State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs-Senate

Okay all right. Senator if you're ready will be ready for. To handle this. I did send an extra Texas Texas senator garner since the new year had a question Senator Ballenger I'm not sure but. everybody had it posted in in a staff and given notice so hopefully everybody's here that wants to be here you're recognized Sir for presentation of the bill. Thank you Mr chairman and members of this house bill of ten oh three eight six same bill when I was here yesterday to present and if there are questions I have people here that can answer some technical questions for you. Well would you mind stating what the answer is to what held us up yesterday what you found out I will. So she's going to help with the questions Senator. Yes Mister chairman okay in would you please state your name and who you represent the record sure Amanda Yarborough I'm counsel for the department department of public safety okay and if I could just get. Just a brief synopsis of the questions that you want answered well unfortunately vice chair is not here that had most the questions the questions seem to center around the fact that the possibility of someone that is not certified as a law enforcement officer being issued weapon and having law enforcement authority anywhere they go in the state of Arkansas. Think I've got really the gist of the heart and medicine that was a question members correct me if I'm wrong on that but I believe that was the the main question that often pulling it down for discussion. So it's my understanding the way the bill is written yes they would have statewide these officers would have statewide general authority and they would not be subject to minimum standards that they're set by class currently but the idea as I understand it is that. Anyone will work under the class standards and the person that is hired now will be subject to those standards as per Legislative rule and anything that needed to be fixed would be fixed in a general session. Okay at one question that came to me Senator sample and as is and I I think I know the answer but I will make sure to get get it from you we had a bill last session that talked about moving the capitol police. Outside and away from the secretary of state and I had someone that contacted me said is this a move to do exactly what that bill did without really stating and I said I I have not heard that in testimony I've not heard it stated it seems like it's just an additional security measure for each chamber but would you you please speak to it that's not the intent of this bill this is this bill is to create another. For lack of better term agency for this for the legislature right okay. All right members any court Senator Tucker. Thank you Mr what's the rationale for the statewide jurisdiction. This this will. This will give the. Legislature both bodies a house in the Senate. Protection while they move about the state if there's some meeting outside this. Facility worker it million rural development committee or meetings retirement committee meetings or something that will give us a level of protection for the membership without having to take independent phone local jurisdictions or state police service or the state capitol police. Okay. M. and what's the process for hiring I mean is it essentially what is now where the Speaker in the pro to kind of do the hiring or is membership element I can't speak for the House for the day for the Senate it will go through The heart committee deficiency. It's it's our rule action sufficiency after a rule proficiency efficient use and different rates are. Okay all right thank you Mr right. Members any other questions on this. we do have one person that is signed up to speak for the bill and I believe we should giving the owner speak for it since you've made the effort to be here unless you have anything else I have thank you for your your help thank you members we get Speaker Matthew Shepherd here. To speak for the bill. Mr Speaker you're recognized thank you Sir thank you Mr chairman. So I just came down just to because this bill ridge named House I thought that I could give a little bit of background and and possibly follow up on a few of the questions have been asked. So what what it but precipitated this bill is that we on the house and we had a vacancy in our sergeant of arms position around the beginning of session and we through a combination of other things we hired in an individual who has extensive federal law enforcement experience to serve in that position also not only is sergeant arms but I think we also referred to as chief security officer and he handles a number of things for us A wealth of wide range of things for us but in the course of that coming out of last session a question road just in terms of What a story if he were to have to take any kind of. Action in the course of his perfect performance of his duties where would that fall and so that's what brought about that we felt like we need to run something just to clarify that it was in an effort to create any kind of new law enforcement apparatus as to the questions about secretary of state I think somebody to ask about that I reached out secretary of state actually earlier today because I I meant to do that several what days ago but got tied up on other things just let him know that this is not an effort to detract from capitol police or to to for anything in his office this is just strictly to clear up maybe what could be a gray area you can see in the bill that at the outset I think of the topic you know it talks about that it's the. Provide Senator Eddie you know during meetings or other official functions the General Assembly and then I think there's a question about the state wide at the wordy that when you read that in concert with that initial section it's really intended that if if we have meetings out about the state as hopefully we can get back to you on a more regular basis like we used to just allows him to be at those meetings many of you probably are familiar with with that individual he's he's been in most of our meetings through the general but again it was just a an effort to try and clear up a greater that might exist and as we move move towards fiscal session or even the next regular session if there's other things to be done two you know further clarify that certainly would be open to do that but just want to give a little bit more background on on what brought about this piece of legislation. Right. Members any other questions actually had a message for Senator Garner he's he's good on good on all this so. Schicchi coming. Senator English thanks so. If this person leaves then what would be the criteria. Not all state law. Back on the. Hi person what we your job to be for a new person well I think that I think that part of part of that as far as the job description goes honestly because this is somewhat of a new position in terms of of their responsibility that's part of what we've kind of worked on on our end as far as the different things that that that type of position might be in honestly that's one of the things I've I've leaned on this individual that understanding that that at some point you know he he may not be there and and what was that position look like going forward as far as right now the criteria and who could be hired I guess that You know I guess spot by virtue of this bill there's there's maybe not the in the strict parameters but. What honestly as for me or I think virtually anybody else around here obviously if you're hiring somebody and do you would you would whether it says it or not you're beholden to up to a high standard again this is really just to try and clear up that gray area for the time being and if we need to you know go back and and look at tightening that up even further as we move forward I'm certainly willing to have that discussion. Thank you senator. We don't have. Standards somebody has to meet the. Hold this position. I'm sorry hi. That. Unless. Right. Any other questions Senator Tucker. It I'd I really agree with Senator English the language I mean the statewide jurisdiction gives me some pause but just allowing the house and Senate to set their own criteria their own training qualification centers that language. I just don't don't understand the rationale for that since the IRS sounds eminently qualified and it's great and I trust as long as your Speaker and and head of House Management that whoever is hired will be well qualified the same for for the Pro Temp now but we're not set rules for you and and president Hickey you know and so that's that's really my concern about the language in there. I again I you know I'd be willing to have a discussion as we move forward about what that looks like if there's additional language that could be added at some point you know in the future again we were just trying to provide some clarity and you know the other thing that that point out is I think both on the house in the Senate in there already individuals that are hired at both ends for security purposes and I you know I don't know whether it's our red coats or or their counterparts on the Senate in in both chambers already have some degree of Hiring in place but that's a fair point and again I would be be glad to have you know further discussion about you know putting forth additional legislation to tighten it up. All right members anything else on this. Senator sample thank you for bringing the bill thank you for your Speaker shepherd for the House bringing it up in particular I think that it's been over two I mean we've been fortunate up to this point we have had some other things but it's obvious the times in which we live it's important we take responsibility for our own security inner chambers someway Senator sample you have anything for all right he's close the bill I have a motion of motion do pass from Senator Bledsoe and the second from Senator English all those of favour say aye. All opposed no thank you senator