ALC-PEER
Video
Transcript
18 documents
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
members if you'll take your seats we'll go ahead and get this thing this meeting started
I call the peer subcommittee of counsel to order we chair sees a quorum will be begin with item B
thank you sharer we're in section B. These are various temporary
William Parrish
Unverified
5:30
appropriation requests the first item is a letter from the department of Education
division of elementary and secondary Education. This is for32 million dollars in appropriation it's to cover the total expected need of eligible students for the 2526 school year in the educational freedomccount programme. This is to be supported by a restricted reserve fund transfer that will be requested later in the agenda. for the committee's information this is the second transfer for the program a $90 million transfer was approved at the beginning of the year from a set aside account that was created for this purpose. Today's transfer would come from the various general discretionary
account next itemb2 is a letter from the department of Public Safety staterime lab. This is for476,000 appropriation. This is to purchase health and laboratory supplies. it's supported by fines paid to the DNA detection fund. last item is B3. this is a letter from DFfa assessment coordination. This is for 90,000 the spending authority this is to cover cost increases in contracts it's supported by ad valorum taxes. Let's share those are the three very simple appropriation requests on the agenda.
all right members has been the routine here in the past. I'll just go to each one of those items if you have
a question hit your light at that time are there any questions on B1? B2 Representative garner Representative Ggarner do you have a question
Chair
Unverified
7:05
B3 Representative Kavanaugh you're recognized for a question. Thank you. If
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
7:19
I could have the agency come down please Someone from DFNA
DFNA come to the table please if you would please identify yourself for the record.
Speaker 20
7:39
Mr Chair, members of the committee, I'm Sandra colier I'm the director for assessment coordination division Representative
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
7:49
Kavanaugh you're recognized for your question. Thank you Mr Chair. the request for this transfer states that it's because
of the higher contract cost and so my question is it's a contract and you have a set price how did we go over that contract price we
Speaker 20
8:03
have it is a scaling contract and it is the we purchased data for all the counties
to use to value vehicles and also to use on real property values and it is a s it's scales up and we actually had to renew the one for totality this past two months ago and it just was it just came out a little bit more than what we were expecting. OK, did
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
8:31
that contract have to come through review? I
Speaker 20
8:35
do not believe so. I believe it's considered a commodity and
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
8:41
on these contracts like you're paying to value vehicles and how much is that contract? Representative Kavanaugh, I
Speaker 20
8:51
do not know the number but I'll be happy to get that for you this afternoon if you
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
8:55
can get that for me I'd appreciate it thank you
absolutely seeing no other questions without objections these items will be approved
William Parrish
Unverified
9:13
Itemc thank you Mr Chair. we're in section C. these are American Rescuelan Act requests there's one item on the end on the agenda is for the department of healthal, epidemiology and laboratory capacity it's just for $1. this is returned unused funds to the CDc. right members are there any questions
on C1 all right seeing none do I have a motion
Senator Irvin you're recognized for a question ' m
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
9:52
just curious on the $1 that we need to return. how much money is that going to cost us to return the $1 you don't have
to answer it just that just never in my life had seen something come before us for a dollar so
appreciate that. OK got it thank right seeing no other questions so I have a motion to approve
this item. have a motion and a second all those in favor say aye pose sayy nay itemtem is approved thank you miss
William Parrish
Unverified
10:30
chair we're in the sectiond of the agenda. This is a restricted reserve fund transfer request. the 1st 1 isd1. it's a letter from the department of Education division of elementary and secondcondary Education. This is a32 million dollars transfer it's from the various general discretionary majority votes set aside the appropriation was requested earlier in the agenda. this is for the educational freedomccount programme.
the next item isd2. this is a letter from the department of Energy and Environment division ofnvironmentaluality this is a $2.5 million transfer it's from the various general discretionary and majority votes set aside account. it's according to the letter these funds would support used tire program reimbursements and other costs associated with the used tire program. This is the same request as last month. however, the letter has been updated to stipulate that funding will will not be used to reimburse or remediate any tires that Jefferson County processing facility
all right members any questions ond one Representative
Kavanaugh you're recognized for a question. who do you need the agency have someone from the department headd come
to the table please identify yourself for the
record and then Representative Kavanaugh you're recognized for your question Courtney Salifod Department of Education. Darrell Smith, Department
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
12:08
of Education. g re g rogers department ofducation thank you all for being here my question is how many students are we currently funding through these accounts? 44137 I believe
Speaker 41
12:16
124,000 did you say 44137 I believe 124,000 did you say4, I couldn't hear you44,000. I'm like 124,000 OK
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
12:25
when we were first talking and I support the education funds. I mean people need to go where they can best get their child educated but in the same breath I'm gonna say we do have a budget we do have limited funds and when we first started going talking about these education fundsersonally, I was told that we were never going to hit 28,000. that just never was gonna happen. it was never going to be we were gonna have to fund
more than 28,000 students and that's that's kind of where we set our money that we were looking at in the budget. I was told that repeatedly by the agency on numerous times you're now saying it's at44,000 and it will continue to grow and my biggest concern is how we're going to fund this going forward. I realize we're currently funding it outside the Rsa but I realize that that can't continue it has to be part of the RSA
going forward. we can try to take it out of restricted reserves like I think in24 after this request, we have taken out $122 million out of reserve different reserves to go ahead and pay for these accounts. as someone looking at the budget and worrying about the budget and how we're going to fund these things and we all have different priorities that we want to fund how are we going forward to be able to fund this amount of money through the RsA what are we going to cut out of the Rsa
to be able to fund this or are we just going to fund these for one year and say I'm sorry, I don't have the money. thank you Representative
Speaker 45
14:10
Kavanaugh for the question. I mean I really feel like that's probably a little bit outside the scope of of our ability to speak on. I don't know if you would like Secretary Hudson to come up. whoever can answer will be great.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
14:32
just one thing if I if I might add because I don't want to I
don't want to agree with any precedent that we're going to punt the rights to draft RSA to the executive branch so in a lot of ways that's gonna be a question for ourselves on that what we do and what we include in Rsa you know speaking to the 90 million that was in restricted reserve that was intentionally outside of RSA but also well within anticipated revenues in that year so we weren't going to be needing to cut something else that was intentional the32 million that we're
talking about today is on top of that as additional funding for the program just based on participation but as a body and again not to take away from anyone else's authority we draft RSA and I do not want anyone to have a misconception that we would ever
forego the ability to draft RSa they're going to propose to us a budget and we we look at that budget and we dispose of that budget but ultimately what comes out will be something from the legislature. thank you senator. I understand we're in charge
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
15:29
of RSA but we fund so much stuff out of RSA
and when we tell ourselves that we've got a balanced budget we're lying to ourselves and to our constituents. so if you could answer that senator, I mean secretary if you could give me some light on how we're going to move forward yeah Id I
Chair
Unverified
15:47
don't agree with the statement that our budget is not balanced. our budget is balanced. I don't I don't know
Speaker 55
15:52
how one can say that it's not it is balanced. so the governor will be submitting a proposed balanced budget according to the timeline that's been set out we'll get that to you you well ahead of fiscal session she
will include the EFA's in her proposed balanced budget and we'll follow the same process we always follow in terms of going through the legislative process and deci ding you know what ultimately will get funded for the state's budget this is a priority for the governor and it will be reflected in that we have one time money for this fiscal year we're not proposing to use one time money next year it'll be in the RsA that's what I'm asking this so you're you're looking at
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
16:30
a way that you're going to take these counts and move them from one time budget
out of reserves into the RSA I mean that mean that that's what I'm asking is a lot of times we'll take and set aside this money for special fundings or whatever but this is not a special funding this as you said is a priority for the governor and it really should be in my opinion part of the RSA because it's going to be a continual spend that we have to look at funding in the state so 187
Chair
Unverified
17:03
million currently is in the RSA so most of it is already in the RSA an additional 122s coming in
Speaker 55
17:09
through the one time funds for Fy26 that additional one time funds 122 will be imported in the RSA for the next fiscal year so we're looking
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
17:17
at what about300 million somewhere around that is is ish ok all right and in the beginning of all this, you know we like again we kept being told that this was going to be controlled by the budget and my frustration is that it is not being controlled by the budget His we we have still expanded
and still expanded and we're asking it to come out of one time funds and although I support this 100%, I just want to make sure that we don't get the state into an area where we and quite frankly we're going to be there anyway that we have to make some really tough choices as you said what we're going to prioritize to be able to fund and we're we're fast approaching that and I just want to make sure that as we go forward that we realize that that were choices that have to be made that that taking money out of one time restricted
funds to fund something that's ongoing expense it's not the way for the state to state in a balanced budget and and that's my biggest concern with this. don't disagree. I mean that's that's what a budget's all about is
Chair
Unverified
18:20
having conversations about what priorities are and how you're going to meet your priorities and so again I think as we
Speaker 55
18:25
get into the fiscal session we'll be very transparent about what the governor thinks our priorities are. I think she's been talking about there'll be nothing new there really and we'll talk about what will be in the budget from her perspective going the next fiscal year
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
18:42
Senator hickey you recognize thank you Mr chairir. Mine's for the agency just a question here in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette I believe they reported some questionable items. I believe that all the audit found I'm not gonna go into that however it made me start
thinking and I'd just like to see how we're handling this so if a parent student if they request a computer and would that be like an approved use
for these funds I assume for technology yes sir
Speaker 69
19:14
obviously the law states where they're qualifying items are and then all the rules kind of
Speaker 70
19:20
expand on that a little bit so certainly computers and those type of supplemental items that would that would enhance a student's education would be included as an eligible item OK and this is my question because of what we've
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
19:33
seen with some of those suspicious items whether whether or not they were mistakes or not again it it led me to start thinking of course if you're a I guess a
public school or even any type of state agency you're you're required to like document I believe and to keep
your you know ser serial numbers so that inventory can be done on those on those particular things what
safeguards and it seems would seem hard to me what safeguards do we have in place that if somebody goes we approve them to do a $2000 computer they go to xY xyz retailer and by that we approve it they get the money
what what keeps them from returning that and just putting that money in their pocket it's an excellent
Speaker 70
20:24
question and certainly we we're putting as many the controls as we can on on those type of items would we find out immediately when a s when a student returns it probably not right on the first end immediately but we would we do have new reporting in place that we that has come through this body and some reporting through the class wallet platform that will allow us to start looking for those types of things where if
a family chooses to buy this another item or multiple items so that what we're doing we're we're looking for anomalous activity or things that are out of the ordinary so that if a student would buy another computer so we if we have a we see a system or a a pattern of of of family or a student buying multiple computers that would flag on our on our in which would then lead to an investigation of whether or not those the items are being used appropriately and in that in
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
21:19
that particular case for that for that particular item capital item whatever we want to call it whenever the money does flow to them at that point that's no longer the property of of the state or anything like that that is just automatically their property is that correct that is correct sir OK Mr chair whenever it's time to vote whenever it's time to vote on this and I'll have some questions on the next. I would appreciate
a minimum of a voice vote thank you sir
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
21:50
Senator Love, you reckon us thank you Mister Cha. thank you for allowing me to answer the questions since some'm all on the committee but I wanted to just get a clarification from Misterhudson in regards to some of the numbers he said moving forward in funding the EFA accounts. Mrhudson did not understand you to say that it was going to be once we fund the EFA accounts in RsA it's going to be about310 million dollars moving forward
Chair
Unverified
22:22
the the sum of the transfers plus what's in the RSA for Fy26 is about310 million dollars as to what the amount will be for fy 27 we'll have to go through that analysis it will be something like that but there'll be some people who probably come out of the program. some new people will come in the program they'll be you know in terms of the category fundings as well will change so the the exact number for next year's RSA I can't give you at this point but that will be in the governor's
proposed budget in the next few weeks all
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
23:02
chairir. Senator Irvin you recognized thank you Mr Chair thank you. Last week in joint audit in theation subcommittee
we had a report University of Arkansasystems had done an internal audit and had found where students had falsifiedfaFAs and received a federal funding that weren't enrolled and it just
as we so have two questions.umber 1, I know that we had we passed legislation to tighten up on some of the EFAs have you seen any change in utilization due to that legislation that's my first question well certainly we again we verify every student that comes
Speaker 39
23:40
through so once the application is done that they they no money is received by a
Speaker 70
23:45
student unless they're are verified enrolled in a private school or they have a verified notice of intent to
homeschool and so we'd verify that every quarter to make sure there's still an active notice of intent or that they're still actively enrolled in a private school if those if one of those two conditions exists then we fund so we always fund after we
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
24:09
verify so if you've if you've verified and they're notified of being homeschooled then is that is that all that's required or is there a curriculum purchase that's required to trigger the reimbursement. well every every submission is
Speaker 70
24:27
reimbursement submission or invoice comes in we will review those expenses and the based on the eligibility of the items that are on the on the receipt itself as well as as they apply to the ordinary necessary criteria that we have employed to determine whether or not an item even though it may be an eligible item it may or may not be ordinary or necessary based on a reasonable cost and so we both we look at both cost framework as well as does it actually s supplement
or enhance the education of that particular student.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
25:01
right so but my question was as it relates to a child that is homeschooled. I realize that if they're in private school it's easier, right? it's a direct line of sight that we know that that tuition is getting submitted and used for private school education my question was on homeschool you said and when they file notice of intent to homeschool is what then allows for the release of the funds is that correct? it allows for a
Speaker 39
25:28
release of the funds into their account but funds aren't then distributed from their account unless it's been for an approved item
Speaker 70
25:35
and we do keep track of the types of items so if we see a homeschool student spending a significant portion outside of core curricular activities whether that's curriculum or supplements to that curriculum then that's gonna flag on our end which will then trigger at least some questions to the family of how that money's being spent and why that money's not being spent necessarily on core academics
Speaker 45
25:59
Missalis Ford did you have something to well
Speaker 38
26:05
and I was just gonna add once a student is deemed eligible through their notice of intent just like if it is with a private school. there are no required purchases to Mr. Smith's point, they have that amount of funds available in their account and they can then best decide how they want to expend those account that those funds as long as they're an eligible use. Most of the expenditures are through the marketplace so there are no funds going directly to the parent or and it's not even a reimb
ur se ment the funding goes directly from the account to the vendor that the parent has selected that item from. there are some instances where we will reimburse and again as Mr. Smith stated there's a process for the parents to submit all of the documentation as to what the purchase is for, why um, why they needed that for their student's education and why it needed to be in a reimbursement and not a direct payment to the vendor. OK, so there's no requirement for a curriculum to
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
26:53
be purchased if they are homeschooled. That is correct. OK and and
are you checking on the back end my case that I brought up from audit as to any kind of as it relates to fraudulently u I
Speaker 38
27:13
mean that's when we have many yeah safety precautions and guardrails in place through the administration system through Mr.smith's staff review of expenditures we are constantly cross checking to make sure that there's not duplicate enrollments um, between the EFA program and public school um,
can we say that we're going to prevent every instance of potential fraud that's not possible that's not possible with any program but we have multiple guardrails in place and continuously checking and auditing to try to avoid and catch any of those and the last question
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
27:46
is did you see any utilization change in as it related to the legislation that was just recently passed that changed some of those restrictions and made them a little bit more set a little bit more tighter parameters did you see any
Speaker 38
28:03
change in utilization? we really didn't and that was kind of difficult to do because this was the first year for full implementation the first two years not only was eligibility restricted but use of the funds was restricted and so the parameters that were put in statute really did not come into effect until this third year when eligibility became universal. right that makes sense. thank you Representative Kavanaugh
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
28:35
thank you Mr chairir. my question is you know we're all here in these crazy stories about what got funded through the education cos you hear news stories on them you hear people talking about them in your audits of what they're asking for being reimbursement. how much are you catching that are really just outside that they're asking for this cause we hear all kinds of crazy stuff they're paying for vacations, paintball whatever. how much of that is really going on and how much of that do y'all actually see?
Speaker 41
29:06
well we see everything that comes through because nothing comes through the office without it going through an approval process and so I would also I guess encourage you not to believe
Speaker 70
29:16
everything that you read because there are some things that certainly have been misrepresented maybe in some of the some of the articles that have been presented here recently I will say to to the question directly though is that our staff looks at every invoice every marketplace purchase every direct pay vendor purchase and within our the best that we can do with the
best of our ability ensure that that those things that are purchased are to benefit the student's educational outcomes and so we we work really hard at that again to to Courtney's statement earlier are we going to catch 100% of everything that comes through probably not but it's certainly our goal to to make sure that we can justify every approval that we make in this program thank you
Representative painter well technical difficulties there but you're good now you're fine Mr
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
30:23
chair thank you very much. Secretary Hudson really
quick if if this32 million dollars request is approved how much is the total balance of the restricted reserve left I've seen some different figures so I just wanted to just checking for the latest number35 I think that's after the32 correct that's correct ok Mr Chair so this is coming out
William Parrish
Unverified
30:48
of the discretion majority vote set aside account within that account the current balance is65.8 million. This will pull from that32 million we have another request for 2.5 million for used higher if both of those were approved the new balance for that set aside account will be31.3 million. thank you appreciate it thank you Mr Chair. ent er loveve I'm gonna give you a little bit of leadway
Chair
Unverified
31:10
here we'll give you a little bit of leeway I just
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
31:13
I wanted to follow up though on the homeschool
accounts. right so we are you said once they make the purchase you know I guess according to the guidelines what I wanna what I wanna verify with you all those is so are we making sure so once they purchased the item are we making sure like is is anybody going out to the home and checking or is it just we just it's kind of like on an honor system that we're going to they're going to keep the item they're going to make sure that they have it
Speaker 115
31:52
well we're certainly not going into their homes and checking their items obviously from a from a parent choice and a
Speaker 70
31:59
parent empowerment standpoint we're trusting the parent to to educate their child to do what's best for what they feel like is best for their for their child so
Speaker 69
32:08
I guess to to your question I guess it would be on the honor system so all right thank you see no further questions do I
have a motion ond1 have a motion to have a second have a second all those in favor sayy aah all
those opposed I have it motion passes so with that members we'll move on to d2 and we've already explained it so any questions on d2? and I would highlight that the last sentence of the autum says this would not be used for Jefferson County's ttire remediation. I think that's important for the members to
understand Senator hickey you recognize yes and I'll try
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
32:58
to be quick but I would like to have the agency down just for some quick clarification from ADQ? you
guys would introduce yourself for the record and Senator hickey you're recognized Lauren Ballard,
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
33:22
chief of staff Energy andnvironment. Bailey Taylor, chief
Speaker 127
33:25
administrator ofnvironment and DEQ director. OK It thank y'all for working
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
33:31
on this over the month so I wanna make sure that and I understand what's been said so we are going to still be funding district o but Jefferson County in no
way shape or fashion can can receive any of those funds about that so that's correct right? OK my other thing to say is this of course after the last meeting as
always happens and I'm not being accusing anybody of anything but people start calling and saying I know this I know that and of course I give those to the appropriate officials which I have done myself the whole thing with Jefferson countunty is a huge red flag or red flags everywhere is I assume it is with you all and a lot of the other members that I've talked to so my only thing is is I think that there should be and maybe some of them are here listening or whatever but you
know that the district four board of directors you know should understand that those you know things have come into question and I don't know if any of the same players are involved with district o that were involved with Jefferson County but I think those board of directors they need to be cognizant of that fact just until we are until we get to the bottom of all this and see where we were because I've heard things that you know would
would run up a red flag more than a red flag you know I've heard things such as possibly co mingled funds and things like that don't know if that's happened I'm not accusing anybody but you know all these behind the scenes conversations needs needs to be checked out so I think that the board needs to be cognizant of that and to be very war wary you know that you know there is a possibility those could be looked at thank you. thank you members do we have any other questions seeing no other
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
35:30
questions what's the will of the committee we've got a motion to approve we've got a second in discussion on the motion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed motion
carries we are at E1 Thank you M Sher we're in section E
William Parrish
Unverified
35:53
this is a reallocation of resources for the department of humanman Services special language allows the department to make four reallocations. This
is the first reallocation for fifth year 26 on the last page is page5 our tables showing all transfers the second table on that page shows transfers between divisions the division of county operations is requesting 180,000 in salaries and match for positions those positions will also be requested transfer on the stable. The next table shows fund transfers the probably request team's total general revenue fund transfers of4.27 million among the divisions to meet client needs the largest of the transfers is 2.1 million to the
division of accounting operations for administrative support and the next largest is 1.9 million since the secretary's office the remaining transfers are for the division of childrenldren and familymily Services and that's two other divisions to support activities performed by those divisions on behalf of DCfs clients and then the next table shows four position transfers between divisions and they will go into more detail in the personnel subcommittee all right thank you members we have any questions on E1. all right seeing none we need a
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
37:01
motion to recommend approval to the ALc personnel committee we've got a motion we've got a second any discussion on the motion seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed motion carriesers to our review items members I'm just going to draw your attention to the reports here I'm not sure if we said it earlier in the meeting but if you've got questions on the reports go ahead and be getting those ready and then I'll ask if there's any questions or reporting and we'll take those and if
not then those items will just stand as reviewed all right with that f1. thank you Mr chairr we're in
William Parrish
Unverified
37:31
section F. this is the appropriation of fund transfer requests and this is a letter from the department of shared administrative Services division of building authority is for 1.4 million is to make a loan to the office of Technology to replace the power supply for the data center west facility in LittleRock. the appropriation funds are made available by the sustainable buildingildingsign revolving loan fun programme. The letter says the project is expected to net a 23% energy reduction. all right thank you members do we have any questions
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
37:59
on f1? seeing none what's the will of
the committee we've got a motion to review. we've got a second in discussion on the motion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed motion carries members we're going to go throughg1 through5 and then we'll take questions on each 11 at a time. thank you
William Parrish
Unverified
38:16
Mr chairir. we're in section G. these are cash fund appropriation requests. The first item is a letter from department of Education division of elementary and secondary Education. This is for 2.4 million appropriation is to create a real time data dashboard to help address a persistent teacher shortage it's supported by a grant from the Walton Family Foundation.
G2 is a letter from Parks heritage and tourism outdoor recreations for750,000 spending authority. This is to make grant payments related to the all kids bike programme it's supported by funds passed through from the minority healthalthcommission. G3 is a letter from public safety staterime labs for74,800. this is to provide for toxicology tests and sexual assault kit outsourcing it's supported by funds from the office of the attorney general G4's a letter from Veterans affairs the eterans cemeteries's divisions for40,000 it's to cover operating costs including realigning headstones and
general maintenance by the cemetery's division it's supported by federal reimbursements and private burial funds. G5 is the last item. it's a letter from health board of podiatric medicines for 2000. This is to support collaboration with other agencies in conducting licensing investigations is supported by their fees and funds. all right thank you members we'll go through these one at a
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
39:24
time any questions ong1 Senator Urvin? whoops sorry all right no questions ong1g2 Senator Irvin you're recognized for a question on G2.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
39:37
just wanted to see about yeah the department of health Jamie Fisher Park's Heritage and tourism CFfo
Speaker 141
40:01
OK thank you Katherine Andrews director ops of out recreation. Hey guys
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
40:09
thanks.uickly so this is going from your department through to the department of healthalth minority Health Commission to
other way around. OK, I got you. thank you. OK all right and then you're gonna work with
the schools is that correct to get this out to as many schools as possible or how what's the approach there I mean I'm supportive of this I just, I thought it was the other way
around and that didn't make any sense to me so yeah so we are going to be
Speaker 143
40:43
have self selected into the program via the Arkansas Game andish Education initiative so they currently have about70 schools that are in the program this year and so we'll give those funds to the schools that have been selected through that program and then ongoing throughout the years that follow and they have a plan to engage schools to try
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
41:04
to get them enrolled all right thank you appreciate it thanks
thank you Mr Chair. seeing no further questions ong1 G2 we'll move on to G3 without objection questions any further questions on the other items underg I forget Senator Desmaine's procedures CNon I got a motion have a second all those in favor say aye
all opposed eyes have it move with that we'll move on toh and just go ahead and explain H1 through three and then we'll
William Parrish
Unverified
41:50
take questions sir thank you Mr Chair we're in section H. these are miscellaneous federal grant appropriation requests the first one is an item from the department of Veterans affairs is for5.5 million. they have a grant from the Department of Veterans affairs to expand the North LittleRocks Veterans Cemetery h 2 is the department of agriculture. This is for7 million. David have grant from theDA Forervice to make an award to central Arkansas waterter to
acquire 1300 acres in the Mamill watershed. members this is an item that's been on your agenda for the past two months. Also at your desk is a resolution that was passed last night by the Perry County Qorum Court. now we'll move to the last page of the packet that'sh3 H3 is a a request from DFfa dispersion officer. This is for6.35 million. they have a grant from the Center for medicare and medicaid Services for the rural health transformationgrame. this first
request is to provide for administrative expenses in order to establish the program which will award over $200 million in the next four years. Mr Chair, those are all the MFG requests en
ator Davis you are recognized for a question. Thank you Mr
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
43:04
Chair. at the appropriate time I have a motion for item h2. OK.
any questions on the items before I take the motion Senator hickey you're recognized
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
43:17
of course I don't know what the motion is my my question on H2 and again it may it be in discussion is I guess what I was wanting to see with this is with whatever counties of this is located in and I'm not even for sure if there's any municipalities have we have we had any resolutions from the and I've been told we don't but do we have any resolutions from like the quorum court or any municipalities involved in support of this so from a local standpoint so again I don't know where the
appropriate time is but that that is of a very importance that's of great importance to me thank you yeah I
Speaker 153
43:59
got I'm reading this and right uhpresentative Bentley you recognize thank you chairman and to senator hickey's
point there is a resolution from Perry County
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
44:19
in your packet they're just put there it's OK if I hear we have Senatorlarkansas up for some questions please. thank you chair if you want to go
ahead and introduce yourself for the record and then representative Bbentley you recognize. My name is Brian
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
44:50
Ruuppar I'm the watershed protection manager for central Arkansas Water. thank you for being here
today. My first question is to you and throughout this entire process that you've been working on this land grant has anybody ever reached out or worked with a Pericanic quorum court, the Praie County judge myself or Senator Rice that covers Perry County. Have you worked with them in any form or fashion during this process? thank you for the question.
I did attempt to meet with the county judge on several different occasions I met yourself and the county
judge out at Lakesylvia not specifically on this during their dedication event and spoke about some of the protection efforts we're trying to partake but I did not reach out directly beforehand before the grant application was submitted to you. my next question are you
aware of the land that you received in 2024 the 2000 acres that you got through
this land grant that you remove the potential from Perry County for $1.5 million annually in property taxes.
Speaker 169
45:52
I'm sorry what what was the figure of property taxes
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
45:56
in Perry County in 2024 you got 1,935 acres through this land grant that 1,935 acres if we had been able to build houses on five acres plots in that area we could have gotten $1.5 million in property taxes in Perry County is something that we desperately need at this point Perry County's land budget I mean road budget is only $900,000 so when you receive that
1,935 acres of prime as we as we have in testimony heard prime acreage for development. you took away the potential for Perie County to get 1.5 million in property taxes which they now will get minimal amount of forestry land. I just want to know if you were aware of that when you were working on that project and did not in any way work with Perry County the corn court or the county judge on that grant
thank you for the question. We did not analyze potential future tax revenues if
there was a full buildout scenario I do know that you know several Perry County customers benefit from CAW water and that purchase of about 2000 acres was about0.06% of the land in Perry County. yet we serve almost 10% of the population in Perry Countylean water so it was really an investment in clean water for Perry County as much as anything else. are you aware that the periecounty residents
for centuries have taken care of the
lake Mollel of the river Mamel River we have residents beyond the land that you purchase on either side of the river and for centuries have taken care of this land and the water coming into the Lake Mo mail from Moel wherever has been has been pristine during that time has
it not The water is pristine. That doesn't mean every action taken has not in some way led to the deregate degradation of the river system. there have been several incidents of machinery even recently gravel mining in the river,
which are navigable waterways I believe is falls under the commissioner of state lands and his state property and and all that sediment eventually flows downstream into the lake. Now the lake is still in pristine condition but it can only handle so much nutrient loading over time and so that's what we're concerned about is long term nutrient loading and sediments into Lake Mallmell. I would just
Speaker 174
48:19
counter that we've been for centuries taking care of
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
48:23
that land and done a phenomenal job and then returned
my my county has been hurt. we have a small very small fraction receiving water from Perry candy but nothing in this grant brings more water structure into Perry County or benefits my county whatsoever. So I will do it with that but my county is being hurt immensely and I'm just wanting Perry Kenne to be completely removed from any further land purchases you've already gotten 2000 acres from our from our can I think enough is enough. thank you chairman for the time
Representative Eubanks you recognize. thank you Mrir. I guess I'm curious how this resolution might impact the sale of the of the piece of property is there somebody here from from potlatch or from department
of agg that could possibly answer that question
Chair
Unverified
49:40
Kylecunningham state forester department of agriculture. Innusuzaki Department of
Speaker 57
49:53
ourulture. Scott Corley potlatch delta do I need to repeat my question or your question
Speaker 181
50:01
was about making an adjustment to how would
this possible adjustment may be impact the overall sale of the remaining
Chair
Unverified
50:11
portion of the property yes sir I know with adjustments we've made in the past they weren't removing parcels but when we try to change or alter any acquisitions the national forre legacy panel and and forestervice can be hesitant to do that I I believe on the reduction we could probably pursue that but I don't know for sure what the ramifications of that would be I would say you know if you
look at the packet we gave you there's two pieces to this purchase this piece has been approved the second round is still waiting to be approved at the national level and so there are very strict timelines on some of those things to occur for approval and so that would be my concern would be the full completion of this fors legacy project could be impacted from a timeline perspective but we could check
right members, I'm trying to stay with committee members first uhpresentative beatty you are recognized maybe. thank you Mr
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
51:24
chairir. I I just have a question because I I heard umpresentative Bentley mentioned the tax property tax implication of this this acquisition to the county but she used the word if in her in her estimates so I I was wondering does someone have the actual property taxes that are paid on this property right now
and what that impact would be because I I remember that number being a rather small number last time that we
Chair
Unverified
51:58
were here So I can speak to the property tax on if the land stays in forest land and I know for the prairie County portion of the creek's tract it was only like48 dollars or50 dollars a year in property tax you I believe her question was what if it were developed
and you know one of the things that I would like to if I can follow up on the forrest legacy programme is based on potential for development in the long term and what consequences that could have on a waterway. and so when you start talking about migration from other states from other countries and that type of thing coming in you know you're really opening the door for a higher level of impact on waterways and so that was the justification for us
pushing this particular purchase in a forres legacy program request does that answer well that that that answers some of the question cause I, I
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
52:54
that that number would would have a significant impact on on most of us if if it were gonna hit the county for over a million dollars in property tax but you you said that number again was how much go ahead so the number for the per
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
53:11
the 2000 acre purchase that was done previously at on our closing statement it showed a tax
Speaker 189
53:19
liability of4,000150 dollars a year is what the county's losing in revenue from taxes and and this
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
53:26
would protect the waterways and and in that 2000 acres for for the foreseeable future under under good conservation efforts. correct and we're working with the game and fish
Speaker 168
53:36
commission to have that open for the residents of Perry County to recreate on as well so the residents of
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
53:43
Pererry County would benefit for this for the indefinite future. yet even those that aren't
Speaker 168
53:50
served by our water system as I said earlier about 10% of them are in the wide mountain area the rest could benefit
Speaker 189
53:57
from the public access opportunities right thank you Representative Kavanaugh you recognize. Thank
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
54:09
you Mr Chair. you mentioned the second purchase, how much land is going to be purchased both this purchase and the secondary.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
54:22
The total for the two parcels together the two tracks together would be3,471 acres and how much
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
54:28
is the secondary purchase gonna be? how much money it
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
54:34
will also be a7 million dollars federal award and
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
54:37
how much is the water having to put with it central water
Speaker 189
54:42
well we're estimating approximately3 million dollars so central waterter
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
54:45
has6 million dollars they can put toward approximately toward this purchase correct
so why don't they just purchase one and not use federal
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
55:02
dollars tax dollars. because it's a future investment it's a federal investment. these are nondiscretionary federal funds that we seek out to protect that green infrastructure you know our forests are our first drinking water filter and if this helps protect 500000 Arkansans that are served by central Arkansas waterter we feel that that that's a a great federal investment and it's a
great investment of our ratepayer funds because we're only using 25% maybe up to30% with our additional match on this grant to provide that same quality of protection by leveraging federal funds along with our own funds
Speaker 168
55:37
and you also happen to mention that Arkansas game and fish was
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
55:42
going to be involved in this house is Arkansas game and fish going to be involved in this? we've been
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
55:51
discussing the possibility of expanding our our
current lease acreage we we lease our acreage around Lake Mael to theame and fishmission at a reduced rate. I believe it was52 cents an acre per year to lease the property for 99 years to open it up for public fishing and hunting opportunities. we would want to expand our agreement with them. it allows them to provide enforcement, open up those recreational opportunities and provide also technical expertise to help with forest management public recreation access
points and help you know develop those it's been a
Speaker 168
56:30
great partnership and they'd like to continue that and expand those opportunities.
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
56:34
OK, so the land that you're purchasing thank you Mr chairir. does it actually touch the lake This land does
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
56:43
not it touches other properties we already own and major tributaries running into Lake Mamell. so the guess what I'm trying
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
56:49
to figure out is what game and fish, how they would actually provide
opportunities for Arkansans in being able to use this land if it doesn't touch the lake and can't get to the lake on it, how would this land with game and fish provide opportunities for our Kansans so there are other roadways
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
57:14
that connect to the property that it's not accessed directly from the lake but from access points along public roads some
Speaker 189
57:19
of the land especially the the 200 acres in Perry County touches existing forestervice
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
57:28
lands which is already open for public access. and so if we're able to acquire that additional acreage in Perry County on the southwest side of the tract that'll also physically connect to additional properties at central Arkansas Water already already owns that has difficult public access. they have to cross the Mael River to get to it and this would allow the opportunity to cross over lands to access existing holdings as well as the new 200 acres OK thank you Representative Kavanaugh could I follow up also
Chair
Unverified
57:58
on that thank you so you're correct this purchase does not touch the lake but it is in a very important I I want to make this point it's in a very important or critical area because it's in the headwaters there's there's three or four streams that feed into Mallmill or Maelriver there and then it also touches the uhalmel River itself or near it. The 2000 acres that do want to go back to 2000 acres or so that were bought in 2024 the Mamillriver runs the length
of that property and so I'm really speaking more from the for legacy standpoint of that CEW talk about the development of the entire watershed you know those areas are important because they buffer those streams and and where I was headed with that was if you think of it from a timber harvest and I'm a forester so always relate to timber harvesting we do streamside management zones on timber
harvest and we buffer the entire stream along that way that we're doing the harvest on and so from a forest legacy standpoint trying to put this in perspective that's really what we're seeing here if you look at the map of figure 1 of7 it shows that these areas are buffering that watershed or that that waterway where there's the river or the lake immediately adjacent to that so it makes sense I just wanna make sure I'm getting out we're focusing on this particular area within the watershed for the forest legacy
I wanna talk about our reasoning for this Is there anything potlatch would
Speaker 205
59:43
like to add to that yeah you know'd I'd say we're always looking across our ownership we have about 935,000 acres in the state and we're always looking for what's the highest and best purpose of each property we own and you know almost all the time that's sustainable forestry management for us and that's what we do
occasionally that's development but there are cases where conservation is what wins out and this is one of those cases and for us we've always viewed this property highest and best use as a conservation outcome and that's why we're so supportive here you remove the possibility of conservation from this then we have to move on to the next thing and I can't say what that would be
it could be a form of development it could be anything that might not after a sale have the water quality impact that's trying to occur here so that's why we're fully on board we're trying to do what we think's best for the citizens of central Arkansas and that's protect this watershed but we can't say what tomorrow will bring if if that possibility is removed so I would just add that
Can you walk me through from a potlight's perspective what that would look like if housing was to be built in an area that's that high of a value of conservation and what that would mean to the conservation world in central Arkansas there's
Speaker 205
1:01:22
certainly some properties there that I I'd start by saying I view conservation on this as being a a ways out obviously we have Chanel properties unless LittleRock and we have
a good bit more acreage before you even get to the lake but certainly if you get in that area and you think about the amount of dirt that has to be moved I mean they're the heels there are not very conducive to just build houses as it sits right now so you're gonna have to think about the amount of dirt work that goes into this and what that does downstream in this watershed I think it could have a pretty large impact and we probably I'm you know I can't sit here day and say we'd be the develop
er we have Channaul properties it's more likely that you know somebody approaches us another developer approaches us about building in that area and we'd have no control over that and I'd hate to look back and see this opportunity pass us by in 10 years from now we're all looking back and saying man I wish we had done what we could to protect this this watershed so yeah that would kind of be the impact so give me more lines I guess you kind of missed my question a little bit but
give me more of the lines what that means for
water quality and maybe central Arkansas water could answer that if all this dirt movement had to take place on the side of these hills with the tributaries at the bottom what does that look like long term because we've heard the impact of a million dollars on the property taxes if it was developed so obviously people in Perry County want it developed. so what does that look like for the other500,000 water users So along with development comes more than just the initial slug
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:03:08
of of dirt and erosion and and sediment that washes off a job site there's not currently any wastewater treatment in that area either so if you're talking five acre lots there'd be at least one or more septic tanks on every lot there'd be however many far tosu pharmaceuticals those households are taking that aren't filtered out in typical septic systems and winding up downstream and eventually in the lake so the more and more sediments
and future contaminants some that we may not even be on our be on our horizon or in the lake the higher the treatment costs are at our treatment plants and then those are going to get passed on the to the ratepayers in the future that's why these investments on the front end to protect those areas especially along major tributaries it's it's one of like the old cliche you know an ounce of prevention's worth a pound of cure it's just much cheaper to protect it in a forested state. keep it in natural vegetation instead of lawns that are
fertilized and people changing their own oil and all those additional nitrogen and phosphorus inputs from housing developments keeping in
Speaker 168
1:04:16
a forest that can cycle those nutrients instead. thank you senator Irvin you
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:04:26
reckon us OK thank you appreciate the conversation. I'm looking at your page three of the handout
under threatened and there it talks about the real estate development projects you've got with Chanel Valley
and then another one and then Lakeview west the picture that is presented here. do you know how much in property taxes that one likekeview west subdivision produces I'm assuming that's for Plaska County. I'm not aware of what
Speaker 168
1:04:59
the property tax is on those properties
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:05:02
but but the lakeview west development here that's in this picture the land that you're wanting to purchase is around that development is that
correct or near that development touches that development it is nearby it
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:05:19
it's a about a half a mile west of that I believe would I'd say would be the closest parcel to it OK but it does not have the same overlook of the lake that these parcels do. so your parcels would be of higher
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:05:34
value if if it were developed the partial no our parcels do not have the same overview of the lake the same
Speaker 189
1:05:44
scenic overview do yeah especially over the the proportion of them you may get a glimpse of the lake from certain ridge tops but but nowhere near like
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:05:55
Lakeview west has and then I guess when you talk about watershed I mean I live in the part of the state where if you want to talk about a watershed and issues with watersheds and runoff and sediment and all all of that kind of stuff then you're talking about the entire portion of north central Arkansas
and so I think for me it's I understand the perspective understand your perspective also understand Perry County's perspective particularly and I just feel like y'all are not sensitive to that issue and they're not like hearing that understand like you're not sensitive to the fact that when you take properties out of the public domain for development you are absolutely affecting these budgets of these very poor counties and they don't have and
so here's a here's your you're considered about you're worried about water sediment downstream and all that well when you don't have a road budget and you can't pave roads then you have dirt roads and then those dirt roads are not built correctly. Guess what happens to the lakes and the rivers and the creeks. The sediment and all the gravel and everything gets dumped downstream because of the runoff and the washes because of a heavy rain or whatever I feel like y'all just are
completely disconnected to rural Arkansas and what actually is happening in rural Arkansas as it relates to how vast and big a watershed is actually defined and the control that you want over a watershed for the greater good and and that's what bothers me about this is that there's just really no recognition of whatpresentative Bentley is talking about you don't even acknowledge it and and that
quite frankly for somebody who grew up in this area out west LittleRock. I know exactly what but I live in very rural Arkansas. I live in the Buffalo River watershed so yeah we have a septic tank you know we're those rural poor people that change our own oil I guess I'm a polluter. I guess you just look poorly on me. I don't know but that bothers me. I'm just going to be frank with you and so you know
under threatened you're talking about me you're talking about people that are trying to build in a rural part of the state of Arkansas that's really beautiful. I get your arguments but just a little bit of recognition would kind of go a long way here in my opinion and I just don't find that from central Arkansas water you can respond if you like but is that ever in your calculation of what you're doing to these rural counties la County doesn't
seem to matter here because they got plenty of property tax I got plenty of county road budget do you ever give back? does potltch ever donate to the unpaid roads programme that the state of Arkansas set up have you ever contributed money towards that have central Arkansas water if you're that concerned about sediment and water quality and water control have you ever put money towards the unpaved roads programme that the state of Arkansas set up legislatively with state funds
and private funds to be able to help out these county these county road. have you ever done that bothth of you can answer. Sure thank you
Speaker 161
1:09:35
for your question and one I apologize I didn't mean to insinuate any offense to you. I changed my own oil. I have a
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:09:42
septic tank. I'm saying compared to a forest there's a difference between a residential development and a forest as far as drinking water qualities and the meetings that I mentioned earlier with Perry County judge were specifically I was trying to talk to him about the unpaved roads program
we've reached out to the county road department and invited to go with them to the unpaved road trainings which is a prerequirement to getting that funding they have to have a representative go through the training I know I wrote the bill well thank you for that. I've attended the training myself so I could learn more about how to identify problem areas so those are some aspects we work at and and there are several other outreach opportunities I've just been focused on the subject at hand here but you know we'd love to discuss more about how we can
Speaker 168
1:10:27
better serve Perry County with the properties we do currently own as well potlatch you want
Speaker 205
1:10:36
to respond unfortunately I'm not in our group that handles our donations so I'm unable to speak about that but I can get that information and let you
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:10:44
know well I'm just it's just the understanding and recognition of being able to say you know we're going to be good neighbors here. we recognize that there's issues here and there's perhaps ways to work with these rural communities and
these rural counties in a way that would be beneficial to them versus them looking at this because when I look at Lakeview west development that's a ton of property taxes that's going to Plasky County undeniable. so you can say what you want about forestry lands and what you're paying in property taxes versus if it were sold to a developer or if you as yourself developed it like you have innnel the property taxes there are tremendous. they're extraordinary yes yes so you
understand the issue when you take that much money out of the public domain we we face this and we deal with this with the national forest you know that's a lot of land particularly in Cercy County that they can never collect any kind of revenue off of but they're always on the hook for taking care of those roads and they don't get paid for it because there's not the federal funding to support. I could go down that whole path so I guess I would love to have some recognition from you know potlatch and central Arkansas water that these kinds of issues
do exist and that there's real concern amongst us that our rural legislators that represent these areas of the state of Arkansas and a little bit of recognition would just go a long way so I'd appreciate if you want to look into that and I'd
be happy to talk with you I've offline
thank you absolutely members I've got23 more committee members then I'm gonna go to the nonmembers
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:12:32
representative beatty is the first in line on the members thank you Mr chairir. I I guess my question is if
if we have if we hold this project up what are the drawbacks in delaying and and what do you think the feds will do on this yeah
Chair
Unverified
1:12:52
again I I I think we could could potentially look at the creek's track purchase which is the one you're approving today but again this is a two part
purchase and so the streams on your map the streams is is the whole area and this is just my initial thoughts we'll have to talk with US Forest Service Region eight with our contact there. I don't want to speak for them but my concern is that it could impact the timeline on on that remaining acquisition because it's still going through the national process we received these funds these are IA funds they're not the traditional forre legacy program funds and so that's another
concern I have is is we did a lot of work to get these into place and I can promise you if we return these funds they're gone we're not gonna get them back and so it's an opportunity you know to protect this area this is a watershed that is experiencing forest loss most of the watersheds in Arkansas actually are increasing in forested area the my mi ll watershed is not increasing in forested areas it's it's losing forested area. it's experiencing population
increases and so it's a little bit uniquelake Momelel itself is a little bit unique all that CW speak to that that's not my area but again it's just when you talk about going back to the drawing table and you're dealing with you know this goes through the pre on the president's budget it goes through Congress goes through the USDA SecretaryRowlins has to approve these and you when you start messing with those timelines that does concern all right well I I mean first of all I want to
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:14:31
say on the record I'm sympathetic tores
representative Bentley representing she's taking care of her district she's taking care of her folks taking care of Prairie Keunty and I think that's what all of us are here to do you know overall it looks like if I've got the numbers right, if I heard the numbers right they're 200 acres out of this 1,325 acres in Perry County so roughly 15% of this project is is inpresentative bentley's district in in her county in Perry that she she's referenced but the other 85% are outside
Perry County so I I'd hate to see that the whole project be held up over that 15%und0 acres there in Perry County and you know the deal is I wish you guys would expanded a little more time on the front end while you're trying to get the money from the feds to to reach out work with with the local folks there in Perry County and withpresentative Bentley I'd encourage you to do that in the future that could probably forego a lot of what we're discussing here today but but with that said I I just I just think if we hold this up we're just what you're saying we're sending the message back
to the feds this is fed money that we we can take and utilize here in the state to protect this land protect conservation and so that that's why I'll be in support of this issue but I am respectful and appreciative of ofpresentative Bentley protecting her district so thank you yes sir
Chair
Unverified
1:15:54
and if I may you know and this is just from from us at the department we obviously support private forest landowners in Arkansas that's our mission and so we're certainly not trying to do anything to impede private landowners rights or anything
like that you know these are willing sellers that we work with in forrest legacy and I want them using Arkansas woodd to build homes and to expand but I think we also have to look at areas that are sensitive like this that could have a broader impact for decades on both Perry and Pulaski County. Representative youbanks you recognize thank you Mr chairir.
I'm trying to remember our other meetings but it it's I thought that it issue came up that this this portion of the land that we're talking about would connect a tra a trail. Is that correct? that is correct a portion
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:16:56
of the purchase connects the Wachita National Trail 223 mile trail that goes all the way from Talamia State Park in Oklahoma to pinnacle Mountain State Park and
Speaker 189
1:17:09
I believe it's about a half mile I'd have to look back through the proposal cross some private potlatched deltic lands and this acquisition project would protect those I
think one of the reasons that I'm I'm supporting this this purchase is that it you know, it affords the people that live in littlettleRock area, mainly urban area some sort of recreationaler you know avenues for them that you know that they don't have to drive a
great distance to in order to be able to avail themselves of it. that's correct
Chair
Unverified
1:17:44
sir. I'll just follow up with that. havenn't really hit on the multiple use aspects of the forrest legacy and again I'm speaking to this specific purchase I'm not talking about the broader development in the in the watershed or in Perry County you know the fact that this would be a WMA there would be hiking you know birdwatching hunting all of those things that anybody would want to do the land would continue to be a productive forest it's one of the big things with forest
legacy program is that they can continue to harvest timber off of it and manage those timberlands to keep them healthy don't want to get too far off on the side but from a state forester standpoint managing those areas to reduce fuels and wild and fire potential could play into this as wellgain I'm getting off a little bit here but there are there are multiple benefits to this other I know we're focusing on water quality today but there's multiple benefits to this to the people in both counties
Sener hickey, you're the last one in the queue that's in the committee. all right thank
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:18:51
you Mr chair whenever we first heard about this and time gets away I don't know if it was a month or two months ago I
started asking I said well I want to know what the local people think I'd like to see a resolution in support of it and then this I started that off because I was told we didn't have those and it wasn't stapled in the package but they were right it was in there but I hope all the members do understand that this resolution is not in support of
it's against from the local folks in Perry and it's also I don't know where P pulaski County is because I don't have one for or against well they don't have a res so so I am getting a question Mr chair so my next question is as it relates to the title and if somebody's already said this I apologize but I want to hear so money's coming in who's gonna
hold, who's gonna close and who's going to hold title to the property
Speaker 189
1:19:50
The title would be held under central Arkansas Water's name and it would have a notice of grant grant agreement attached to that as well stating that funding came from USederal forest legacy funds and the property needs to be managed according to the rules of that program or those funds have to be returned. The current value of those funds would have to be returned so if they paid for75% of the property 75 % of the current value if it was ever sold let's say in500
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:20:20
years Lake Mallmelel is too polluted to drink and central Arkansas waterter
Speaker 189
1:20:25
decides to sell it75% of that revenue would have to go back to the federal government so there are going to be
Speaker 230
1:20:31
some restrictions on the deed and and those are gonna be listed as exceptions and and
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:20:37
everything's gonna be done correctly whenever they do the title policy or whatever. Is that correct? That is correct it's filed with the
Speaker 189
1:20:43
deed or shortly after as a as the as part of the closing package. OK real quick just just one more and then that
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:20:52
would be good so in the event central central Water wanted to sell 500 acres of this later they're not limited they just have to return the funds on on the500 is that correct not entirely it it does have to go through
Speaker 189
1:21:09
a series of approval even through the I believe it's the secretary of agriculture of the United States so it wouldn't be up to us there there would be other decision makers
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:21:23
involved OK so it's not allocated like whatever the total price is divided by the acreage if there was some other property that was of greater value they couldn't just go in and sell and sell this on the per acre price and then get an increased value that they're gonna put in their pockets is that correct? That is correct thanks for those explanations. are there any other questions from committee members before I go to noncommittee members.
seeing no Senator Johnson, you are first in the list. Thank
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
1:22:03
you, Mister Chairman hardly know where to begin but let me first thank all of you for being here and your expert testimony let me kind of respond to senator hickey's very important point in question this resolution that we got stuffed in our packet was passed yesterday so you haven't seen a lot of eyeballs
on this and I I wanna say two things about my friends in Perry County before redistricting I had 98% of Perry County in my senate district I love the county I love the people I lovepresentative Bentley I think most of you in the legislature know she is one of my dear friends now I don't have that area in my district but I have the85% that's in pulaski County I can tell you that my constituents in owland natural steps littlettle
Italy in that area almost to the person support this because we've been under threat from inappropriate developers I'm for developers I wanna compliment potlatch Deltic they've done a lot of work close to my house and might have had a couple of things I'd rather you made made that second round about a little smaller but otherwise they are responsible developer and the deltic part of that in case you don't know this
came from a merger the Deltic tim ber that's the Murphy family from El Dorado and I believe they bought this property 90 years ago or something crazy like that they've had it forever and they've been good stewards of the land and not just here but wherever they've been operating now so they passed this yesterday now I get the point about development and and inappropriate development but also get the
part and my friend Maryentley says we need development in Perry County I absolutely agree with her but you also to get development you need water and you need to recognize that the kind of people that would want to come there and live there and build a house there want those things too and they want to be able to hunt and fish and hike and ride their bikes or whatever else they wanna do this is extremely important but again 85% of this area is in my district we've been working on
this for some time and I acknowledged in the last month when this came up a very important point that senator Irvin made about some past indiscretions by CAW totally unrelated to this project really unrelated to water and they kind of got out of their lane and I chastised them for that and their board s responded by passing motion to they're not gonna do those kinds of things anymore and I'm grateful for that because some people make a mistake and they admit it and
they in effect apologize I appreciate that very much but what we're talking about here is what's the appropriate use and what's the long term benefit now long term if these this property's development but this develop that48 dollars a year on the property tax yes it would it would probably go up but at what cost on the other side there's always a net cost to these things so I just I want to thank everyone and I specially want to
thank the gentleman from the department of agriculture for clarifying this in fairness to your department and to Secretary Ward I think maybe we had the wrong guy last month down here speaking to try to explain this and we probably wouldn't be sitting here today note respect disrespect to him but I believe that secretary acknowledged to me personally that he was miscast. he said he's a great nuts and bolts guy but he didn't quite have the
overview that's very important for all of us doing this but I ask every one of you out there when I hear from my friends in this room and throughout the general assembly about an issue in their district I listened to them and philosophically I might have some problems that the very idea that we've got all this privately publicly owned land all around the country that keeps private development from happening that bothers me I mean you go out to Nevada the federal government owns most of the state that's that's ridiculous
but when we're protecting water not just my drinking water and this is my drinking water
now but also it's drinking water for some people in Perry County and may be more in the future because CAW was chartered by state law to be regional water provider and their influence will continue to to grow and so far when they stay in their lane I'm comfortable with the job they're doing I think they're
gonna continue to stay in their life but we've this has been vetted by our congressional delegation by senator cotton Senator Bozeman and congressman Hill and I I pledged to my friends in Perry County I will do everything I can to make sure that they're concerns are met and that everyone that I have any influence with brings them in the loop into the table when there's anything that affects their county and and I feel bad that that didn't always happen
in this case but let's don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because we have some people trying to do their job and they they dropped the ball on a couple of things but would you agree that what I've said applies to this situation appropriately and would you believe that if we don't do it we could find ourselves not just in some things we regret as far as you know polluting lake Moel but also some water quality
issues that absolutely affect our future economic development in central Arkansas I asked our forester that question
Speaker 239
1:28:13
yes sir I I agree with everything you
Chair
Unverified
1:28:18
said you know water quality and quantity are an ever growing concern and that's not gonna go away it's only gonna worsen and so that's why those projects ranked so highly in the forrest legacy program area you know we look at those here before we send them up the line and if it has
water quality in there with the combination of of preventing forest loss because we there's been multiple studies performed that show that forest cover provides the the best land use for both water quantity and quality and so that's why we get behind this and it's not to you know prevent anyone from developing land in the area but these specific tracks are deemed important from the water quality standpoint thank you sir and and thank you Mr Chairman for letting me ask these questions
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:29:09
and a heck of a question it was senator if we could, I think we actually need to probably mark the tape and call a Guinness Worldbook of Records and that that may almost make it in there is the longest question I think I've been here for so members here's what I want we are in the question phase and I understand that y'all have some points you want to make and we do take some latitude when we do that all of us do, I think and when we're asking questions to make sure it's you know got kind of the background we want you know as we're you know trying to get to an answer again we are in the question
phase and so if you have a question let's do that right now and at some point there'll be a debate phase and we'll enter into that later on so with that I'm gonna recognize
or if you're just simply wanting to state like hey I've talked to Mayor Scott, Mayor Scott support of the program I've talked to you know Ken Judge Barryyde and he supported the program sayy
that but I don't think we have to I think Senator Johnson's handled it for you otherwise sopresentative Keith Brooks you're recognized for a question that's a tough one to follow. thank you. Mr Chairman for
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:30:12
the latitude to to speak not on not on this committee. so I will I'll letcho Senator Johnson about3,000 of the3,400 acres is in my district and overwhelmingly their support of this but I'll I'll pivot to a question a couple of questions. first on on the forest legacy programme as you look into the future are there additional plans to purchase additional trackx that are not included here. not at this time second question in in I'll editorialize and and thank my my
friend and colleague Representative Bentley because she is a strong advocate for her community and her district as she should be so I really appreciate that relative to the question about usage of the land specifically not necessarily just in Perry County but but Pulasi County as well and this is for the potlatch representative has there been overtures or offers to purchase land to utilize for development since that's a question relative to tax revenue have there been offers and have you entertained offers to to
utilize it for development and and if not would you even would that even be a question in your mind that you would consider in the future? to
Speaker 205
1:31:26
my knowledge we have gotten offers and have sold what I would call rural home sites single homes in the area nothing on a large scale development basis that hasn't come to us yet if it did come to us will we consider it we have to I mean as a publicly traded company we
have to do what's best for our share shareholders as well so we have to consider all aspects so we would certainly give it a look thank you and
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:31:55
and again I appreciate Mr Chair the the latitudes and and appreciate the the work that y'all are doing this thank
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:32:01
you for the question Representative Collins recognized for a question thank you Mr Chair. I
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:32:06
also appreciate the latitude and and like Representative Brooks this is part of something that also affects my district because I represent part of Westletot that goes out the pinnacle and I understand that water quality is
probably the most important thing we're talking about here but I'm very interested in focus on the washdo trail aspect of this because as you mentioned that goes from Oklahoma all the way to pinnacle and I think it's pretty common knowledge among people like myself who go out to that trail fairmount that that little s t re t ch there toward the end on the east side over by pinnacle is one of the least traveled, least popular parts and I think part of that is due to maybe the difference in how it's maintained it's mostly the
Washington National forest out west central Arkansas water does a great job I will tell you I was out there I I went in December I parked in Perry County drove out there, shopped in Perry County by the way which you know I just want to make the point also that in addition to this being a property tax issue it' s a sales tax issue because if you have tourism if you have people coming from all over the country as they do to go in the washdotrail they have running events they have hiking events it drives you know activity in
the area and it can be a beneficial thing it's low impact but my question for you is how do you maintain CAW what would you do differently from say a private landowner as far as how you would conserve the area because I'll be honest that area between highway 9 and highway 10 no knock on anyone but it looks like it's been managed differently than how CAW does it let's just put it that way. what are the differences that we could expect? thank you for your question
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:33:50
forest management stra strategy differs from some of the other landowners out there who are doing short term intensive single age management where we try to do an uneven age management where we have trees of all age classes represented on a particular stand it's also currently most of it's under management for offsiteloblolly pine which isn't the native pine to that area it should have been in short leaf pine and for the record I'm also a registered forreer in the
state it's part of my background is is forestry and so we do a a longer term rotation we manage with prescribed fire we do less nutrient inputs it's common I did my master's thesis on mid rotation treatments to plantations of adding herbicides and fertilizers at about 15 years into their growth cycle to stimulate more growth and and bigger sawlogs and and more output whereas we're also trying to maintain a herbaceous
groundco on the site too to stabilize the soil so managing more for the for the whole ecosystem rather than just for the trees themselves as a timber commodity and and potlatcheltic does meet sustainable forestry initiative standards and and we also manage those standards above we just try to go above and beyond those standards increase our streamside management zone widths increase our BMP requirements for contractors so we we try a variety thing to to play again that long game for long term
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:35:23
management of those sites thank you and and I think even more than what is the current comparison to to potlatch is what is the comparison to a potential future where there's development private development and in homes and things all around and do you I mean I guess you can just tell me do you think that management by CAW of property where the Washingtondotrail is passing through would be better for tourism better for that kind of aspect of bringing people to the trail than the alternative
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:35:53
of having it be sold for development. would absolutely agree with that and we can back that with the fact that just this past year we opened up two designated camping sites along the Wachita National Trail where there are shelters we worked with the friends of the Wachita Trail the organization that maintains it and to ensure that campers had a spot to go and and concentrate where that disturbance may happen where we can monitor it clean it up you know and and concentrated in one
area rather than having them dispersed throughout the whole property Senator
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:36:33
clark you're Allan lark you're recognized for a
Senator Alan Clark
Unverified
1:36:36
question thank you don't have a dog in this hunt but I'm listening intently both from a conservation standpoint from a property development standpoint it would appear to me you can tell me if I'm wrong that no
property development leads to the highest water quality but I don't think we want to go to no property development but as I look not at this purchase but down the road that the same arguments what land in Arkansas what part in Arkansas above sea level is not above a tributary and watershed surely there's none
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:37:27
So these tracks again we're we're focused on major tributaries and areas with a high concentration of streams running through them which makes them
Speaker 189
1:37:34
least desirable for development you know a developer would have to have additional culverts and drainage and and we're not against development in the watershed we just would like to have some smart development and have them in areas with the least impact to the water quality. all of it's going to have some but there are ways to do it less disruptive and so we're
trying to protect these critical areas around the critical stream corridors that gives us a buffer so anything uphill from that like you mentioned would have to flow through those managed lands before it reaches our lake. and I'd just
Chair
Unverified
1:38:11
follow up with that if you don't mind so we have had a forrest legacy acquisition in the what we call the white river's headwaters forest legacy area that was a pass through to the natural herritage Commission I believe and so we've done other areas but again they're very specific and not
every watershed is in at risk of being developed to the extent that this one is because it's around LittleRock and so there's some criteria here again from the forrest legacy standpoint that the specific acquisition meets that we would not apply broadly across the landscape and and I'm not saying
Senator Alan Clark
Unverified
1:38:46
I'm against what you're doing and or that you're wrong I just want to make the point that all property is above a major tributary and just a few years ago sitting here in this room we had the federal
government wanting to control everything every drainage ditch and so listening very carefully while the arguments you're making may be very good for this piece of property that can be made for just about any piece of property when you when you get down to it and that concerns me thank you thank you Mr chair thank you p re s ent ative Howard beatty recognized
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:39:22
for a question thank you Mr Chair. I was
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:39:28
just wanted to know do we have any representative from Perry
County or from Pulaski County here in the audience today that would like to speak on the
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:39:43
record on this not seeing anyone thank you sir thank you all right senator Davis you're recognized thank you Mrir. I'd like to be recognized
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
1:39:52
for my motion would besome thank you I make a motion asking that this item be deferred to the full legislative council meeting this Friday and request that the
department of agg would consider removing the purchase of property in Perry County from its request, which would therefore limit the purchase of property in the Manmel watershed using the federal grant monies to federal grant monies to property I'm sorry using that money to buy that property solely located in Pulasaski County. This motion would allow the agency time to resubmit the request to include only the purchase of property in pulaski County.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:40:35
right thank you so that just kind of restate the motion would it defer it to the full legislative council requesting department ofagg to remove the purchase of property of the
Perry County portion of the property and then for limit the purchase of the property the mill water showed using the federal grant monies to property solely located in Pullaaski County that's the motion all right and then with thatpresentative Eubanks a roll call with a divide of votes right so we've got a motion do we have a second on the motion
we got a second on the motion we've got a request for vote by division. need three hands We got3 hands for the vote by division and now we're going to move on to discussion all right senator hickey
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
1:41:26
you are recognized so and I don't I don't know if that's as just has to be between us or if there's or if there can be other questions here my only my only thing with this motion is unless staff knows of course if we didn't take the whole
acreage and say each acres is worth x amount of dollars if if the land in Perry County is worth more than there's gonna have to be a renegotiation with potlatch during this time also so it won't I don't know how that the agency could just resubmit it and restructure it unless there was a renegotiate renegotiation with Perry County which I do like the sound of personally you know as long as I can hear that pulaski County's fort and some of the members have told me they are
that's that's the only thing so I don't know if y'all have enough time to do that it's just something to
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:42:18
consider you know and at this point we're in discussion amongst members and not them and I understand that means so I think what he's really doing is asking you a question because pastorail is probably something that needs to be answered so after committee all right members we have any other discussion on the motion? Representative Eubanks are recognized for discussion on the
motion. I'm on to withdraw my request for roll call OK right
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:42:46
that's been withdrawn with that we've got a a we've got a motion asking this
item be deferred to the full legislative council meeting this Friday and requesting the department bag remove the purchase of the property in prairie County from its request and therefore limit the purchase of the property of the Monmel watershed using the federal grant monies to be proper or property solely located in Placi County we've got a second discussion's over all those in favor signify saying aye
all those opposed all right motion carries. right members I'm trying to recall where we are in this process I I don't think we've taken uph1N3 so is there any objection to reviewing items one and 1 and3. all right seeing none those items are reviewed without objection itemg1 sorry I one sorry
William Parrish
Unverified
1:43:45
thank you Mr Chairman in section a this is a paid plan appropriation request it's from the department of Veterans affairs for 133,000. This is to support implementation of the new pay
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:43:58
plan all right thank you members we have any questions on item I1 all right seeing no questions we've got a motion to review we've got a second in discussion on the motion seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed motion carries J1. there are members we're at
reports again we kind of mentioned this earlier. are there any questions on J1? all right Senator Irvin is excited. Is there any questions on K1 through7 all right seeing none members with that we are adjourned thank you for your time today.
Agenda
A. Call to Order
Items for Approval
B. Various Temporary Appropriation Requests
C. American Rescue Plan Act Appropriation Request
D. Restricted Reserve Fund Transfer Requests
Item to Recommend Approval to ALC-Personnel
E. Reallocation of Resources Request
Items for Review
F. Appropriation and/or Fund Transfer Request
G. Cash Fund Appropriation Request
H. Miscellaneous Federal Grant Appropriation Request
I. Pay Plan Appropriation Request
J. Semiannual Report
K. Monthly Reports
L. Other Business
M. Adjournment
Documents
Speakers
Representative Jon S. Eubanks Chair
Unverified
William Parrish
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Representative Frances Cavenaugh
Unverified
Speaker 20
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 41
Speaker 45
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Speaker 55
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
Speaker 69
Speaker 70
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 82
Speaker 39
Speaker 38
Representative Jeff Wardlaw Chair
Unverified
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Speaker 115
Speaker 127
Speaker 141
Speaker 145
Speaker 143
Senator Breanne Davis
Unverified
Speaker 153
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
Speaker 169
Speaker 174
Speaker 57
Speaker 181
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Speaker 189
Speaker 168
Speaker 205
Speaker 161
Speaker 230
Senator Mark Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 239
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Senator Alan Clark
Unverified