students in that building the questions that we have probably. Four hundred for her so because the call five hundred just for some growth at five five square feet per student which is a twenty five hundred square foot storm structure verses of what your call in a forty five thousand square foot storm structure forty five thousand costs more than a twenty five hundred square that instruction according to the rules if we build the standalone shelter it has to be big enough for the entire campus. Right high school not just that building if we build the standalone. Okay so it's twenty two hundred kids but I I'd also like to say a thing for safety purposes you're trying to if there's a tornado coming sometimes we don't have enough notice and if you're trying to move all the students from the classroom to another facility first of all you're rushing kids potentially outside to another room. I mean I think you're better off keeping them in the classroom yeah. We've been doing it for hundreds of years so it sounds like it's a bigger a bigger problem some soldiers are bigger problem we need to figure out address as a state I'm asked what what what code we adopt as a state to require this construction barcoded twenty one park of late it was the it's the most recent. Date I believe it's twenty twenty. I'm kind of going off memory thanks again the farmers. Senator Hammer thank you measure. Do you have in your capacity now director Kane the ability to review and approve or deny based on the square foot cost. What is she if she if she pretend Walters Rachel's building something and if we take the cap off this do you in your position have the authority to say wait a minute that's too high or do anything to intervene if it appears that the cost is going to I. When the law it talks about prudent use of state funds so I would say that there's that what we when we review a project we look at the R. rules ship rules and we look at our facility means. And if it meets that we give what what we call tentative approval then it goes to the commission. In order to be funding so if there is an issue with the per square foot cost there's at least two layers that are there to call into question that that if we take the cap off as is being talked about there's at least two layers there that somebody can the commission can say you guys are way over priced or something's going on here they have the authority and the ability to look in a put a hold on the project if they see something they don't like that's correct that's correct okay and then superintendent let me ask you this The way I would interpret this is were hit the pause button were saying everybody's getting a little but nobody's getting anything done this is a real alignment of the stars to where some school districts based on the chart here would be moved ahead of some others and potentially have to have to wait a C. Scott Smith stand over there see some other people in the room is there anybody with any associations or organizations that have raised opposition to this that you are aware of until we get a chance at the end table. I'm not aware I know our ministrations Association is in support I'm not aware of anybody I think that there were concerns at the beginning about how it would impact the small districts but I think the data proves that to be false so I'm I'm not aware Sir okay all right thank you thank manager. For any other questions from the committee. Dotson. Thank you madam chair so if I'm understanding this correctly this is all as a result of but not all building costs but this particular one is a as a result of this fire code those adopted by rule. Yes Sir my understanding. It wasn't by statute by. At. I mean is this not something that was disclosed at the time and not known. Is this something that we can again it was senator it was of it was the fire marshal's office rule that they brought before the legislative body yeah I mean I know that would be a question for most of those things are just adopted because it's an update but I don't know that I've ever heard of one that had this dramatic an impact so is that something that is. Authorized by statute I'm assuming that we that they can bring those updates before us but. Have you looked at actually I'm doing that particular rule. This statute. I've I've heard at in talking with the fire marshal recently that there is a consideration that he's had conversations with senators and representatives about. changing aspects of the bill that would again be a question you know more directed death the farmer shall. Ninety four we just. Go and start dramatically increasing all over costs with a mandate that. Was not really discussed or known about I don't know what I'm I'm with several I'm here thank you that I do want to cap on the square footage cost that were. That we know about on the front end but. I also think we need to look at that that fire codes. That's a. It's been brought up that has a dramatic impact without any discussion about it so I think we need to look at that before we move forward with something like that I do also want to point out forget the fire code part of it actual costs for schools built in twenty twenty to actual costs were approximately three hundred seventy five dollars a square foot so that's significantly more than the two hundred dollars that we're currently allowing so even if we didn't have the safe room aspect of it and I I very much understand your concerns with the safe room and is there something that we can do to by a little bit more time or think it all through I completely agree but we still have the reality that things cost more than they did a few years ago I've been trying to add a room on to my house and I keep thinking it's going to go down and it's going to go down well I wish I could return the clock and go back to twenty twenty and build it then when I thought it just went up a little bit you know that's just personally I can't imagine to the extent that we're trying to build the schools cost is going up and we need to allow for those funding factors to be considered. Thank you can make a motion so I just wanted my understand we're not taking a position for or against the bill. And I'm happy to answer any questions about that are there any more questions from the committee. On the do we have anybody speak for against the bill. So what is the will of the committee. But motion do pass like to speak to the motion I get a second. Thank you I have a second second by Senator Leding in a do pass by Senator Hammer. Go ahead. Thank you committee chair what I would like to ask the kid Committee to consider before we take the vote is. And I'm I'm sitting here recommend memory because I think this just went through rules and a a review thank you remember it being discussed. But it was one of those things I think that we were put in the position that we didn't have much of a choice but to go ahead and do that because of some other factors that right now I just can't have the total recall there was one of those deals as I mentioned I think we do have a choice but to pass the rule because the recommendation coming down from the fire department seems like the feds were involved in it somehow maybe some funding stream and I may be all wrong on that but there was more to it than than that. So what we've done in essence is put a mandate on the schools that you have to build these firearms or taking consideration in your plans whether that's a standalone or whether that's incorporated into the cost of what has already been approved and blast but now maybe I go back to the architect and say. And we reconfigure this thing somehow to make it work logistically I know a bit brought into in the Benton sorry in the Bryant school district it's like a little college campus and put up a safe room expect everybody to leave their classrooms and go but yet in the school where I graduated which was outside be branch it would be that big of a deal in the there in tornado alley I think there's some individuality based on where the schools are located there his story historical experiences with tornadoes and we need to leave that down to the you know to the individual level. The. All that being said that we are sitting with some schools that have been approved with plans the rising cost add the inflation that's going with that and we can either do something and take and and re direct his the future and say the schools go and get it done now yes it done have a cap on it but we got safety measures from what I just understood the director say that they get online it can be held accountable that we have we have the ability to take care of the schools now so they can complete their projects next cycle the other ones that didn't get to and do it in in their entirety instead of piece Mealing that together to your point Senator Davis I I agree I think maybe we need additional layers but to get this going now I think we have the safety measures to do it and then we need to take up the the fire room discussion is a separate issue but not let this be punished because of something that we as a legislative body obviously approved through the rule making process and and let this go ahead go for to take on these other issues we still got time in the session come back and drop some legislation to deal with those and maybe the put the cap on it otherwise but I would hope I respect whatever you do but I appreciate a good vote I hope you take that in consideration what I just said. We have a do pass by Senator Hammer in a second by Senator Leding The anymore discussion on the boat. All in favor hi All opposed. I think the ayes have. Senator Davis. Now Senator Leding. Yes Senator Hammer I yes. At center Brandt. No center stone. Yes Senator Dotson. Now. Senator Chesterfield Senator Chesterfield. Hi okay. So I get. So I I that I. If. Have. Forty three thank you and passion Bills. Yes. Okay that's right you're right we have don't have enough in here. Thank you sorry I made a mistake but manager I could not hear you could you repeat your ruling I'm sorry thank pardon I did not understand I did not hear number of votes fail okay then I'd like to make a motion that the the beach Fund so we can keep it here and work toward toward the future please okay thank you thank you. You have one more that's almost the similar thing come right up you wanna get ready with that so to want to help me present the bill could not be here today so I'm gonna put that on that one okay and it kind of deals with the same name areas so we can come back next week and have some new ideas based on the feedback I appreciate all the feedback it's all good thank you. Right. Okay with the late late late in. And we need to make a vote on that your expungement motion I have a second. Widget you may be made a motion to expunge the vote so I know I would feel so I have to find out more than once okay if you want to let go and vote. So who is. Nobody seconded. All right Senator Leding all in favor aye All opposed thank you I just wanted clarity manager I know sometimes I just wanna make sure I was clear thank you. Okay this representative Richardson you have this House Bill. Thirteen twenty nine. Department chair on Scott Richardson district thirteen representative state representative so I'm presenting thirteen twenty nine correct. House bill thirteen twenty nine actually came to me from. Well from my son as much as anything I have a twelve year old boy who is considering what he's going to do with this future and in that process he is signed. Decided he wants to be a doctor which is a noble profession a noble effort and a lot of hard work ahead of him so as he was going through the process of setting up his sophomore to season his freshman to senior year at high school he was asked to select classes a lot of those classes into B. C. T. E. classes or career and technical education classes in our school district there and that he built children have the opportunity to speak I take a city courses that are actually offered out of the northwest Arkansas community college and receive a nursing degree by the time they graduate high school which could really and provide him with a jump start on his career in the direction that he wants to go out unfortunately in reviewing that I noticed a number of interesting realities that he's going to have to deal with for instance even though he's taking more advanced classes like anatomy physiology things that nature is also having to take basic health he's also having to take all three other core requirements associated with his sciences along with a number of other courses that tax that are mostly duplications this the creates a bit of a challenge for him to be able to get as much instruction learning that he needs to complete it also during that time I was speaking with Roger school district and they offered us an opportunity to go over and and sure there a career and technical education environment when I went over enter that environment I was very impressed with some of the things that they have a hi everything from auto mechanic diesel mechanic all the way through to sports medicine nursing technical fields lots of different things and one of their biggest complaints came back and reiterated the exact challenges that that we have so we created a bill working with Roger school district to address that very challenge so. Essentially what this bill does is it provides for an opt out opportunity to substitute career and technical classes that meet or exceed the the curriculum requirements that are currently in our core curriculum so if you take an advanced science class in your career and technical and it meets the career rushing that curriculum requirements for the science in the court you can substitute that class over to continue your. To continue your education this is a a a a nice substitution that one the one the challenges we have a number of kids that are failing to complete the career and technical education courses because of all the core requirements that we have and so they're not actually able to finish then they have to they graduate high school and they have to go on to a secondary education when they could be entering directly into the workforce and and for for filling the career of their choice so with that I'll be happy to answer any questions and. yeah. Other questions from the committee. So I personally just love this and and actually that falls right in line with some of the things that senator Sanders I mean governor Sanders has put in in in that learns bill because it does provide that opportunity for us to look at those courses so I'd like the bill. Thank you. If they have similar questions. I have a second. As a motion to pass centre Dotson second by Senator Davis. Any questions any discussion on the motion. All they were. All those. Thank you pastor bill thank you very much madam chair and committee. Okay let's see see and let's see representative back is not here. Are you doing now okay. That's house bill thirteen forty seven. Senator Dotson is going to do that. Identify yourself you'll be recognized madam chair state senator jim Dotson district thirty four. Police Lewis the assistant director for the Arkansas division of fire and thank you. Thank you madam chair members the committee I. I'm actually going to turn it over and let her explain more the details bill that kind of it in the top over overview this is basically to create a financial appeals process for scholarships so I'll let her going to any detail or and answer any questions the committee might have like you said this is just a mechanism for us to create an appeal for students who have lost their scholarship and there it's very similar to how institutions do this on campuses and we are asking for a way to to include that and in our procedures. So tell me how what we're covering the. The appeal for what. For all the scholarships that are in under our purview at the Division of higher education. In the end what if the if they failed classes they get is under review no ma'am that the intent is for students who may have failed to just jump through this that hits that are required like an application or failure to put a hold on if they were hospitalized and and it gives them an opportunity to say you know I I missed this one step cannot be reinstated for my scholarship. Currently we don't have an appeals process for that they missed something they're just out so this would create that process for them do I have some questions from the committee. Is there anybody here speak for against the bill. What is the will of the committee I make a motion to pass. Senator Dotson do pass. Senate Chesterfield second. All in favor. All opposed thank you very much. Okay let's see Representative shepherd is there somebody here to run his bill. Okay thank you very much. His house bill thirteen eighty three. Thank you madam chair this is a Masto Senate district. I think this will be the simplest will here this morning at the table currently in my district in Eldorado there is a college call south Arkansas community college and I want to change their name to south all all college they'll need to change their about also had made the changes with the US secretary of state on the funding so just to change the name from south Arkansas community college to South Arkansas that is requested of us into a house bill thirteen eighty three. Any questions Senator Dotson. Thank you senator stone yes just a quick question I don't know if changing the name is this open them up. being not. I mean is there something difference between community college in a regular college that that allows them for additional grant funding or some other type of things that a community college wouldn't qualify for a change in their name if you would allow I have doctor Bentley Wallace president of the college you're with me today if you would come forward maybe you can better answer that question thank you thank you. There. Good morning madam chair and committee my name is Bentley Wallace on the president of south Arkansas community college this is a shift that we're saying among other colleges in the region and state our role in scope is not going to change we're still going to be a comprehensive two year college focused on workforce development we're we're fighting for fewer and fewer students in our region and we know that when students and their parents and grandparents look at colleges when they consider whether going to send their kids sometimes that community college designation can be a deterrent and we know that those two year colleges are the best places we can send our kids to get them ready for college transfer or transfer or ready for the workforce and so this is about our recognition of of who we are we're not changing who we are we're not changing what we do we're simply changing our name to so it would not allow you to become a four year institution something else it would not and we don't intend to that thank you. Any other questions Senator Chesterfield. I. I have any other questions from the committee anybody speak for against it in the audience okay okay so we have motion. Second by Senator Dotson all in favor. All opposed thank you pastor bill thank you madam chair all right. So next we have Senator Solomon. S. the one twenty five. You take out the. Hi. The reason the. So Senator Solomon if you would identify yourself you'll be recognized. Thank your question what. It's temperamental. HM yes senator Dan Sullivan district twenty I appreciate the committee hearing this bill we've already pretty much heard it once I'm not going to repeat much but after I put the bill down our visited several of our campuses talked to a number of our students I want to you have a you see a Bowen School of Law Dr number of other students at Arkansas state. And also asked the Attorney General to review the bill. We had a comment when I was visiting the colleges made by one of the professors that this bill would prevent her from grading down on inappropriate grammar the part where it talks about the university may not a mandate language she made a point there and if the U. of a one of the administrators made the point that this bill prevented professors from grading students down and the Attorney General weighed in on that and said the hypothetical that was raised by the colleges if a student uses the term y'all in an essay can the doctor points or grade down that was the example from the professor at one university. The Attorney General's office response was no that would be an absurd conclusion for the text of the bill and not at all applicables from the plain language of the bill the plain text of the bill reads as follows in the courts and the tax there I then the attorney general's opinion with what they call the brass tacks our office is a review of this bill did not raise any red flags we have no issues with this bill and there are no constitutional infirmities. You have on your and your hand outs there. You're part of the concerned and genuine concern is disruptions being made and I think I made the case several years ago we had free speech outside and then again inside that free speech doesn't end when you into the enter the university go through the doors and go inside it doesn't end and all we're asking the universities to do is to develop a policy I have the policy from UCLA. Four doors it's about three pages long. A simple that you kinda outlines what their policy is so it's not over burdensome to create a policy. When you read the. The Pages from the University of Arkansas you may have seen this occur. In the paper where the student inside an art student. C. Fite file marked copy. My copy has a picture on of yours does but it says the event Thursday billed as an opportunity for the University of Arkansas to bring their questions to the chancellor by the way I want to commend the chancellor there he did a great job in handling this very difficult situation happen pretty quickly and he just did a great job and I appreciate you can read that in the article here. But essentially if you read through that there were some provocative pictures posted in a certain place on campus that is students walk by there they saw those pictures because the the pictures were in the art department behind glass doors and some students were offended and some not and the chance for that are again a really good job of mitigating that working through it but if you look down at at the end of that the statements there. At the very end it talks about campus leaders this is a quote from one of the students campus leaders need to get on the same page regarding how decisions are executed that was a comment made by the student there needs to be a conversation on how we will manage moving forward because we can have an understanding moving forward we can avoid this Robinson said that's the chancellor the best way to address the problem if the cop have a conversation I would add to that the best way to address the problem is to have a policy that there's no conversation without a policy and that's all we're asking for is that the universities have a policy that addresses what free speech looks like if you read through that you'll see what actions chancellor Robinson took and doing this and again I highly commend his efforts to bring the campus together. If you will see the hand out about the university of Houston. The other. EgyptAir the FDA mandated that they be called by their pronouns that's addressed directly in this bill and they lost that case in the pronouns didn't have to be accepted so folks these issues are coming up on our campuses all the time and all we're asking is that they have a policy to address those as simple as a two or three page policy. Again I'm not going to go over the bill unless somebody has questions but again the Attorney General has looked at it doesn't have any questions about it thanks as constitutional and we need to protect free speech indoors and outdoors and with that madam chair I'll take any questions. Senator Hammer. Thank you ma'am chair I'm just curious do you have anybody signed up to speak for against this. A child like to hear from somebody with higher it just a just collect your from somebody higher it could be one of the condo I've we have somebody here from university and from a issue okay let's of rust. Thank you. It. I did see a really nice. If you identify yourself and push your buttons A. L.. It's a temperamental things at the bottom is at the bottom. I'm committee chairman members of the committee my name is Melissa rust with university of Arkansas system there are other individuals here who may wish to testify as well we do not sign up because it was our understanding the bill was not going to be presented today but so if if the committee does want to hear from others there are certainly others who will will be I think available and ready to testify I'm. When I think Senator I'm Sullivan for the opportunity to visit with him about this bill as well as other city is currently sponsoring is we understood the bill is going to run next week I have not had an opportunity to share all of the comments then I had to pull together relative to this bill but I will share with you at least some of of what I have done thus far In reading this bill what it what because very clear at the very beginning of this bill is that higher education institutions are subject to a of free expression standard that under this bill that will be different than any other official or employee of state government cities counties six cetera and any other aspect of the executive branch legislative branch a judicial branch anyone that higher education would be subject to a different standard and it's unclear to me why that is the case but I think it's important for the committee to understand that there would be a standard that would be very different from higher education than any anybody else in state government in talking with I'm Senator I'm Sullivan he had previously testified any also indicated to me last week that the bill only clarifies protections under the first amendment you may remember that when the bill was presented previously in this committee and that it did the bill didn't go beyond the first amendment and and I just have to tell you that I respectfully have to disagree with Senator Solomons a comments the very language of the bill indicates that it goes beyond the first amendment and even though there have been some amendments that have been made to this particular bill you can look for instance on Page one line thirty six where the bill states that the first amendment is the floor of free speech and that this bill guarantees right to be on the first amendment which is the very thing that we have we have race we have said you know the first amendment is the gold standard and what is the rationale for needing to have a bill that would actually print to provide protection for employees and students are beyond that particular standard you can see that on page two lines three and four Page two line seven you'll see where the Bill references the first amendment but it also referred. This is and other free speech rights but it doesn't identify what that means if you look on page two lines twenty two and twenty three the bill provides for free speech protections but it also includes protections under this subchapter and other state and federal statutes none of those state or federal statutes or referenced in this particular piece of legislation so it's unclear what that means but what is clear is that it those are protections in excess of the first amendment if you you can also look on page three lines ten and eleven and page five lines thirty and thirty one for similar language. And while Senator Solomon has indicated that the bill seeks only to clarify the first amendment not to get rid of it as he testified last week I agree with him there I'm no state statute obviously could get rid of an amendment you know to the US constitution but if there's any clarification that's needed with respect to the first amendment I would submit to you that state law is is not the way to accomplish that goal the second point I'd like to make is there a lot of unintended consequences I think in this piece of legislation there are a lot of undefined terms if you go back and you look at the forum act from two thousand nineteen there are ten terms that are defined in the form act in this bill there is one term that is defined and that's fighting words their own there are no definitions for a number of terms and I just give you a few examples The Bill indicates that an individual would be able to express their first amendment rights in indoor areas that are generally accessible that's on page two lines thirty five and thirty six in page four line thirty three it indicates that expression can be controversial and collegial disagreeable or deeply offensive unwelcome none of those words have any definitions and and as you can imagine if you're on a college campus in your president or chancellor OR your an administrator of of some type I'm trying to make a decision without knowing exactly what this terminology means or how you would interpret that or if you made a decision whether you would be then subject to litigation or some kind of lawsuit is troubling I'm there's language about I'm leading nonviolent and not so Norris I had to look up to Norris I never heard the word I had Latin in high school so I at least had something to do with Sam the only thing that I knew that's on page three lines two and three there's no definition there there's no definition for you know the fullest degree of intellectual and academic freedom and free expression and I don't want to I don't want to overdo the point but I just want you to I want you to understand that when you have a bill that is is vague is this bill is in in my judgment then that means that that's really difficult for presidents chancellors and administrators to know how to actually carry it out and do so within the requirements of the law and not necessarily subject their institution to litigation I'm I will tell you that another point that I want to bring up in and that is the format will before let me back up I'm. The format basically said you know you can't have any free speech zones right and that's clearly what you know the U. S. Supreme Court has said as well I believe this bill effectively creates indoor free speech sounds that's that's inconsistent with federal law it's inconsistent with the law that you passed in two thousand nineteen for the forum Act and so I think that's very troubling that you know we would basically have our our our our policies and all that are consistent with federal law and Arkansas law in there looking to expand the indoor spaces and and essentially create free speech zones there the the last thing I would say is Senator Solomon commented to me last Friday when we spoke in a very nice conversation we spoke about this bill and so and and another one and he shared with me some of the comments that he was hearing when he was on a few of the campuses from students and and I thought about that over the weekend quite extensively because I thought you know is there is there something you know that I that I'm not thinking about you know in all but in going back and reviewing this legislation I don't think there's anything about this legislation that fixes a problem if in fact it exist and I don't know that it does you with respect to students perhaps feeling that they you know not do not have the full benefit of being able to express you know their free speech rights and so You know we can't support the bill I think that's clear from from my comments but I did want to leave share with you what I told Senator Solomon Solomon that I would do which is to go back and carefully review this bill and identifying the concerns from my perspective and the pages and line numbers of those concerns and while I did not sure all of them with you I think you have been pretty general sense of of of the concerns that that I noted upon review of the bill and I'd be happy to answer any questions and there are others who who who may want to speak as well. Senator Hammer thank you I'm looking on page four. Winds ten. Through twelve. We need to look that up Senator Hammer I don't have that front of me but let me pull it up over talking. Thanks away there okay. Okay yes Sir I'm just I'm just wondering that seems to me like a safety clause written within the bill that still gives the institution some latitude. To have some control to address some of the fears that you've expressed a state supported institution of higher ed Education may impose reasonable restrictions regarding time place manner of carrying out expressive activities so I'm just one with that clause in there a. What could you do the University and I'm not implying you would undershoot in terminology okay to choke down anybody from being able to exercise what this bill would allow if passed inside the facilities. And then number two how would you I would just not alleviate some of your fears given the fact that you would have. Some ability to institute policies that would. Achieve that sure it's a good question excuse me the bill does indicate if the bill does provide reasonable time place and manner restrictions that's correct I think you have to look at the bill in its totality and when you look at the bill in its totality the reasonable time place and manner restrictions I'm not certain or that helpful frankly I think Senator Davis asked the question a week or so ago in committee about you know one disruption maybe a description that concerns that would be a concern for let's say a student or faculty member classroom whereas another destruction might not be concerning and I think you know in the bill it references fleeting you know disruptions are fleeting in nature I'm that might be disruptive for a particular classroom it might not be for another in trying as an administrator to make those kind of determinations I think it's relatively difficult I will say also that in talking with our law enforcement folks on the various campuses what they have indicated to us is that even if you had an event for instance let's say a protest for instance indoors and It is really difficult to limit the number of people for instance that would might want to participate in an event of that nature in an indoor setting obviously as opposed to being able to do that outdoors you know without any particular let ation or the time and while all the time place and manner is is helpful I don't think in the context of the entirety of the bill when you really look at how broad and expansive the bill is that that necessarily resolves Concerns in terms of free expression at the various various indoor areas of of one campus building or another. Our thank you the manager. Any questions from the committee. Thank you very much for your thank you nation. Is there anybody else in the audience would like to speak for or against the bill Certainly. Good morning my name is Bentley Wallace on the president's south Arkansas community college and south ark we support free speech and and want to find ways that our students can express themselves in and out of the classroom my concern about the bill really is about disruption to training as I mentioned before the previous bill were workforce institution that's our focus we partnerships with many employers to set our advisory committees and help guide our curriculum and what happens in the classroom in our training labs for example in our advanced manufacturing training center will time clock our high school and college students when they come to class they punch the time clock when I go on break they punch the time clock may leave for the day they punch the time clock there's an expectation of their employer partners the training will be expeditious there's an expectation that our students will be able to get the training in the amount of time that they need so that they can go on to work in the industry in our region my concern about disruption is that if it's unfettered if it's not controllable if it's in a manner that disrupts that training we won't be able to meet the demands of our employer partners in our region and that that's our reason for being and so I hope that we can find a path with legislation like this in a way that that prevents unnecessary disruption but at the same time maintains the integrity of free speech for students while they're on our campuses thank you to the committee you have questions from the committee. Yeah okay thank you very much. Yes senator Chesterfield of a issue with excuse me Mr Gillam is coming. No Code glad. Did identify yourself. That thing is temperamental. Sorry Jeremy Gillam on the drug at university of central Arkansas and I've committee I apologize I'm well echo what mistrusted I've been sitting here today Senator Solomon indicated to me that the bill would run next week so our folks are not here today. But they did share a few concerns we were gathering up some information is requested. And that so they were sent some of that to me earlier I just had been able to get it over to Senator Solomon yet but a lot of our concerns we had another repeat and waste your time but a lot of them were along the lines of what mistrust has already said the couple of things that I would bring to the committee so that you would have this information but I was with Senator Solomon when he was on our campus for his listening tour of the three campuses that he went to and our student government association and truth rather than leadership groups that were there and I was able to listen to the dialogue that they had with Senator Solomon and one of the things that students were very clear on. Was that they did not want the disruptions that they felt lacking this was something to Senator Davis said that brought up earlier that they felt like the amount of money they're investing in being able to go to school there. was significant and they did not want to have disruptions and I also felt like that things were going pretty good at least on our campus the yes case we're going to have students that have a disagreement with their professor on different things but you take a scalpel to those kind of situations you know take sledgehammer and so that was very clear from the dialogue with the students was that they felt like that this probably did not this wasn't going to solve a problem that they had it would probably end up creating more problems trying to solve this. Are there abuses that occurred in other states and things like that yes I mean obviously there's there's things you can read on the internet that show that but we're not having a prolific problem here in Arkansas and from our campus standpoint the concerned we're looking at this languages the vagueness and the way that it's set up it seems like it's almost laying a trap here because it does create the time make place in manner Senator Solomon mention this. Repeatedly both on our campus and when he presented the bill in committee that that was something that he was making sure that was in there so that we would have that ability but he also shared with me last week I'm from the Senate chambers that he realized that yes probably what this will do is create new safe speeds zones free speech sounds excuse me and within lead to lawsuits and so it and then you're gonna have multiple judges weighing in on things that the vagueness the lack of specificity in these areas are what concern our folks and how this would be implemented because we might say say yes students center is a place that they could gather and do things but another building where there's instruction taking place that couldn't and if the student is encouraged at that point by industrious a member of the legal community to file suit then now you're going to go through this process point of reference here is the fact that I mean the time place and manner existed before the form act and and there was still a lawsuit brought so just because you're giving the universe's time place and manner is not suddenly assault them and and solve all the problems that would occur from a functional standpoint that's really where you see As concerns that is on the functional side of this implementing it and and it just seems like that the the real beneficiary of this bill the way it's written right now it's probably going to be lawyers as opposed to students so campuses I appreciate that and again I try not to be redundant but our folks weren't we didn't know the bill is going to run so they have a motion from the Committee. Thank you very much. So we've heard from the audience. What is the will of the committee thank you it's close to the grant you folks I can't begin to have talk about all the complex it just. First of all for the the bill is been on the agenda for quite awhile and you know it's legislators it's hard to get for committee I've been out here three or four times trying to help other people run their bills and you know and the lobbyist and I'll call on that the lobbyist from higher ed have been a expressed intent on killing this bill they have when we did this several years ago that was the intent to be NIT picky at some of the things so I take exception to the point that their taking a few of my words to make to make their point when I just strongly disagree. and I don't know that the intent of the bill just come up with a policy. And Mr Gillam who just spoke. There's their policy. On outdoors and it talks about they define outdoors they define expressive activity. Taking the bill in totality and disruptions it clearly give time place and manner in the Attorney General for the state of Arkansas. The first Baker spoke about their concerns about the constitutionality concerned about this concerned about that the Attorney General the state of Arkansas said there are no constitutional issues so all that talk about going beyond free speech and going beyond the first amendment the Attorney General said there's no constitutional issues with that so I I take exception that whole part. As far as disruptions again the the gentleman from South Arkansas. tech. Thank you have control over that as a matter of fact in the letter from the chancellor in the article the chancellor there he's talking specifically about we need a policy that's what he's saying even if you read the entire tire article he cordoned off where the where the I think there were new pictures to cordon that off and put signs up that said be aware if you enter this area you may be exposed to a material that is offensive to you. Why can't you put those kind of things and policy it seems very simple to may and one one argues that it is It is not in their best interest to have a policy because you want to avoid lawsuits. It doesn't compute with me it seems like if you want to avoid a lawsuit you have a policy. When students were walking by the offensive material why my exposed to that if you don't want that to happen have a policy and again I highly commend the chancellor for his actions and if you see what they did this is this is going to happen around the state I tell you the comments that I heard from students. At three different universities. One student said she disagreed with her professor and she was told multiple times that she clearly disagrees with a professor and. She did not receive discussion points because she disagreed with him and when you talk to students I'm sure there are a little more open to talk to me then they are the lobbyist from higher it but when they when students talk to me confidentially they clearly indicate they can be punished by not receiving points or other ways to expressing their point of view one student said the met at and several were still sitting there one of this students at the last lesson here to keep your mouth shut. That's what several students complaint talked about that. Ulam I get kind of passion about this and I'm going to draw to a close but their insistence that this is a violation of free speech is patently false their insistence that they do not have the power to hold down disruptions if they want just like the chancellor did here and put up a sign that said you may experience material that made make that upset you the same is true of a hallway when classes are going on they can say quiet hallway there's nothing illegal about that that's the time place and manner. I couldn't begin to tell you how impressed I was with our students I talked to some really sharp young people and I'm I guess what. Mr Gillam talked about what he heard what I heard were two different things I heard students are for free speech that they are I believe that they are can be hindered by their our replications far far. With professors and folks are close with this when I asked the universities yeah I traveled around the place the talk the students and I said what are you doing proactively to do this have you talked to the students and the answer was chi well that the professors have evaluations as well are you pro actively working with your staff to make sure students are treated equitably and respectful of their free speech rights and are you out in front of that well again I keep warning to you of a the perfect the chancellor there is he's going to have discussions with students to find out what's going on and be protected but there's free free speech that's all I ask of you today is to vote for the campuses to have a policy addressing free speech inside. Thank you very much with that I'm close to. Senator Brian did you have a question. But I did I don't know if I miss my opportunity to ask questions close. I was I was hoping you do is go into a more facts scenario. Of of how instructors or facilitators administrators of our college campuses deal with. groups coming in the campus whether it's a pro far right group or far left group. coming in the classrooms as students you know be. To form groups outside of classroom hours and come in the classrooms how do they currently do with it recess how could they do with the workers whatever university is different just like the U. of a they have that art area but its glass so their ability to time place and manner is going to be different from what other universities would be and I think that's your speak exactly to the point the universities need to have the freedom to do that just as you look at university of central Arkansas as you see age they define the the campus community they define what those areas are outside they can clearly define him inside but if a if the idea that the legislation is too broad is true because every university is different and they need to develop a policy again like the chancellor said he wants to meet with students and decide what works best it's a collaborative effort. Is that address you pointed out. Kind of touches on this horse back scenario is there like a specific examples of this being issues okay here that is not what you talk to students and and some gave examples but if if the students came in and started disagreeing verbally with the professor in the pressure limit speech obviously they have a faster still has the right to which the student of the classroom for disruptive behavior or the or with this that will. Excellent point I thank thee that universities need to have that discussion with their professors and I think there's that's why this allows for the universities to have a policy I thank you for us to be more constrictive is doesn't allow them the freedom they need to do that again I'm use just one example but if you look at the university of Houston saying you have to wear name tags to identify your pronoun there are multiple examples of if you do a quick search on your phone you can say that students are being chastised our our points removed because they are pro life because they are of a certain ethnicity because they are you have strong opinions on marriage that the professors may or may not agree with that they're being penalized for that now how does the university stop that they need to have that conversation just as the chancellor is saying here we need to have the conversation to develop that policy. I don't think our yeah I don't think we as a legislature need to delve down that deeply and tell them what their policy is. Senator Dotson. Thank you madam chair Senator Solomon I was involved but eventually was Senator Ballinger when he wrote the form act a few years ago and I know we we had a number of meetings with all the stakeholders involved including higher ed going through the language. Striking some adding others tweaking stuff And this. I'm still for. Free speech for the concept of what you're trying to do it's the details that are are challenging with anything and so I guess. When you ran this last time I had several issues with that I don't have those notes with me anymore and I I I thought you said you weren't going to bring it back right then but I said I'd I'd work with you on it I guess you've made several changes since then I guess question is have you set down gone through the language with Hi read with with all the very stakeholders in detail Since then because I I don't have been part of any of those conversations and and I'm just curious that talk with Senator Ballinger several times on the bill I went to the universities. What they're on their campus I had. I'm talking about specific language in the bill Wellman from there on the campus we're talking about the specific language we we read through the bill one of the assignments was before you came to the to the meeting with you see a that came a class assignment they had to read the bill and so when they came in they would have questions on there certainly constituents. With the most important constituent out there they came and they asked they went through the bill line by line with me when I went to you of a most all the students that were there. For by far the majority had gone through the language I want to Bowen School of Law and the students in the law school. I went through it line by line matter fact it was students in the law school who indicated that their message they got when they attended UA was to shut up keep your mouth shut if you disagree with the professor that was their take away so you know I guess have I sat down with the administration yes we've had multiple opportunities they asked if I was willing to make more changes to it and at some point you realize at the previous bill you just can't make all those changes and as you heard testimony now they believe the bill is unconstitutional and violates the free speech bill of rights. And the Attorney General disagrees with them I think when you meet with their representatives when you meet with the Attorney General when you meet with previous People who previously worked on this I talked to the young lady who file the the bill the lawsuit against university four Arkansas state she was a part of that discussion again I don't know who else I can meet with because that one could always raise that objection that I haven't met with enough constituents and I believe I've heard have not heard anything significant that disagrees with the. What the bill does. Thank you. Senator Leding. Thank you madam chair of I do applaud you for going to some of the campuses I know you you worth you they they're in favor and sitting that was some of the students can you tell us about how many students participated in the event of if you were invited to invite thank you you have able to attend so you are constituent as representative or senator Dotson is talking about a constituent who had an opportunity to engage in that but chose not to I think the first Senate education hearing on this I did plenty of engaging but there are yeah there were I think probably twenty to thirty students there okay I think at this meeting right here that the chancellor is having I have the picture you don't I'm gonna guess there's. Forty and the state forty students that interrupted were from the art department you were saying the chancellor. they were offended by the actions the chancellor to and they interrupted another meeting so I don't know how many people were there and Bowen School law there are probably twenty or so fifteen or twenty I've talked to probably eight or ten to twelve students and a issue the message is always the same but with specifically with the campus I represent it I've heard that all the students who were there that the twenty or so we're from the college Republicans organization and nothing against college Republicans their students to we all have an opinion on this but that is pretty self select group and is that is that with their students from outside the organization president with they were your campus however students from Democrats I assume they're Democrats because they were very concerned about the Actualizada campus and you see a that pertain up specifically you know what if I decide to dress this way or that way in this specifically came up we had a good dialogue they may have been Republicans to I don't know but I didn't ask for your nobody had were name tag that said what you were what you pronoun was so I don't know but they came and asked if they could have what about of people dressed up in drag and walk through campus I said this bill protects that and they were the young lady who spoke to me had a mask on I don't know if that applies to party affiliation or not but she was very concerned about rights and people's rights and free speech rights and she agreed with me on the bill essentially that this bill helped both Democrats and Republicans and I did consult with a professor at a liberal professor at he admits it I'm not yet the division are you over there how you want to say that but it defies without liberal or progressive view and helped write the bill this bill of the the twenty or so students out of the student body of thirty thousand there to pay a bill with support for this unanimous or where the. Thank you thank you misconstruing I think when this is additional and the students that were there and again it depends on how one assumes there agree and if the students felt as aggrieved as they did they were very vocal and I I don't pretend that this representatives of fair representation all the students but students who felt like their rights were offended you took one student at a issue who said I'm not gonna stand in square and a lawsuit came about by that because of the wrong policy. At this university a bunch of students showed up and they say we're we thank you are not you're violating our rights by doing that and the chancellor took appropriate action so to say that this representative a number of students I don't think is representative of what the issue is. Thank you senator thank you madam chair. Senator Hammer. Thank you have here and and hit on something you just said so if the chancellor took appropriate action. And was able to address the issue and I assume that both parties both those that were against him because of the decision made but also. What I understand is the group that was there if appropriate action was taken how did that not already addressed the issue you're trying to address on this bill or how did that Limit. The free speech and this bill would have addressed the made the situation different sure if you look at the. At the end of the article of university I think it's just very representative of what goes on the student says we need to meet and we need to figure out how we're going to move forward. One can't move forward by addressing every instance individually one can only move forward by having a sound policy develop in a collaborative way so that everybody knows the parameters and I think that's how the. The article ins. With the campus leaders need to get that this the scope of the student the campus leaders need to get on the same page. How do you get on the same page without policy as a policy does there need to be a conversation on how we will manage moving forward. If we can have an understanding moving forward we can avoid this the best way to address the problem is to have a conversation about this that's true in the conversation needs to and then policy. Is it your position that the universities. Across the state do not have policies how to addresses and is this legislation forcing them to develop policies where they're not policies that. Don't exist. Currently the people just spoke have no policy or think they can't do that when the the representatives are just vote for their university would indicate they don't need a policy and just let them handle everything just like they did that I think that's an effective and efficient use of quote that article from that you just read chancellor Robinson from you have a thank you and Mr. That's okay. Thank you manager. Thank you any other questions from the committee. Are you closing your bill thank you I. So. What is the will of the committee. The main motion. This. Senator stone moved to pass. I have a second. Second by Senator Bryant. All in favor. All opposed. Well call thank you call. Senator Davis. No Senator Leding no Senator Hammer. Yes senator yes Senator Breanne. Yes Senator stone. Yes center Dotson. Senate action. Chesterfield. Don't have already I'm sorry did not pass your bill thank you thank you Committee. Okay moving right along here let's see and we will finish of five and seven well. The representative I mean senator Murdock you have to Senate bill one ninety. You identify yourself to be recognized thank you madam chairman senator Reginald Murdock district nine. I had thank you this is Senate bill one ninety bring a bill to you that you will hear and remember ACT twelve forty that of two thousand fifteen that we pass you have the passes this call the waiver bill this bill just enhances flexibility and accountability for that same activity it's a pretty simple bill it helps everyone the Bill us since its inception in two thousand fifteen has been the most utilize bill in educational circles so much that the state board is made at twelve forty a part of their monthly agenda because so many schools have been able to utilize this to make educational delivery better it not only help the smaller schools help the larger schools and help those that are he's a proficient and efficient it even helps those that have been struggling and trying to find a better ways this bill does is done so much good for so many it has been I mean is it from the delta to central Arkansas to northwest Arkansas I've heard from superintendent school board members teachers everyone that have just been happy with the flexibility in the account this allows for in and of bringing education so I just take any questions if I have any questions or concerns and questions from the committee. Senator Dotson. Thank you madam chair and this this question I'm not sure if this will be percenter Murdock or maybe for the department but so that at as you know I was very supportive of at twelve forty and Look at running a similar piece of legislation what you're doing follows a few years ago and got feedback from the Department that automatic waivers and that's what I read this. That be granted automatic waivers if I miss and some please note that changes the word was there before we amended it so I met with a department and we did an amendment that put that use the same criteria as open enrollment charters use so the word what I met was there you that's what you seen and one of the co sponsors of rich rich and into regional language so that we fix that I've met with from the governor's office all the way through every organization has anything to do with Arkansas education everybody's okay with that and realize Amendment since I read it last time yes so so so basically I guess I'll finish my question though If it if it did have automatic. Or or they they did approve the waiver process it still requires an approval by the state board before they they get the waiver well what what what it provides is an opportunity for school district utilize the waivers the school the state board can only act there they have a calls to disapprove okay so that's the difference and that's the reason why we brought this legislation so that the red tape and schools will have to come back and renew re apply just interrupting. Them for no reason but the state board do still have. A chance to intercede if necessary so would one of those causes be because this is the thing which came up when I when I was trying to get this done because I was going for automatic before and it it's my understanding that some. Charter schools don't have a school board they they have a waiver for that and so if there was an automatic waiver or if a the state board had to grant a waiver similar to the open enrollment charter school that that that charter school didn't have a school board could the school district dismissed the school board no this is not give them ability to dismiss and this still gives the state board result say let's just say a case like you mention and out in the district wanted to do what you just said that's when the state board would have to see that would be cause for not carving their thank you. Chesterfield. Thank you madam chair let me say at the outset I've never been a big fan of waivers that may be the only one on this committee was not. But I visited with visited Helena West Helena. And I saw the only wish. Measures that were taken that made it so difficult for them to retain staff. And that is what I'm going to support this bill a I believe that the more we waive the less quality we have and maybe I'm wrong in that but I don't believe that it ought to be so onerous that it precludes those schools that still need these waivers from being able to do what they need to do. I want to say at the outset like you know I'm back rentals I feel about it is that I also believe in fairness. And the way it's set up now it is being particularly unfair to those school districts that a poor. That are not able to attract as many folks and when they get somebody by the time during your two three they got a bill to the whole process again and these people then may or may not I mean it's just a big mess and if you we were there for the visit and so for that reason I will support the bill. Not that not that that. I still have yet to exceed two thousand fifteen that way. What we. Are there any more questions from the committee. There anybody in the audience speak for against the bill. What is the the will of the committee. Senator Dotson do pass and that senator Chesterfield seconds all in favor. All opposed. Thank you to pass the bill thank you Linda. You might have a bill. Yeah thank you. I'm sure you're recognized thank you very much Senator Jane English district thirteen and I have a very simple bill we have a the National Guard has a tuition assistance program and it typically runs of four years a hundred twenty hours and in the. Event which is rare event that a program would require additional hours another five or ten hours this would allow the State action general and the Department of higher education to agree to allow those extra hours you for an explanation bill other questions Senator English. Is anyone in the audience who wishes to speak for against the bill. Senate. Thank you. Is there if we need to okay is there we needed okay we'll need is good to see the former representative Have you because we bill that the bill what is the pleasure of the Committee. Is there a second motion by Senator that's a second by Senator Leding discussion on the motion saying number place the question all those in favor please say aye opposed no. Congratulations Senator you imagine. Thank you okay let's see we've got. I know that we got a couple more here so centre Payton. Thank you madam chair thank you Committee on I'll try to be brief there is an amendment it doesn't say the substantially changed what the bill does in my opinion the amendment just makes it a lot clearer in code but the amendments very lengthy so if I could have a little light to to speak about the bill on the amendment together because I it's fine with me with the I want to do with the bill or with the amendment. Basically I think it's time that we eliminate the three hundred and fifty threat of consolidation for rule schools in visiting with my rules schools they've always had concerns when we talk about school choice and home schooling about their enrollment dropping below the three fifty number we've consolidated enough schools my my alma mater was consolidated and probably two thirds of the schools that we play basketball against working consolidated The communities where the schools were consolidated we're we're very supportive of the school very involved my school was the only school in Cleburne County operating in the black when they shut it down because it didn't have three hundred and fifty students I know we did some legislation a couple years ago that the help this area but the difference in the amendment and the bill is the bill just stops the consolidation the amendment goes a little bit further and elements the list it is created every year but both the bill and the amendment preserve the right for school district under three fifty to voluntarily consolidate so that's what the language is a little complicated is wanted to preserve the right to voluntarily consolidate if they were under three hundred and fifty so the. The bill without the amendment. Removes the threat of consolidation preserves the list and the voluntary consolidation. The bill with the amendment removes all the language about the three fifty and puts a sentence and that's saying a school under three fifty involuntarily consolidate. So if you'd like to adopt the amendment I think it in my opinion it makes the code. Easier to interpret and read in the future and. Less cumbersome Senator Hammer. I have a second. Motion by Senator Hammer and second by Senator stone the discussion on the motion. All in favor. All opposed thank you okay Amendment thank you and and I presented the bill basically in the same presentation so I'm closed okay a good. Senator Chesterfield thank you madam chair. I understand what you're doing and this is probably going to pass. And I probably would support will support it however I do think it's patently unfair to bring forth that page amendments to the committee and we only have a couple of minutes to look at. And you know I'm not going to ask you because you probably have already worked the committee but I would just ask that we not do that to each other going full and my apologies when I sat down and read the bill for the third or fourth time this morning I look at this section a code and I realized that. It would leave a lot of room for for why are we doing the list why are we maintain a list if we're not going use it for the consolidation so I called the bill director asked can we clean this up by eliminating the list. And and that's what I'm sorry I'm I'm I agree with you totally I read the bills to I'm glad to know you do. At an enemy to say that's one of the reasons I'm in agreement although it does not get as to the physician's. We have one set of rules the public schools we have another set of rules open enrollment charters. And I am just about fairness in this issue. And that's what I'm going to support your bill because I'm tired of seeing other schools and maybe have a hundred keys and their whole school district into themselves get a public schools that may be operating with killing communities. I don't know however how you work this so that. When you start talking about adequacy I don't know what the hell that means anymore excuse my language if we're going to still have the same adequacy report I'll be going to use the metric of five hundred to fund it I don't know where we are right now with any of that with the changes that we made to education as we know it. So my concern is will they be able to sustain themselves and if they don't and if they go into fiscal distress then we feel lost a school district those are my concerns and I think we need to look at those very carefully which is why we put in a make up or change the matrix you get the same matrix is two thousand three which is funding education on a matrix of based on five hundred eighty eight. Five hundred kids you know are you aware of a what I'm talking about so my concern is if we go this way are we going to still be able to fund education. So that those school districts that have been low five hundred will be able to sustain themselves and move forward those are my concerns what are your comments Arsene repeatedly the community step up to make sure those schools are found. Leding. Thank you madam chair I also have some concerns but I plan to support the bill but just a quick question this is something I should probably know is a member of this committee I'm not familiar with how often these days schools are forced to consolidate the Senate the top of your statement that you think it's time to go ahead and do it this caps that mean that we anticipate the pace of consolidation potentially increasing in coming years so the last one I know of was the winner school district I think that was four five years ago for those of us that were here probably remember that and now we closed a very good school that was operating this fiscally responsible a. I don't know that there are any schools on the list the other subject to consolidation at the moment but I do know that several administrators in the rule school district that I represent are concerned that if they lose thirty or forty students to home schooling or private school thank you and up on the list of having less than three fifty in real. Thank you thank you madam chair thank you. Are there any more questions Senator Dotson. A senator Payton thank you madam chair centre Payton you you had I think I heard you say this and. Just been trying to read through it real quick but That this still allows if if a student gets down there for voluntary. They can voluntarily consolidate is that that's correct so If they have to be below three fifty before they can voluntarily consolidate. The only section a code that I studied was about being below three fifty and during the voluntary consolidation if if if some a school over three fifty involuntarily consolidate it's probably a separate section of code I don't know okay thank you I'm definitely not changing that situation if they go under three fifty though then they for sure still have that option yes with your name age exactly thank you. The other questions. What is the will of the committee. Senator Hammer do pass to her second. Second by Senator stone. But the discussion on the motion. All in favor of all those thank you Mr Bill thank you committee thank. All by a lunch at the capitol. Okay we'll move along. At least. Senator Hammer. Senate bill two seventy six. Thanks mate cheer I have Kim Hammer state centre District sixteen I have members as secretary of state right. Yeah okay here cases any questions if you look at the emergency clause inadvertently last time we left a we left something out what this is intended to do is remove some confusion just if you look at the Emergency Clause line thirty three its founder chairman general some of the state of Arkansas the confusion exists concerning the candidate filing period for position of school board of director election for school elections held in November in odd number years that this act will clarify the appropriate filing period from November election in odd number years to coincide with one week period ending ninety days before November's election in even numbered years so all we're doing is taking out the confusion by aligning the star so that when it comes to the election school boards that they're that they're on the same that they're on the same page whether odd numbered years or even numbered years it was just inadvertently left out last time and that's what this does and I'll be glad to take any questions. They have questions from the committee. Senate. Anybody in the audience like to speak for against the bill. No so we have to pass by Senator Chesterfield I have a second thank you. By Senator Hammer second all in favor oppose thank you very much thank you meant your committee so let me see here senator stone where did you go. What do you. Oh good lord okay we'll these up because everybody else is gone. And so now. Let's wait. You want. Well let's let's let him get that we have that's the last thing we have on the schedule today on the agenda so. The three or four. As. Yes. What. If. Everybody be patient you'll be back in just a moment. It's son. So. Real for. The state. You identify yourself you'll be recognized Masto state Senate district and. I don't care of this Senate bill three oh for the purpose of this bill is to limit superintendents of forming contract to one year instead of the three year contracts most to pretend motion pretenders current health. I agree this superintendents data layer protection if terminated however a three year contract is not in the best is not the best use of taxpayer money I personally know what the job personally know of no other job that all present level of security. We spent tax dollars for constituents would be to make sure that the that will be a good steward of their of their money superintendents will be put to the same level the teachers as a supervisor at all and when your contract. Are there any questions from the committee senator Hammer. Thank you ma'am chair and that I don't disagree with anything you said I'm just curious in the discussions that you've had around the bill do you anticipate that this will have any bearing on getting quality superintendents because they may be fearful that they would be able to get a contract beyond one year. That's first question. I don't believe anybody should have be careful to get a job as long as you're doing your job you're doing your properly why should they be afraid to do anything. And then the and then the second question would be Could a school do this kind of school do this now issue a one year contract without it having to be legislatively done and I'm not I'm not sure so that's what I'm asking is because they do not believe the school could issue a contract right now but the the majority of the schools that I've been able to determine have a three year contract so they're not going to have a chance to happen when your contract of the super ten is going to hold out for a three year contract okay my opinion so would this bill limit a school from being able to issue a three to three a four year contract I mean this this is resetting the the bar as far as school districts can't go beyond one year that is correct they've got a superintendent should be treated just like to teachers a one year contract okay thank you yes. Senator Chesterfield. Thank you. If found thank you for taking my question my colleague to my left and I believe that this act the last. But let me just raise the concern that I probably should have raised the last time. The majority of of superintendents throughout the country have multiple year contracts but that does not preclude them from being fired but call. Do you think that this will put a chilling effect on the ability of. A list of school districts across the state to attract some of the brightest and best. Superintendents and has the school board the school administrators association weighed in on this at all. I don't believe that this will put a chilling effect on the school district's ability to hire superintendents if it's levels the playing field where everybody has one year contract I think that will make it easier to hire hire superintendents you know I I may not I mean I personally do not know the any job. I've never worked the job that I got terminated that I got a three year salary on the way out the door to meet the when I first heard this bill it I was shocked I remember back to a term that I heard when I took a business law in college unconscionable it's something that shocks the conscience I know of no body that has a three year contract and I was just shocked when I heard that and I started to prepare legislation on it and was just talking to Senator Davis one day she shall I ran a similar bill so ended up being elected and actually just resurrected it and re run it I was shocked that I have a three year contract look at they have a they have a large job. Retentive it's like state like being the captain of the shield your standard detail. Four but are also well paid they make in the high six figures on in the mind if they just do their job like it like we're expected to do our jobs then they will never have a problem we shouldn't have a problem. Thank you yeah here from the administrators association of a signed up to speak about this bill at all no they haven't yeah you're from doctor in and it has. I got fancier other wrong setting at Dr Martin and is executive director of a and at. Centers for we weren't actually prepared to speak today at one of the reasons words what was stated by center stone is not what we determine that what the bill actually says going back twenty twenty one what we look at is this is a complicated three parts of the first part being that anytime a superted enters into a contract with the school district there must be language in that contract that states exactly what the reasons for calls would be so if I for example this is a bad example but if I were purple socks on the Tuesday and that was a cause for may be terminated that would be in the contract the second part of that bill talks about buyout agreements and so the way I determine our way I understand that is that anytime there is some issue between a board and a superintendent if they enter into an agreement that it can't be more than twelve months worth of state funds there is some ambiguous language in there that I don't quite understand about finishing out of term so it could for example allow might read that is if I decide in March that I want to enter into agreement with my board then I can only have a three month buyout agreement at a state funds the third part of that is if it's super if the board intends to let somebody go let's say they have a two year contract and that's not a buyout agreement that is a termination without cause then the board would have to honor that contract no we're in the bill does it talk about reducing the limitation or changing limitation about where it goes from the ability for a board to select a three year contract versus a one year two years and so if that's obviously would be opposed to that if that's the way he was going but we don't read the bill that way thank you thank you Mr. Any other questions from the committee. Senator Dotson. Senator thank you mentor senator stone just looking through the bill I. Right I kinda have to agree that what your intent of the bill I understand what your intent of the bill is but I don't think it's doing that it's it doesn't actually. Limit a contract to one year it just limits the amount of funds that. That can be used for a buyout so I don't know if if you want to try to to change that or continue on with the bill it as it is but. I don't think it's going to accomplish what your intent is as it's written right now Leave that kind of that's more common than a question thank you yes I will continue on with the bill is the is. Davis. Thank you madam chair well I was just gonna make the same clarification that it's just my understanding is that you can't use more than twelve months of state funds to pay out of contract so my understanding is this was mirrored similar to and what they do in higher ed with contract buyouts that and private funds can be raised and they can pay out the remainder of the contract through private funds or some other means if they so choose but just in terms of state funds being used that it can't be more than twelve months worth of state funds use is that correct that is correct senator Davis thank you. Thank you senator Bryan. See we're we're striking striking all the language statutory language about why a school system may terminate the relationship with the superintendent we're just giving that to shall include standards for which a superintendent may. If any concerns that some school boards will take that very lightly and not not enumerate reasons for termination there for there to be a along litigation. Of a terminated superintendent that's I'm not. Have any concerns with that. The school board says you may be fired if you are. Not intended for a week believe nothing else into it and then they comes in you're fired because you. You wrecked state vehicle. Thank you cannot sue for I guess you soon time you want but you think state be liable for the issues revolving around that since we don't work for striking all the enumerated clauses. I do not. In other questions from the committee. Anybody else from the audience who will speak for against the bill. Are you close to be a bit closer the bill appreciate a good vote okay do I hear a motion. Lotion you senator Davis motor moves. I have a second set center Dotson. the discussion on the motion. All in favor. All opposed. Yes you pass your bill thank you. Okay we are. Your. Thank you very.