ALC-PEER
Video
Transcript
16 documents
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin
- Processing date
- October 5, 2026
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
0:30
Members, if you can go ahead and take your seats, we're going to get started. that
chair sees a quorum. We'll do this as before. We're going to go through all of the items in a
section. Then I'll come back one by one. And if there's questions, that is when you'll hit your mic. For instance, if you have a question on B3, hit your mic on B3. Don't don't hit it on B1, hit it on B3. But with that, Billy, go ahead and kick us
William Parrish
Unverified
1:19
off. Item B1. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're in section B. These are various temporary appropriation requests. Item B1 is a letter from the Department of Health
Chair
Unverified
1:26
Minority Health Commission. This is for $100,000 in spending authority. This is to support the second-year launch of the Food Desert Elimination Program.
The letter says the program will use tobacco settlement funds to make 10 reimbursable grants of $10,000 each. B2 is a letter from the Department of Health Minority Health Commission. This is for $150,000. It's to support the second-year launch of the Maternal Health Outreach and Education Program. That's a collaborative that partners with the New York Institute of Technology, College of Osteopathic Medicine. This program is also supported by Tobacco Settlement Funds. B3 is a letter from the Monitor of States for $20,000 in appropriation. This is to reimburse and cover future costs for integrating with the state's new software accounting system.
It's supported by State Central Services. B4 is a letter from the Department of Education, Division of Higher Education. It's for $7 million in appropriation. This is to fulfill scholarship needs for the Arkansas Future Grants Program. It's supported by fund balances. B5 is a letter from Public Safety Division of State Police is for $560,000 in appropriation. This is to replace live scans and accessories used for automated fingerprinting. It's supported by fees generated from criminal history searches. B6 is a letter from Public Safety Emergency Management for $210,000 in spending authority.
This is to cover increased maintenance contract costs and to realign the coding of existing grant-funded travel needs for the division. It's supported by both general and federal revenues. B7 is a letter from the Department of Health. It's for $500,000. It's to establish a construction line item to do land acquisition, facility renovations, structural improvements, and new construction projects. It's supported primarily by vital records fees. B8 is a letter from DFA Revenue Divisions for $10 million. This is to cover implementation and increase contract costs to issue physical driver's licenses.
This will help modernize their credentialing systems and it's supported by license fees, search fees, and title fees. Mr. Chair, those are all the various
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:25
temporary appropriation requests. All right, thank you, members. Do we have any questions on B1,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:47
All right, seeing no questions, what's the will of the committee? I've got a motion to approve items B1 through 8. I've got a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none,
all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed, motion carries.
Speaker 10
4:04
Section C. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're in Section C. These are the Infrastructure Investment
Chair
Unverified
4:08
and Jobs Act Appropriation Requests. C1 is from Department of Public Safety, Division of Emergency Management, for $3,060,000 in spending authority. They have a grant from FEMA for the Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities Grant Program. to do hazard mitigation activities this is an update to to an award that provides more funds for sub grants and admin costs c2 is public safety division emergency management 368 000 they have a grant from the u.s department of transportation for the hazardous materials emergency preparedness grant program this is to protect against the risks that are inherent in transporting hazardous materials award will be used for personnel and operating costs including training and making subgrants c3 is public safety emergency management 8
million in appropriation they have a grant from fema for the pre-disaster mitigation program that's to reduce risk from natural hazards and to reduce reliance on federal funding and future disasters mr. chair that's all the iija requests all right thank
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
5:07
you members any questions on c1 senator hickey c1 you're recognized for a question hold on just a second i've hit something wrong. There we go. Thank you
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
5:19
Mr. Chair. Just one question. A member had asked me that couldn't be here today. They wanted me to ask the question. They wanted to make sure or at least
have knowledge if any of these monies were going to be used in any way that would affect the federal surplus program that was out there because they thought that the first one I believe might be tied to it and they just wanted to get acknowledgement of whether that was or was not that so I don't know if a staff
can do it or agency can just could come down and ask answer that one question it
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
5:54
looks like we have some money if you could just recognize yourself for the committee and if you
Speaker 21
5:59
can send her if you can just restate your question to make sure good morning aj gary director of the arkansas division of emergency management and sir the answer your question is this does not have anything to do with federal surplus property it's a mitigation federal grant program okay
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
6:19
they just wanted to make sure that it didn't tie back in any way shape or fashion and i told them that uh i would ask
Speaker 13
6:26
that question for them since they couldn't be here yes sir thank
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
6:30
you sir thank you thank you sir all right do we have any our representative
Ladyman. Hold on. I'm going to get the hang of it again after a couple of months. There we go. You're
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
6:40
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I need to have him back down there, I guess. Got a question. The agency. He's
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
6:58
heading your direction. You're already recognized. Representative, you're recognized to ask your question.
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
7:03
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I was reading the details here on this grant and it says it does so with the recognition of the growing hazards associated with climate change. How are we using this money to combat climate change? So, and I apologize, is this still the Building Resilient Infrastructure, the BRIC grant? I think it is, C1. Are we on C1? Yes, okay. I just wanted to make sure it was the right one.
Speaker 35
7:34
So this is a, and I'm going to ask one of our mitigation people to come up
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
7:39
to help out on this, but this is a... Let me rephrase my question. I apologize for asking it that way. What will this money be actually used for? And I know it may be being held. So what things would this be used for? Because when they reference climate change, you know, I would like to know the details on what we plan on using this money for. All right, and if you could just recognize
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
8:04
yourself for the committee and you're welcome to answer.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
8:07
Hi, Jody Lee, Deputy Director of Recovery and Mitigation with the Arkansas Division of Emergency Management. The primary purpose of these grants are to mitigate past and future disasters. So flooding is what, it's a federal grant, FEMA ties flooding to climate change. So you're raising bridges, elevating roads, things like that are what would primarily tie it to climate change.
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
8:39
So it could also be used in response to tornadoes and those
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
8:45
kind of events. Is that true? This grant in particular is not used in response to tornadoes. This would be for future planning, mitigation plans, future infrastructure, possible infrastructure damages in the
Speaker 43
9:01
event upgrading things that could be damaged in the
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
9:08
future. so it could be used proactively uh to anticipate major problems you might do the infrastructure
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
9:16
where those problems could be abated yes yes and also could be used for safe rooms public safe rooms too that that do go back to tornado safety
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
9:26
all right thank you all right thank you members do we have any other questions all right
seeing no other questions what's the will of committee I've got a motion to approve item C 1 through 3 I've got a second any discussion on the motion seeing none all those in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed motion carries D 1 thank you mr. chair we're in section D
Chair
Unverified
9:50
this is a restricted reserve fund transfer request this letter from the Department of Energy and Environment Division of Environmental Quality it's a 2.5 million dollar transfer from the various general discretionary majority vote set-aside account within the fund. According to the letter, these funds will support used tire program reimbursements and other costs associated with the used tire program. For the committee's information, the statewide accounting system shows the program's revenue is relatively flat and expenses are climbing, and that is eating into the program's fund balance. The balance was
$3.4 million at the end of fiscal year 24. The balance was $894,000 at the end of last month. The agency confirms it is in a pattern of deficit spending on the program, and they point to a special report from legislative audit in January of 2023 that describes the imbalance in more detail. The department cites hikes in inflation, fuel prices, machinery and equipment, scarcity of parts for maintenance and repairs, and labor shortages resulting in the climbing program expenses. ALC approved a $1 million transfer in October of 2022.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
10:53
That was the last time I faced a deficit. all right thank you go ahead and have
somebody come up I know we're gonna have at least a couple of questions and if you could just
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
11:14
go ahead and recognize yourself for the committee and then I'm going to recognize Senator Hickey Lauren Ballard Chief of Staff Department of Energy
Chair
Unverified
11:21
and Environment Bailey Taylor Chief Administrator of Environment and DEQ director all right thank you Senator
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
11:25
Hickey you are recognized. Thank you Senator Dismang. I'm up here to y'all's left. So I guess
the thing is is you all are presenting this as a deal for the overall program for the state. However I've received some calls on this and I'm just going to tell you what I've been told because I want to drill down into the specifics a little bit more. So what I've been told is that I believe district for that the that they just quit shredding tires completely over in that district is that is that
Speaker 54
11:57
true yes sir their processor shut down and so
they've been in the process of contracting a new one going
Speaker 57
12:02
through procurement trying to find someone else to take their tires there's been some other districts that have chipped in where they can and pick up those tires to prevent them from piling up okay well I'm just gonna
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
12:14
I'm gonna tell you what I was told and then you can just tell me if that's true or not true and mr. chair up may need just a little bit of latitude with that so then as what you said you said that they were going through the procurement process but prior to that I was told that that board actually went out and hired or
attempted to hire somebody else without doing bids and that they were going
to do around five dollars a tire and that they that they were just going to pay
Speaker 57
12:46
are you familiar with that it's my understanding that they had gone through emergency county procurement to find a new processor and they had been utilizing that processor while receiving their previous rate of 292 so hired whenever jefferson county was processing their or the rate that they had
established whenever their local processor was processing their tires then they submitted a revised business plan we asked them to go through procurement to try to see if there was a competitive bid that would reduce that price because yes their their existing business plan request was for 505 attire we countered with a little bit of a lower number and asked them to go through procurement that business plan was never instituted they went through procurement we received a revised
business plan with a lower number and a different processor it's our understanding that they're still going through that process and so we're anticipating a yet another revised plan okay so
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
13:51
it was my understanding which they were doing part of the work in that particular district anyway was davis tire out of little rock is that correct What was their bid per tire after they went
through the procurement process? Because they did win that.
Is that correct? I don't have any knowledge of who won the contract. I don't believe it's
Speaker 57
14:13
final yet. So they did represent that that is the bid that they were going with. And I don't recall the specific number per tire, but I can tell you what their reimbursement rate was going to be. That includes their admin costs and other transportation, not just Davis's. That
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
14:30
was going to be my next question. So how much was Davis? So you don't know what their bid was?
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
14:40
I have been told that, and I don't have the exact number, that that was somewhere because this is going to be part of my
next question, is that it was somewhere around $1.97 to $2.50 or something like
Speaker 57
14:55
that per tire. their overall request was 425 per tire that
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
14:59
but that in but that includes that's what the county's put in and that's where i'm heading that's why i'm
asking that we need to know how much that
davis is doing because if and i hate to do this but just making it up especially in this meeting but i'm gonna use a round number so
if davis only bid two dollars a tire and they're going to get those tires and do them for two. My question is, is why are we going to be paying for
something a tire? Because we're going to be paying some monstrous amount for administrative and none of this
Speaker 57
15:35
is adding up to me. They do break down their business plan. You know, this is what the processor's charging. This is what the transporter's charging. And then here's our admin. And so UTP4
has one of the lowest i believe it's
Speaker 60
15:47
the second lowest admin cost in the state overall cost
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
15:51
though most of them round numbers are going to be either a little less or a little
more than two dollars per tire
Speaker 76
16:00
is that correct the 292 is the highest 290 286 280 those are the so those are the those are
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
16:07
the three right now and we're talking about four something on this on this next one okay another thing I'm going to ask is those tires that are stacked up over there when that was not done
are we 100% sure that that somebody has not already
received money on those tires we we do
think that they probably have and therefore we will not repay for someone to pick those
Speaker 57
16:34
tires up there's currently a proposed enforcement action for the for the processor facility to clean that up themselves since they had already been paid to do so. So what if they don't? How many
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
16:46
tires are we talking about? And I, round number, because I've heard that it's a
Speaker 81
16:51
huge stack. It's massive, yeah. Okay. Thousands, tens of thousands. All right. So
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
16:56
you're telling me that that's going to be on the district to
do on their own, so they've already... No, sir, the
Speaker 72
17:06
facility. Okay. But they've already received the funds? We've already reimbursed for that work, so they should have
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
17:12
received the funds. I just, this whole thing's a, I just don't know about it. Uh, and I understand, and I'm not, this is not really anything that's directed at you all, but if we, if we've got a facility
and a district over there that, uh, I hate to say mismanagement, but I don't know what else to call it. If they've mismanagement, mismanaged it, and there's a possibility that they've received funds and didn't do the work, I'm not for sure that we don't need to have a leg audit or some other entity to look into that to see what's going on and to see where those funds went before we go forward with funding the rest of this. And I know we've got an issue with these tires stacking up,
but I'm not for sure if we could do something different and just allow Davis Tire or something to go get those tires and we only pay whatever that lesser number is. I just don't understand throwing another $1.50, $2 per tire towards the facility with this history that I'm hearing about right
Speaker 57
18:20
here. So that request is not currently ready to be submitted or reviewed yet?
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
18:26
But if we fund this restricted reserve transfer, This is the funds that you were going to use to
do that, correct? That and the other three districts that are currently over the 231 per tire.
And I guess, Mr. Chair, that's my issue right here, is
if we've got the other districts, you know, maybe that's okay. But I'm just personally not willing to put money towards this other district until we get some clarification on what's happened
and that there's not more to the story with these maybe getting paid in these tires that are, as you called it, massive, which is the number. I've heard that it's a huge amount of tires over there and that that district and the citizens there are
going to be waiting for that to get cleaned up and it never gets cleaned up. So currently UTP4's reimbursement rate is 290. So with this request for the restricted reserve transfer, They can only be reimbursed $290,000 until we come before you with a different request.
Speaker 86
19:31
And, Senator, I want to clarify that, too. Certainly, they would have to submit a revised business plan with all those variables explained that you've been asking questions about, and that would come through us, and then it would actually go for review by full ALC before that
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
19:48
would become effective. I guess that's where I'm still struggling. Even if it's $290,000, if
they've been paid for some other tires at $290,000, I don't know that I'm personally willing to go forward until we get some clarification on this. It just doesn't add up to me that if we think that there's a possibility that there may be some mismanagement,
why we're going to continue to go forward with this. I don't know if we can go a different route for a short term and maybe just use the processor. if Davis has got the low bid or whatever, if we can just use those and
pay them their number without paying that additional money because we may have to use that additional money to go clean up those tires in that district. So, Mr. Chair, I think I've
Chair
Unverified
20:34
said all I need to say. Thank you. All right. Representative Ledeman, you're recognized for a question.
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
20:42
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is about where that money is coming from. I mean, why are we taking this from restricted reserve? I mean, I thought that was money. You know, when I asked for money from that, they said, well, you can't really get that for operating. That's for disasters or whatever. So why are we going to restricted reserve instead of somewhere in the budget or the surplus?
Why are we using restricted funds for an operating problem? it's probably a dfa response
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
21:19
i would think there was a i mean a little bit of background i would say there was an agreement to do what we needed to do to keep the districts afloat while they're still trying to develop a plan i know that there are numerous members in the the room that are engaged in that but again this is to keep operations going until whatever is developed is developed and
then when we were in session we specifically set aside money to be able to
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
21:46
accomplish that set aside where where is it in a restricted reserve account what's that where's that document that says we voted on that i mean what i'm asking is yeah you know guys and there's people in this room that talked about this there's also people in this room that have not talked
about this okay so i mean a backroom talk is not us voting on something
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
22:13
I can't say what you do or what your members do when we're discussing the budget
and the bills that do detail outline how we do these things. But you can say
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
22:20
what you're talking about in a back room. You just said that. You said there are members in here that have decided. I didn't say anything
about a back room. You said, never mind. My insinuation
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
22:33
was, and I think that's one that's correct, is the members that want to be engaged in this issue are engaged in this issue. And it's, sir, if you choose to be engaged in this issue, or you are welcome to be engaged in this issue. There is no one preventing anyone from being engaged in the discussion on what to do with waste tires.
And I would also say I think anybody would want all of the support and help or new ideas they
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
22:55
could in relation to trying to get to a solution on this issue. I promise
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
23:01
you will not be prevented from being engaged. Well, my question is I don't see this as being something that restricted funds should be used for because it's operations. i don't know why we don't look at other places in the budget you know we have a surplus that we could use for this why are we going to restricted funds which are supposed to be there for
things that we can't fund in the regular budget that's my question i don't know who can answer that
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
23:30
but i feel like i i mean as far as what i understand i think i've answered about as well as I can, that my, that the belief is that there is a solution that needs to be reached, but there does need to be a temporary bridge until we get there. Instead of putting more money into RSA and increasing the base, this was a way to bridge that gap. And if someone disagrees with that, then from DFA or elsewhere, or has more that
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
23:54
they can enlighten with it, I'd be, I would welcome any other information. Well, I think I agree with Senator Hickey that, you know, we, we need more discussion on this before we pass
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
24:06
it, but thank you. now mr. chairman thank you all right senator ervin and representative i mean senator love can you hit yours again i accidentally clicked
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
24:22
you off senator ervin you're recognized thank you mr. chair hi thank you which which is the district uh so the 2.5 million is for all
four there's four districts is that correct kind of need a whiteboard here okay so we have four districts one is where we have this problem is that correct so
Speaker 57
24:39
four is what senator hickey was talking about district four oh district four okay southeast the south their quadrants of the state
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
24:48
okay but there's four total one which is southeast is where the issue is where the tires are being stacked up yes district four picked up okay and when we when we go through the plan so what there
could have possibly been you're saying we have reimbursed them we've given them money but they have not used that money towards mitigating for the tires is that correct correct okay do you have the ability with this two point do you legally have the ability to move forward with the other three districts and to do something different with this district so
Speaker 69
25:28
this district's current plan is for 290 okay so they they don't yet have a
Speaker 57
25:34
complete plan to increase that or use a different
hauler with a different rate however what we are doing separate and apart from this is the facility that stockpiled those process tires that we reimbursed for the processing we are enforcing them to clean up and mitigate as they said they had done and will do okay and how
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
25:55
are we enforcing that through a
Speaker 57
25:57
consent administrative order we're currently working out the that consent and those agreements with them to try to get them to to clean it up and we're working with them with
options we would rather handle this separately than change what their reimbursement is you know without them submitting their own plan okay do we run the risk or is there any language
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
26:21
that's included when you if we move forward with this 2.5 million with this one district is there any language included that says so this district is no longer using the facility that caused the
Speaker 60
26:33
stockpile okay they're going to use a different facility and they have been for
Speaker 57
26:40
about a year using a different processor so that tires are not continuing to stockpile okay so reimbursing then the 290 or whatever it is their new request is has they've been able to operate the district is separate from the facility that is stockpiling okay they contracted the facility that
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
26:59
stockpiled okay but there's are we including
any language in this that says you will not give money to this facility that is under
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
27:09
enforcement we don't have that included in this
plan i don't know if that's something we
Speaker 86
27:15
can well but it would be if they if they wanted to amend their business plan to say like they would have to provide us a business plan saying we are going to use this processor so we would have the right to approve or or give them feedback on that
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
27:29
so if they submitted a plan saying they were going to go back to this processor who's creating such a problem okay i understand you're trying to be responsive to what they're going to submit my question is you need to be directive and say you will not use this money towards this facility
that is under enforcement action by the state of arkansas do you have the ability to do that yes or no because that's the problem we're giving a district money that was spent using that was spent at a facility that is now currently under an enforcement action by the department in the state of Arkansas we feel uncomfortable giving money to that district and then repeating the same behavior right and is there any way I understand you're being
responsive to their business plans they're submitting I'm not sure if that's working it's not working with this do you have that ability to be directive that says we will not allow this money to be spent with this facility that's under enforcement I think I
Speaker 57
28:37
think that is something we can direct them you know state to them and let them know document that in some fashion and we always check the manifest where were the tires processed where were they sent so we would have that ability to double check reactively that they followed
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
28:53
through with that directive. Okay. I just would want like, yes, we will do that to the, to
like, but I just think that it's important for the state of Arkansas to be demanding of the money that we're going to spend to people. If they've been irresponsible with that money, we shouldn't fund them again, or we should say, you know, you may not use money towards the facility that's under enforcement action. I don't know if you have the legal standing to do that or not. That's really my question.
If you don't, I sure want to put that in law. Because if there's somebody that's got an enforcement action against them from the state of Arkansas, there's no way I'm going to approve taxpayer money to go back to that facility. And if you don't have the legal authority to
do that, I need to know that. And it should be fixed, in my opinion. Can
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
29:43
we follow up with you? Can we talk with our legal counsel? Thank you.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
29:49
All right, thank you. Senator Love, you are recognized for a
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
29:53
question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I'm going back to this district number four.
So they have collected, there was a, this district, they have a contractor that has collected the tires, And then we paid for them to collect and dispose of the tires, but they have not disposed of the tires. And so we have a stockpile of tires. Is that
Speaker 57
30:22
accurate, correct? Correct. And they since moved to
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
30:25
a new processor that was the goods. I understand what you're saying, but I guess here's the problem I'm having.
So, we paid for someone to not only collect the tires but dispose of them. So, how do we reimburse for a service that they only do half of the job on? I guess I'm trying to get the full picture of it. Because we don't only pay for collection, but we pay for disposal of the tire. Correct. I mean, the process is like two parties, collection and then disposal of the tire.
Speaker 57
31:04
Correct. So each district does it a little bit differently because they use different types of processors. So the manifest documents that the tire was collected, transported, and it may stop at I dropped it at a permitted processing facility with the understanding that that facility would continue the processing and dispose of it. We don't always get records from a permitted, you know, non-district facility that they actually disposed or recycled the material that they processed.
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
31:37
Okay, so I guess therein lies the problem for me is that we're not seeing the entire process through, and now we have a stockpile of tires that we have actually paid for,
however, they're not disposed of. So we
Speaker 57
31:55
do inspect those facilities quarterly, and we're able to tell whether they're stockpiling or processing on time or not. So we do check quarterly to make sure that that process was followed through.
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
32:08
Do you think checking quarterly is, I mean, we have a stockpile of tires now. So do we not think that – I mean, because we're talking about people going and getting tractor-trailer loads of tires per month, right, or however they – so is that adequate for what we're talking about because now we have a stockpile of tires, and we've paid for them. I mean, do you get –
Speaker 54
32:39
I do think it's adequate to catch that the tires are being stockpiled instead of properly disposed,
Speaker 57
32:44
there are other factors as far as getting that facility to take care of the stockpile and the time that they need to do it. In this case, they completely shut down. Now we're looking for
Speaker 81
32:56
someone to take care of that a different way. Okay, so
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
33:01
if it was adequate, then how do we have a stockpile of tires? They
Speaker 57
33:07
shut down. They shut their gates. There wasn't
anyone we could talk to to resolve the problem okay all right I
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
33:19
would I'll just leave it at that I don't think it's adequate and and the reason why I'm saying it's not adequate is because we have a stockpile of tires and we've paid for them they're not disposed of that's to me that's a that's an issue so now
we're talking about pulling out of the restricted reserve fund to actually pay for the tires that we've already paid for is that
Speaker 57
33:52
not correct no sir okay so what are we talking about now so going forward each quarter we reimburse more than what we received from the rim removal fee each district's reimbursement rate is higher than the 231 which is what we receive from the rim removal fee so each quarter we reimburse more than we receive so the the 2.5 million is to help cover that deficit each quarter
so that the districts are not being reimbursed on a pro rata share they're being completely reimbursed to process and transport the tires that they did the previous quarter and and we do check these sort of things you know to make sure that the tires were actually processed again we compare inspection reports the people that are in the field checking so we are aware and try to prevent the stockpiling issue so we would not double reimburse for the tires that are at the stockpiled
Speaker 86
34:46
facility so if i could i would like to just reiterate the 2.5 million today is meant to it is a to supplement the tire reimbursement money that i'm sorry the rim removal fee that's coming in to pay those tire reimbursements and as director taylor noted if we have insufficient funds in a quarter what will happen is what happened in the third quarter of 2022 when we had to give pro we were faced with pro rata distributions meaning those tire districts one well back then there was more but one through four now would be receiving only a portion because we don't have
enough money to cover it that's what the statute requires if we don't have adequate funds so back in 22 actually money i believe from restricted reserve was used to help bridge that gap so that's what the request is here today as far as district 4 and some of those those items they are at that current rate that current reimbursement rate if they want to increase that or change their business plan that does have to come through the department it then goes um due to a change in 23 is actually presented to alc so that alc has an opportunity to take a look and see what all
district four is planning to do to address some of those issues but no that that money is not intended to go pay for tires that were already reimbursed it's meant to supplement those tire reimbursements as as needed for all districts for all districts yeah okay all
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
36:07
right thank you thank you and i just want to make sure i understand the general process so
in essence we've you know money's being collected right now for tires state holds it there's districts that are set up across the state those districts create a plan they submit that plan to the state about how they're
going to take care of you know the tires all the way to
now how much they're going to pay for them that district may engage with a processor in which then you know so they they get money from the state the district does they pay the process of the processor is the receiver for the tires and at some point in district 4 it sounds like to me the processor that they had you know contracted with just stop doing their job right and that got caught and that got stopped and then district four had to submit another plan and they're contracted with someone else right now that is a completely
different processor that is processing the tires which there is still a cost for you know the
ongoing processing so my and then this replicates itself amongst each one of the districts in some way or another maybe one area is more expensive to live in than the other or whatever it may be and there's
some different cost factors and some districts process their own tires for instance okay And so with all that said, if we do not release the funds, the $2.5 million, which cannot be used for the District 4 issue, only to collect and process tires, what happens?
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
37:29
Then we will reimburse each district every quarter
Speaker 57
37:33
on a pro rata share of what we receive, which would be an estimate $400,000 a quarter less than what they've requested. If we do not
Speaker 86
37:42
collect sufficient revenue to cover, like if they need reimbursement on so many tires and we have not collected sufficient removal tire fees to cover that amount, but whatever the shortfall is will result in a pro rata distribution to all
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
37:56
districts. Gotcha. Okay. So substantially less to all districts, which means when they're not processing tires, it's
like vacant lots that folks own in Little Rock that are full of tires. That's where these tires are going to end up. And we're going to find the tires, and we're going to pay for them one way or the other. And so my question is, is there a solution? So you hear the concern. The concern is District 4 and the processor that they utilize, which they are no longer utilizing, has this backlog of tires. And we don't want to give District 4 any money that could be even potentially used. But if I'm understanding it correctly, they
couldn't because they've already contracted to give the money
that we were talking about with this pot to the new processor. they're in the process of that yes okay I'm just trying to make sure we don't hamstring the entire straight and have tires piled up
in your neighborhoods because we don't have a place to take tires because we can't economically do that and I understand the concerns that are with what happened in district 4 and ensuring they don't continue to happen that's that's my so
So however we need to alleviate that, I think we can. Senator Hickey,
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
39:11
you're recognized. Thank you, Senator Dismang. And I think Senator Dismang had a good little analogy of how it all worked, but I want to make sure that there was one more piece. So, and again, I'm around numbers here, but Davis Tire is basically 290, and the plan that you think is going to be submitted is going to be 405. So we've got $1.15 per tire that's going to be going to this district.
that's the issue in my part is you've got this other buck 15 per tire over and above what it's going to cost to shred them. How much are the other districts receiving for that? Is that what would be your administrative fee where they're
getting just a few cents? So the plan that you're talking about is not a
Speaker 57
40:00
plan that we are prepared to support at this point. We're anticipating a new plan so i'm hesitant to speak on a plan that we know is being pulled but i will say that that extra
money also included the transportation of those tires from the retailer from the retailer to collection points let me ask
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
40:21
you this in the other three okay so in the other three districts though is the retailer not paying they're paying for the transport in the other three districts correct
Speaker 57
40:33
the retailer themselves in some cases that the retailer chooses to pay for the transportation themselves i thought it was almost
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
40:41
i thought it was in every case that they don't they get
something like i'm sorry i know we've dealt with this for years is it like 15
Speaker 57
40:51
cents a tire yes they get five percent of
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
40:54
the three okay five percent of the three dollars all right so that's going to be 15 cents right yes okay so we got 15 cents so we got a buck five we got a buck five here so that gets us down to 90 cents so the 90 cents we're we're going to just send this 90 cents
as an administrative fee to that district what who's doing what with that
Speaker 57
41:24
other 90 cents a tire In UTP4, the tire retailers are able to have their tires picked up for free
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
41:36
by the district. That's their model. That's their plan. Again, Mr. Chair, I hear what you're saying.
You're telling me we've got this plan that you've heard something about and it's coming. It's the same one that I'm hearing about that's coming. what are you all going to approve in the end? Are you going to stick with the 290? Are you going to stick with something that's consistent with the other districts? I mean, I know, again, I'm not, I don't, you didn't create this problem unless you all didn't do your job as far as watching these towers close enough to make sure they didn't stack up. I don't think that that was the case. So I'm not, don't misunderstand.
I'm not coming at you all other than I want to make sure that these people that, in my opinion, maybe there needs to be an investigation. I'm not going to sit up here and say they've done anything wrong yet. I'm going to make some accusation, you know, that I don't know that's true. All I'm saying is there's a red flag that's been run up for me, that you sit down here and you tell me that somebody's been paid, that there's a, I don't remember your word, but basically a monstrous pile of tires over there. i i just don't see paying the same people anything i don't see paying somebody anything
until we get it figured out that that there wasn't some misuse of the money i just that's not who i am i just don't don't understand doing something like that or why we would even be that why we would even be thinking about doing that we're
Speaker 60
43:12
trying to prevent tires from continuing to be stacked up in people's homes and businesses so this is my thing I
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
43:18
understand we've got this over there and maybe you can't do it because of the way the law is set up and that's something maybe
I heard Senator Irvin ask about what I'm saying is is if we've got a shredder that is willing to do it for 290 or whatever it is and I don't know if that includes them going to pick them up or doesn't include them going to pick them up is there some way until we figure all this out that we cannot just pay them their money direct they go pick up those tires at those locations in that district
until we figure out what's going on and we just pay whatever that that bid number was
so what's been happening in some cases is that the counties that are close to district one district
Speaker 57
44:06
one has been lending a hand and picking those up and taking care of those and we reimburse at district one's rate district three has also been stepping in and we would reimburse district three at their rate for going across the the district four border and picking up some things that hasn't taken care of every single county but it has taken care of a lot of counties in district four in this interim so so there is that ability for us to do that as a as a band-aid and if i if
Speaker 86
44:35
I could add to that I think Senator Hickey too I think the law does prescribe sort of the protocol of how we have to make some of those payments so I'd have to I don't have that right here in front of me today but I know it directs a
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
44:46
lot of of our work that in that way I don't mind paying the other districts if that's what we've got to do but this district that's in question that's allowed this to happen I just think that we've we've got to see that through before we give any more money and how we get that established in here that that's going to happen that way I don't know or
if it's something that we need to pull down or if it's something that we need to let y'all think about
till Friday's meeting, Mr. Chair, I just, I don't know where we need to go, but that's the way I see
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
45:19
that. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Members. Any other questions? All right. Seeing none. What's the will of
the committee? All right. We've got no motion. I would need to make sure that, I mean, my hope is we can provide some clarity to members
before we come in on Friday and that this is something that can be taken up on Friday because I do believe there's probably some missing pieces in the conversation that we're having right
here about how the program works, some of the procedures that are in place, even if I'm just listening to what you're saying. So I understand that we've
got issues with District 4. I don't know how, you know, what those are exactly. But I do know that if we don't pick up tires, we're going to have a bunch
bigger problem. And if we punish the remainder of the districts because of District 4, I think we'll all be getting phone calls soon enough.
So if we can, have some conversations with those that have asked questions. I don't think we've asked anything for follow-up with the exception of Senator Irvin and a couple of questions about legal that you can and cannot do. I believe it would be helpful to pull the contracts and agreements because I believe most of that is probably covered in your contract that you have or approved or the agreement that's been approved. And then probably more specifically, the contract is between the district and the processor.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
47:25
okay members and I'll just ask real quick for those that were in the discussion because I want to make sure we're going to do generally what y'all want to do as far as a committee are we wanting to hold that item here in subcommittee which it could still be pulled out for consideration in alc or do we want to send it to alc for future action i mean it
in other words are we going to wait a month to hear it or do we want to go ahead and try to get some of these
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
48:08
issues resolved before friday uh mr chair i i would think it appropriate that we hold it in this committee and then that way if uh if somebody was to come with a plan by friday if that gives us the option to go ahead and pull it away from this committee, that would work. So I'd be happy to make that motion, not in any way saying that we're going to try to do this.
There's going to have to be some, I believe, at least from my standpoint and from what I've heard from others, is that we want some answers as far as the tires that are there and how they're going to handle it to make sure no other money is going to be spent. If they can come with that plan, then I think that we at least need to give them the option to go ahead and do it by Friday. So my motion would be to hold it in this committee. You don't need any motion. We're
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
48:52
good. We're good. All right, thank you. We're going to hold it in committee and then we'll wait for some information. If we get that, then we'll make the motion in full ALC
to pull it out of committee. Thank you, Senator. Thanks. All right, now we're going to move to Section E, Department of Corrections. Thank you, Mr.
William Parrish
Unverified
49:11
Chair. We're in Section E. This is a reallocation of resources for the Department of Corrections. There is no appropriation requested
Chair
Unverified
49:18
in this item. The request is to reassign positions related to the recidivism reentry system. The personnel subcommittee will take up this request on Wednesday. The action on this item will be a recommendation to ALC personnel to approve.
In the regular session, the agencies provided more flexibility by allowing them to request a reallocation of resources to manage and make changes to personnel. So that the appropriation requests and the personal changes are both seen by the appropriate committees, the reallocations will be seen by both peer and then personnel tomorrow. All
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
49:49
right. Thank you, members. We have any questions on E1. This will have a different motion. Representative Tosh, you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
49:59
Can we get the Department of Corrections? I have a quick question.
if you could go ahead and ask your question first of all thank you mr. Chair I know I'm not on this committee and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to ask question I just I just want to make sure I see that we're transferring 150 positions from the Department of Corrections to the Division of Corrections the reentry program based on a piece of legislation that we passed is that correct
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
50:37
and then whoever needs to answer you can identify
Speaker 155
50:43
and then we'll Sonia Wallace human resources administrator for the
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
50:46
Department of Corrections did you hear my question we're transferring your yard your agency is transferring 150 positions over to the reentry program is that the way I read this report currently
Speaker 157
51:00
we're only doing 50 transferring 50 correctional officer positions or corporals we're going to wait and fill those and
Speaker 159
51:07
see how that goes before we take away from our security to okay we are allowed to do up to 150 okay that's what i'm
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
51:18
saying you're asking for authorization for 150 and you're doing 50 now i understand that but i notice these are vacant positions that you already have within the division of corrections so i guess what I was curious about is are you telling this committee that you have a hundred and fifty vacant positions within your agency at this time and you're going to be filling you're just transferring those over to the reentry program we do
Speaker 159
51:48
have some vacancies I don't have the exact number at this time
but we're constantly filling those correctional officer positions so that's why we only wanted to start with 50
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
52:00
at this time. And I understand that, Mr. Chair. I apologize for a couple of follow-up questions, but the report here says 150 vacant positions. So that's the reason I asked the question, are these vacant positions that you're transferring? Because that's what I'm reading in this report, and that's what kind of got my attention as I was reviewing
this so are they new positions or vacant positions these 150 they are vacant positions they are vacant positions one last question mr. chair and I see that when you fill these positions you're doing it at the level of a correctional officer at the rank of corporal so where I'm a little bit confused on that and helped me to understand these are new positions that you're moving over to the reentry program and you're doing that and you're asking for permission for to
reclassify these positions I guess are there already classified as Corrections Corporal what is the rank of a entry level a correctional officer that enters into the Department of Corrections is what would be their rank as far as their grade yeah they're well their rank they've got a rank I'm sure he got organizational structure and they starts out either a correctional officer or corporal or sergeant or lieutenant so what's a level entry officer that goes to work his first day what is his title what is his rank um dexter pain i'm the director for division of correction
Speaker 170
53:29
at different facilities that that changes at our work release facilities they enter as
Speaker 171
53:33
a correctional officer one at our more larger facilities they enter as a corporal so this is the entry level for uh most of our facilities as a corporal so the entry level is a corporal at the majority of our facilities other than our work release facilities and our community correction facilities. Okay, I'm
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
53:54
not going to continue with questions. I do have a couple of issues that I really need to understand
because my concern is an officer that enters at the Division of Corrections, if they're not going into the reentry program, they're actually going to be starting out at a higher level or higher grade than someone that's actually going into the Division of Corrections if it's not the re-entry program based on the explanation I just received, unless
Speaker 173
54:28
I misunderstood. For the re-entry program, we're requesting that they be,
Speaker 159
54:33
and I don't know the proper term, reclassified from a corrections corporal over to a corrections program specialist. So we're turning in these 50 corporal positions so that we can have them reclassified to use for the proper title that is needed for this program. I
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
54:54
promise you I understand all that. I guess my concern is that the Department of Corrections has submitted a report that says they have 150 vacant positions, and those are corporal positions,
which to me, a corporal position, means someone that's had a little tenure there that's been there for a while. And I guess, Mr. Chairman, my concern is that, and I won't continue to restate it, is that how in the world did we go and be able to accumulate 150 vacant positions in the Department of Corrections? I didn't realize y'all had that many vacancies, and they hadn't been filled. i i don't know if you can answer that or not but i'll close with that thanks
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
55:41
all right thank you one thing to keep in mind this is all going to be fully vetted in
the personnel subcommittee we are a stop in the process not because of a rule not because of anything else but at the direction of the chairs in case there was an appropriation tied to the request for the transfer of positions so again the the personnel issues and
maybe more in with some of your questioning you know this isn't the last stop this is the first we're just touching it and then we're you know to pretty much say
Speaker 30
56:08
that there is an appropriation more or less all
right uh i think i got representative rye
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
56:15
first thank you mr chair folks let me ask you this we're talking 150 positions okay how many this year between 2025 and 2026 how many do you actually think that you're going to have to that you're going to have to hire is it just 50 lindsey
Speaker 178
56:36
wallace secretary for the department of corrections i apologize for my voice so the act actually contemplates that we can convert up to 150 positions but we didn't want
to start with that large of a number the act also requires that we have one of these re-entry coordinator specialists at each facility so we're starting with a small number to kind of gauge what we're going to need once we get it in place we're going to also create a couple of positions that are a quality assurance position to help with program evaluation and assessment to sort of help us determine the effectiveness of what we're doing and also create some sort of regional managers to help with these correctional re-entry folks at the facilities so we may need more but
we wanted to start with a lower number before we went and asked for the whole thing so that's why you're seeing the 50 it was just kind of a starting point we know we're at least going to need one maybe two at some of the larger facilities maybe three but we don't know what that's going to look like yet but it works to create sort of case plans it works with re-entry coordination out in community and all of those things related to that so I don't know exactly how many we're going to need, but that's what the act
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
57:53
contemplates. Yes. Follow up, please, sir. Yes, ma'am. But
on page one, it mentions 150 vacant corrections officers positions. Are you just going to have 50 this next year? I mean, that's where I'm going with this. We don't quite know the answer to that
Speaker 178
58:11
yet. So as I said, the 150 is sort of the ceiling. So we can go up to 150 vacant positions if we need to create some more but we didn't want to start with 150 because security is very important right we didn't want to start with the whole 150 so we started with a smaller number that we thought
would be feasible we're going to have to see how easily we're able to hire these folks hopefully that salary will get us some good good applicants we also have talked about hiring formerly incarcerated to help with these sort of re-entry navigation tools so again I don't I don't know exactly how many we're going to need, but we wanted to start with, I guess, the smallest bite at the apple as we could, so we may be back asking for some more, but I didn't want to take all of Director Payne's security folks all at once until we see what the actual need is going to be for
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
59:05
the positions. Okay, so actually we're only talking 50 positions. Yes, sir.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
59:10
Yes, sir. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Representative Payne, are you recognized for a question? Thank you. Just more for a request for information can you
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
59:16
get us the uh information on the staffing levels that you have at these correctional facilities where we're at on that please that way i think it may help us to understand what you're asking for in this document absolutely all right thank you perfect all right members
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
59:32
do we have any other questions all right seeing no other questions again this is not
an actual request for approval we are our motion would be a motion to recommend approval to the ALC Personnel Subcommittee. We've got a motion. We've got a second. Any discussion
on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries. We're going to move to our review items, Section F. Again, we're going to take these both and we'll come back for questions. Thank you. Thank
William Parrish
Unverified
1:00:02
you, Mr. Chair. We're in Section F. These are budget classification transfer requests. F1
Chair
Unverified
1:00:07
is an item for the Department of Labor and Licensing, Contractor Licensing board. It's a $10,000 transfer from operating expenses to conference and travel. According to the request, they project the potential deficit and travel costs. Staff learned they attended a conference in September at the same time there was a system outage that shut down air traffic in the connecting airport, forcing them to extend their stay and nearly exhausting spending authority for the travel on item. Next item is F2. This is for department corrections. It's a $250,000 transfer from operating expenses to professional fees. This
is to cover costs for a dietitian audits and pre-employment psychological assessments. Mr. Chair those are the two BCT requests. All right thank you
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:00:47
members do we have any questions on F1 on F2? What's the will of the committee? We've got
a motion review we've got a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed
motion carries. Members I want to say this I should have said at the beginning I and J be reviewing those if you have any questions be ready for them if not we're going to move on and
adjourn so again I and J on the report section if you have questions be looking at those and have those ready and then we'll move forward all
Chair
Unverified
1:01:24
right section G thank you mr. chairman section G these are miscellaneous federal grant appropriation requests the first one G1 is Department of Human Services Division of County Operations this is for five hundred ninety thousand spending Authority. They have a grant from the USDA for a fraud framework implementation project. The project will enhance SNAP administration and increase oversight through analysis of EBT transactions to detect fraud. G2 is energy environment
division of environmental quality. This is for 3.5 million. They have a grant from the Department of Energy for the weatherization assistance program to increase energy efficiency of homes. G3 is Parks, Heritage, and Tourism division of Heritage. It's a hundred thousand. They have a grant from the National Park Service to support the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. The state match of 40% will come from the real estate transfer tax. G4 is Department of Health, $1.3 million. They have a grant from the CDC to provide emergency response for respiratory disease. The request notes
increasing cases of avian influenza and says the funds will be prioritized to purchase a mobile local health unit, modernized testing at the lab, purchasing supplies, vaccines, and protective equipment g5 is a request from department of health it's 3.8 million they have a grant from the human i'm sorry health resources and services administration for the aids drug assistance program g6 is commerce division workforce services office skills development this is 35.8 million and to establish two positions they have a grant from the u.s department of labor to support the
expansion of manufacturing registered apprenticeships the personnel subcommittee will review the the position titles and their grades in class at the meeting tomorrow. G7 is military, $200,000. They have a grant from the National Guard Bureau, and it's for, there's a needed increase in extra help. G8 is agriculture, $160,000. They have a grant from the Department of Agriculture to support the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, specifically detecting emergency diseases and outbreaks. G9 is public safety, emergency management, $4.1 million. They have a grant from FEMA to
support the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program that develops emergency management capabilities. G10 is Public Safety Emergency Management. Again, this is $2.1 million. They have a grant from FEMA to support the Nonprofit Security Grant Program National Security Supplement, and that does target hardening and physical security enhancements at nonprofits that are at high risk of terrorist attack. G11, Public Safety Emergency Management, $1.2 million. They have a grant from the Department of Homeland Security to achieve the national preparedness goal g12 public safety emergency management 58 000 a grant from fema for the national earthquake
hazards hazards reduction program g13 public safety emergency management 1.5 million they have another grant for the department of homeland security to support non-profit organizations at high risk of terrorist attacks g14 is agriculture this is 7 million they have a grant from the usda to acquire 1300 acres in the mall mill watershed to be held by central arkansas water members this is the item that was held last month and then pulled down before ALC. It has been resubmitted with information showing CAW as a subgrantee. Also included with requests is a report to
response to discussion the subcommittee had in the
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:04:35
last meeting. All right, thank you. If we can go ahead and have someone from the Department of Agriculture start making their way forward, I'm going to read through the
rest. I know there's going to be questions on it. So anyone have questions on G1, 2, 3, 4, questions on 5, 6, 7, 8, 8. We got a question
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:04:58
on 8. That is also Ag Department. Winner, winner. I'm going to keep reading through while they're
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:05:10
coming up. Does anyone going to have questions on 9,
10, 11, 12, or 13? So just Ag Department, if you
all can go ahead and come up, and then Senator Irvin, you're recognized for your question.
Speaker 189
1:05:40
It's good to recognize yourself for the committee. Yeah, you're going to have to hit
Speaker 190
1:05:54
your mic. Thank you, Senator. My name is Sharon Puller. I serve as the Director of Laboratory Services
Speaker 192
1:06:03
at the Arkansas Department of Agriculture. Go ahead. Inu Sazaki, Fiscal Officer, Department
Speaker 193
1:06:09
of Agriculture. Lyle Cunningham, State Forrester, Department of Agriculture.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:06:13
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I just wanted to specifically ask how you're going to utilize this money. First, let me just say thank
you for the job you're doing. You do an excellent job, and just hands down to all the people at work at the State Veterinarian and Diagnostic Lab under USDA and through Department of, not USDA, but Department of Ag. so I appreciate all that you do. But could you speak a little bit more?
Are there specifics about the different things that you're addressing with this
Speaker 190
1:06:49
money, if you don't mind? - Yes, ma'am. First of all, thank you for the words of encouragement. We appreciate all the support we get. Yes, ma'am, we are recognized as a member of National Animal Health Laboratory Network. We are a level two laboratory recognized by the USDA. So these grants will be used to enhance our diagnostic testing capacity, to be able to provide better purchase equipment, micropipets, instruments, etc.,
and to make sure we have top-notch biosafety and biosecurity for personnel safety as we are handling some of these samples that come in for our testing and also to provide quality management and administrative support as well. Thank you. And is
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:07:36
there any updates or have we had any cases of the EHV outbreak that
we've seen in Texas and Oklahoma with the equine? Do you know? Could you answer that?
Speaker 190
1:07:51
Yes, ma'am. We are closely monitoring our Department of Division of Animal Health personnel are closely monitoring the cases. we have received several calls from concerned individuals asking for our assistance and we are keeping track of that information okay well thank you I just I wanted just more a
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:08:06
little more information but also just to be able able to say thank you and I hope hope it's encouraging but really we
really do appreciate it it's really important work that y'all do thank you thank you ma'am And we really appreciate it.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:08:25
Ladies and gentlemen, you're recognized for a question on G8. I'm sorry, G12. I'll
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:08:29
get out until they get it. I've got a question on G12. Okay, we've already
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:08:34
have Ag Department up, so I'm going to jump ahead of you so that we don't make them go back and forth for the Maumelle Water Excellence. Do we have any other questions on G8?
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:08:45
All right, seeing none. Representative Bentley, you are recognized. Thank you, Chairman.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:08:51
I appreciate it. I would just like to ask a couple of questions and why I'm over here.
We are the number one state in the nation right now for people to move to. We need houses built in Arkansas. So you're asking us to give approval for $7 million of tax dollars to be spent on property that is primed for development around Lake Maumelle so that they can't build only homes there. Given the fact that the Pulaski County Quorum Court has passed resolutions to make sure all of the land there in the Lake Maumelle watershed is properly taking care of any builders there and making sure they're not hurting in the tributaries. So I really have some serious heartburn about us giving tax dollars to a water department for them to have more land around Lake Maumelle when the water there is pristine and clear and we need more houses in this area.
So, I'm really heartburn with this, and I want to understand why we're giving another $7 million to Central Arkansas Water, who just got 2 million acres, I mean 2,000 acres out of Perry County, millions of dollars spent over there. I can have no development there, and now you want to get more land. When we, you know, all around Beaver Lake, all around, lots of lakes that we use for water. We have homes around there, beautiful homes. We're the number one state in the nation, need new homes. So, explain to me why we want to use tax dollars to stop development around that area.
Speaker 203
1:10:07
okay also if I could could I have central Arkansas water joining me for this conversation would it be okay
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:10:13
it's fine if you want to have some more answer some questions to them
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:10:20
that'd be fine it's up to the chairman if
you could just go ahead and make yourself or recognize yourself for the committee and then representative Bentley you are recognized to restate your question
Speaker 207
1:10:30
thank you chair my name is Brian Ruppar I'm the watershed protection manager for central Arkansas
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:10:35
water. Okay so just to reaffirm the Pulaski County Quorum Court has passed a
resolution to make sure that any houses that are built around in the Lake Maumelle watershed are protected to make sure the water is protected that the tributaries are protected we know that's been passed by the Quorum Court in Pulaski County and now you're asking us to spend seven million dollars of tax dollars to stop any housing development around Lake Maumelle. I just have some real heartburn with that again seeing that we're the number one state in the nation that people are moving to in these beautiful homes we've done it all around other lakes that are used for water
around the state why are we preventing it here at lake maumelle okay some of those questions i'll
Speaker 203
1:11:15
let caw answer i will speak to the forest legacy program it is designed for very targeted specific purchases to protect productive forest lands across the state. There are forest legacy areas that are identified and approved by the National Forest Legacy Panel, so it's not just open purchasing of land to remove it from production or development. The watershed in
Speaker 204
1:11:41
particular here is one that is in high risk of development, and
Speaker 203
1:11:48
so when we look at this specific purchase,
It's in the headwaters of the Maumelle Lake, of Lake Maumelle. And so it's really a targeted tract that will help protect the water in that area. There's other benefits here as well as we'll continue to have timber production on this land. The Ouachita National Trail runs through this area to Pinnacle State Park. And so there's a lot of multiple-use benefits to the public for this particular tract. i agree with you overall we don't need to be buying land randomly across the state but
so this started at the local level went to the regional level with forest service and then went through national approval of procedures so it's been transparent it's been you know went through the rigor of approval and so these are very targeted purchases we do
Speaker 209
1:12:39
with forest legacy does that help in any way i can see what you're saying
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:12:46
with the land coming into the lake around the maumelle river which is you know again my constituents have been extremely good
stewards of that land that water coming in from the maumelle river into lake maumelle is pristine it has been for generations those people are taking a great good care of that land but on the other side of the lake we've already had some development that's not headwaters coming into the lake. That's prime material by Roland and Little Italy. I care about my district. I want to see development out there. We've already taken 2,000 acres out of Perry County that can never be developed, a land that could have really been some nice houses on there in Perry County. You've already, and we already have, you know, the U.S. forest, the U.S. national government owns
Wachita National Forest, which has 170,000 acres in Perry County. You've taken another 2,000 central Arkansas water, and I can understand a little bit there heading in from Lake Maum, the Balmell River right at the headwaters but you're talking about a lot more around that by rolling and literally and all those places where beautiful homes have already been built and more can be built I don't you know again I just have some real heartburn like if I could look at the list here of how many millions of dollars has been given to central Arkansas water it's a water department it's not a state park I would love much feel better if it was part of you know
Pinnacle State Park or if it's part of you know a state land but it's not we're giving it to a water department. I have some
Speaker 212
1:14:11
real heartburn with that. Thank you for your question. So this property does protect the streams that flow into Lake Maumelle. It was selected because it's proximity towards feeder streams like along Bringle Creek. This is an additional 239, 240 acres in Perry County under this particular grant. We do have plans to work as we do with all our
existing holdings with the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission to allow this to be a public asset for public hunting and fishing and recreational opportunities. You are correct that the zoning was passed for parts of Pulaski County, and that's just one of our protection methods. Ownership is another, and so to maintain that water quality, the reason it's high quality now is because it is forested land. And this purchase would ensure that it's that way for future generations of
Speaker 203
1:15:09
Arkansans that it'll remain forested. I need to follow up also. So these forest legacy acquisitions are from willing sellers. We don't force anyone to
Speaker 204
1:15:20
take, you know, to sell anything. As a matter of fact, if they want to keep a homestead, they're welcome to do that. You know, we really work with landowner this is not a a government you know take of land in any sense and then also uh you mentioned the funding i just want to point out that these forest legacy funds are from the land
water and conservation fund from the federal forest legacy
Speaker 209
1:15:41
program this specific purchase is from the inflation reduction act portion that they received again i would say um we have people on
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:15:49
the maumelle river lawn before it gets to that forested area and this is i don't i don't blame Deltic timber they're struggling financially they want to sell some property that's fine but it's not you know I understand that they want to do one big purchase Deltic timber does to get rid of some property and make some money I understand that but there's landowners all around that area mixed in
with Deltic it's not just all owned by Deltics not all forces a lot of land owners mixed in all in with that so all around little Italy and why I'm out and all that I just I have some real heartburn with this and I will leave it that I'm not a member of the committee so I can't stop it from being voted on but I have some real concerns I just think we're at a time we should be building houses and not stopping production when we have again Pulaski County has great water protection and land protection to make sure that those developers that put houses in there do it correctly and don't hurt any of the tributaries those great protections that have already been passed so chairman I
leave it with that and I just would ask that we
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
1:16:57
hold it not move it you recognize thank you mr.
chair I guess my question is why is the central water going to be the owner of this property why doesn't the state retain that ownership if you're trying to protect the the watershed and would they
be able to sell that property at a future
Speaker 203
1:17:19
date first question we would have to turn that into a state forest and so we would have to look at the cost associated with us to do that the other side of that is you start looking at what entity could carry this because we're looking at benefits over decades we're not looking at five to ten years and so what entity is the entity that can do that and CAW with their work in that area to me is the proper entity to do
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
1:17:46
that is there any language in this purchase that would require them to always maintain it
Speaker 203
1:17:54
as there are provisions uh if they want to sell the land it basically takes i believe congressional approval to do that and you repeat that
Speaker 204
1:18:03
i'm sorry it would basically take uh congressional congressional approval for them to do
Speaker 212
1:18:11
that so there's a there's a deed restriction placed on any property that's included, there's a notice of grant agreement filed, the
property has to remain in perpetuity as forested conditions. If it's not, if it wants to be disposed of, the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture has to approve that disposal and then the Secretary also has
Speaker 207
1:18:35
to request then reimbursement back for that investment. Whatever percentage was paid for that property, they get that same percentage back on any sale. I've been working with the Forest Legacy Program for over 20 years, formerly with a state agency. The only time I've ever seen a conversion
was when the highway was expanded in Calhoun County, Highway 167. And it took about two years to transfer that property, even though the Department of Transportation had condemnation rights. It was about a two-year process to get rid of it because it was for
Speaker 212
1:19:05
another public good. So it is possible to dispose of it, but it's highly unlikely. And if it does, the CW would never receive the financial
Speaker 207
1:19:14
benefit or gain for that. It would go back to the program. Excuse me. Okay, thank you.
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:19:24
All right. Representative Rye, you're recognized for a question. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have nothing whatsoever against this right here. But I want to say this, and I've been wanting to say it for a long time. We're taking care of larger places, but we're not looking at the smaller places like we should. We have basically $25 million a year for three years that's going to go to water, okay?
That's not enough. I knew that was not enough money. But what's bothering me, guys, is I've got a town that cannot drink their own water, and they're going to another town to wash their clothes. Now, I just had to say that because I've been,
for a long time, that's bothered me. And I wish y'all would
look into these things a little bit better, okay? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:20:30
Thank you, sir. Senator Irvin, you're recognized for a question. Thank you. Sorry,
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:20:34
can you just on this, which color is it that you're proposing to purchase? I have it in color online, but I'm just trying to understand what I'm looking at because it doesn't make it clear to me. Let me get to the map real quick. I just want to know what it is that we're purchasing and how much of it's in Ploski County and what's in Perry County. it but see this the second map you have yeah that's what i'm looking at so the creeks track
Speaker 203
1:21:04
the area in uh the orange color will be the acquisition okay hold on
Speaker 209
1:21:16
so it'd be i see just east of the national forest land there so orange
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:21:23
so east and north is that correct yes northwest yes so east and northwest okay
okay so all right well okay and then did you have uh what what's the property tax associated with that and i and i guess yes that was one of my questions that i had which which was why I held it. So I know
Speaker 204
1:21:50
the Perry County was in question, and I believe we determined it was about $48 for that because it's not a large portion actually in Perry County. For the Pulaski, I don't
Speaker 207
1:22:00
know off the top of my head. For Pulaski County, it's about $2,000 in annual taxes.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:22:07
And that's just because of. For about 1,000 acres. Okay, but that's not as it's developed. Like it has the potential to be more if it were developed into homes or things like that, right? so i mean but so we don't really have that figure okay and then did you say that was it plus that i hear that i understand that perry county passed um passed uh took action opposing this is that correct uh did pulaski county i'm not aware of that either well i understood that to be the case
but that might be a question for ca okay i just didn't know if you do y'all go through any of those channels
when you're doing these types do you go to your county do we go to
Speaker 209
1:22:54
the counties and and discuss this with them not with the counties
Speaker 204
1:22:59
no there's like excuse me so there's a process um you know applicant submits an application it goes before the forest stewardship committee and then it goes to uh final submission to the u.s forest service uh for the region eight preparation it goes to the national panel uh for review there for the forest legacy program
national panel the president and OMB uh then approves it it goes through congress and then comes back through the USDA for final approval okay and then you
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:23:27
you had spoken about uh some a partnership with game and fish is that could you restate that for me
Speaker 235
1:23:35
currently we lease the majority of our our holdings around Lake Maumelle to the Arkansas game and
Speaker 207
1:23:40
fish commission as part the Maumelle River Wildlife Management Area. They were looking for opportunities for recreation
near large population centers and so I believe the original agreement was in 2013 to start leasing our properties to open it up. So we provide the property at a discounted rate about 10% of what they pay private timberlands to lease property for and then we allow that public access and work with them cooperatively to manage access points regulations okay for hunting hiking whatever fishing
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:24:14
birding okay all right okay um all right thank you
Chair
Unverified
1:24:20
all right senator boyd you're recognized
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:24:30
for a question sorry that was an accident hate to hear that all right members do we
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
1:24:39
have any other questions on g14 all right seeing no other questions thank you i'm going to circle back
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:24:47
uh department public safety g12 we're we're good thanks g12 representative ladyman
Do you all know if he is still here? He had
a question on G12. Representative Bladyman, do you want to ask your question on G12? Okay. All right, thank you, members. Seeing no other question, what is the will of the committee? Representative Vaught, you are, no, you're not.
Hold on. Recognize for a motion.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:25:33
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I make a motion that we pull G14 for a separate vote and that everything else would be approved. Okay. All right,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:25:44
we have a motion to review items G1 through 13. We'll
go take those separate motions. We're going to
move forward. So any discussion on that motion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, motion carries. Now we're going to take up G14. We've got a motion to review because we're doing it separately. Is there any discussion on that motion on G14? All right, seeing no discussion, we've got a motion.
Do we have a second? We've got a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed? all those in favor signify by saying aye all those opposed all right motion fails
all right we're going to move on to our section h pay plan appropriation request one and two thank you mr chair
Chair
Unverified
1:26:47
we're in section h these are pay plan appropriation requests The Board of Examiners and Counseling request $5,000 in pay plan appropriation for extra help and the Board of Nursing request $122,000 for regular salaries, match, and extra help.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:27:05
Members, do you have any questions on H1 or 2? All right, seeing no questions, what's the will of the committee? We've got a motion to review. We've got a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed, motion carries. We're out of reports. Members, do we have any questions on the reports? seeing no questions on the reports they stand as reviewed any other business seeing none members with that I want to back up on the g14 it's going to be in a
very similar posture to what what's happened earlier except this one had a motion it just has a motion to not review I'm assuming that there'll be further discussion on g14 in the full ALC on Friday so just as a heads up With that, we are adjourned.
Agenda
A. Call to Order
Items for Approval
B. Various Temporary Appropriation Requests
C. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Appropriation Requests
D. Restricted Reserve Fund Transfer Request
Item to Recommend Approval to ALC-Personnel
E. Reallocation Resources 1. Department of Corrections
Items for Review
F. Budget Classification Transfer Requests
G. Miscellaneous Federal Grant Appropriation Requests
H. Pay Plan Appropriation Requests
I. Quarterly Report
J. Monthly Reports
K. Other Business
L. Adjournment
Documents
Speakers
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
William Parrish
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 7
Speaker 10
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
Speaker 21
Speaker 13
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
Speaker 35
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Speaker 43
Speaker 54
Speaker 57
Speaker 63
Speaker 66
Speaker 60
Speaker 76
Speaker 81
Speaker 72
Speaker 86
Senator Justin Boyd
Unverified
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 69
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Representative Dwight Tosh
Unverified
Speaker 155
Speaker 157
Speaker 159
Speaker 170
Speaker 171
Speaker 173
Speaker 30
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
Speaker 178
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Speaker 189
Speaker 190
Speaker 192
Speaker 193
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
Speaker 203
Speaker 207
Speaker 204
Speaker 209
Speaker 212
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 235