Arkansas Independent Citizens Commission
Video
Transcript
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 6, 2026
Rose Mims
Unverified
0:00
to the mic so that because we are of course um live and uh for others to be able to hear including the the audience that is here and interested in our work um and i want to thank you all for coming today um we fortunately are coming to uh back into session and it's nice to see you again and i'm obviously noticed that our
uh our vice chair tommy may is not here um we will check on him later but But according to Wendy, she has not been able to reach him. So perhaps keep him in your prayers. And I would like to call the roll now, and then I will declare a quorum. So starting Frank Gwynn, Jan Zimmerman, Robert Hussong, Larry McCrady, Clark Smith, and myself, and I will declare a quorum.
We have our minutes in your packet from the last meeting, which was on November 15, a fairly short meeting at that time to approve after publication of the Commission's recommendations for salary adjustment, and we set our meeting for today, and of course, when you set a meeting
a year out, you think, it'll never come, but it's here. I will entertain any amendments, revisions, corrections to the minutes and I would if no no amendments I will
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
2:26
entertain a motion madam chair I'll move that the minutes from October 25th
Speaker 8
2:35
2024 be approved thank you a second second we
Rose Mims
Unverified
2:41
have a motion and a second to approve as
drafted any other comments questions before we take a
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
2:50
vote if not I will ask for everyone who agrees to the minutes to say yay anyone who disagrees nay they will be approved unanimously I'd also like to point out
Rose Mims
Unverified
3:09
that we have present with us, um, uh, from the attorney general's office. And if you will announce your name,
I think this is your first time
Speaker 13
3:21
to be here. Correct. No, no, ma'am. I was here last. Okay.
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
3:26
Sorry. My name is Aaron Lowry with Aaron Lowry. Thank you very much, Aaron, for being present. Keep us on the straight and narrow. Okay. Now I'm going to turn the meeting
Rose Mims
Unverified
3:40
over for a presentation, which I've looked at online, but I'm very glad we have a way to look at it together.
And this will be regarding our duties, responsibilities, history, constitutional limitations, and our considerations that we do to review salaries. If any of you in the audience would like to see it, you can come forward and sit over here if you want. I'm not telling you to. I'm just saying it's available. Please go ahead, T.J. Thank you, Madam
Speaker 19
4:21
Chair. T.J. Fowler, I'm legal counsel for the Auditor of State.
As you all probably recall, I think two meetings ago, you all had passed a resolution that you all would like to kind of go over
Speaker 21
4:33
the duties at each meeting briefly and then actually consider all of the salaries under your purview each time
Speaker 19
4:40
rather than just choosing them piecemeal or waiting to see if letters had arisen. The presentation is largely similar to the one I gave last year, just with updates for new information. So go ahead and start. Section 1 is the constitutional requirements that are placed upon this body.
So as you know, this was created by a constitutional amendment in 2014. The main things y'all are here to do are to approve the salaries of the elected executive constitutional offices, the legislature, and the elected judicial offices. And then before regular sessions, you also make recommendations for the per diem expense reimbursements and mileage reimbursements for the general assembly. You have some limitations placed on what you can and cannot do.
So, y'all must consider the overall economic conditions of the state of Arkansas at the time you make your decisions. The amendment requires that the salaries of the circuit court judges be uniform throughout the state. You cannot diminish the salaries of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, chief judge or judges of the Court of Appeals, the judges of the Supreme Court, circuit judges, or the district court judges. Salary revisions may not exceed 15%, and then you have the public comment period after you make a determination, and that's why we have to come back in a couple weeks after you all make a decision.
Historical overview, and I'll just do this briefly because we did it last time, this body was initially created because it had become untenable for elected officers to set their own salaries for just public policy, political, and real-world reasons. The first commission came in and was tasked with sort of an overall overarching revision. They had a very comprehensive set of meetings over the course of many months, and these were the items that
they determined that they needed to review in order to set these salaries. The qualification and skill necessary for each office, the overall level of responsibility implicit in each office, the total compensation of each position, including benefits other than salaries, travel and necessary out-of-office expenses, any per diem mileage or expenses received by the officials, the overall public interest of the citizens of Arkansas, salaries in comparator states, and any other factors that y'all deem reasonable and appropriate.
The historical revisions by the ICC I've included in your packets so that y'all can see them. There's no reason to go through this in detail, but this is just every revision by position that you have. So the first page in the first slide is the legislature. The second page in slide are executive constitutional officers. And the third page in slide are all of your judicial positions and your prosecutors. And just a reminder, the prosecutors came on a little bit later by statute, not in the Constitution.
That's why they don't have revisions at the same times as the judges in the early years. So at the last year, y'all had asked me to compile changes to all of state government employees, and there were quite a few last year because of some changes in the pay plan under Governor Sanders. There are less so this year. Governor Sanders did allow performance increases for eligible employees effective on 622.
Employees who received an overall rating that Seeds Expectations 4 could receive a 3% increase. And employees who received an overall rating of Meets Expectations 3 were eligible to receive a 1% increase. That doesn't mean they actually received them. They were only eligible to do so. There was the new pay plan that went into effect. It was implemented on 629. And this created all new titles and grades for a number of different categories of public employee. Any employee whose salary fell below the new minimum grade were automatically raised.
All the others were still discretionary with whoever their payroll and budgeting officer were. So of the approximately 22,700 executive branch employees, about 16,400 received a salary increase. But the amounts of those increases were vastly different. Some were very small. Some were very large. About 6,300 did not receive any increase under the pay plan. And as you all recall, last year I provided the comparator states for elected representatives.
I selected the surrounding states. Last year I had a big disclaimer about how it's really hard to compare one state's treasurer to another state's treasurer. This year, I've tried to dig a little bit deeper since I had some more time. So you'll see I have some added slides here. Governors, pretty comparable. You can see what the surrounding states are. I went ahead and included the median and the mean. So the median for governors in the surrounding states is $158,307. The mean is $158,237.
We're a little over the mean and the median with $166,771 for the governor. That transition took way too long on PowerPoint. For attorneys general, the median is 153,750, and the mean is 157,115. We're pretty close to both the median and just a little bit below the mean with 153,760,68. And here is where I have tried to do a little bit more digging.
We had Secretaries of State last year. So secretaries of state, median is 146,260, mean is 147,159. We're considerably below both of those with 106,449,70. And then this is where I really did more digging. And what the treasurer or auditor or comptroller do in other states is not necessarily a one-to-one comparator with Arkansas, but there are three or four core functions that are performed in each state. And I tried to find
the officers that perform those core functions. So in Arkansas, among the things the treasury does, and we'll talk about those in more depth here in another slide, but they invest all the cash funds for the state of Arkansas. They act as the state's bank. And so I looked for who are the officers that do those core functions. And then in Arkansas, the auditor acts as the state's payroll officer. it issues warrants and does the accounting, and it administers the state's unclaimed property program. So I tried to look for the offices that do those. In these states, each of these offices
does some of those functions. It may not do all of those functions. And as you can see, in Arkansas, we're currently paying the treasurer and auditor $100,535.83. The median, if you take those surrounding states is 139,988 and the mean is 142,063,07. So we're pretty considerably below the median, the mean for both of those offices. I still have the slides that kind of attempt to
summarize the main duties of each office. I've updated them, changed materially, executive powers, They have the legislative power sessions, they can veto bills. They are responsible for preparing state budget and submitting the budget to the legislature. Appointment powers for all heads of state department and for boards of the Arkansas National Guard and the diplomatic representative for Arkansas at a national level. Lieutenant Governor is a part-time position, presides over the Senate with a tie-breaking vote,
Serves as acting governor in the governor's stead and is first in line of succession for the governorship. The Attorney General, and I won't read the entire slide, but the Attorney General is the state's lawyer and represents the state in all matters in which the state is a party. And is kind enough to provide a representative to all boards and commissions to come and make sure that we understand the guardrails that are placed upon us by the Constitution or the enabling legislation. Some of the updates, I will go through and read them.
The one big update here is obviously salaries have changed over the last year for the employees. So the Attorney General now manages an office of 192 full-time employees and 102 attorney professionals. Those numbers are both up from last year. Earning salaries between $84,000 and $199,999. Both of those numbers are up from last year. The Secretary of State has primary roles as the Chief Election Officer for the state, the Business and Commercial Services Officer for the state.
They maintain the Capitol facilities, and they also control the Arkansas Capitol Police Force, which that number has grown since last year, with now 49 sworn personnel and five staff. They are the chair of the State Board of Elections, the chair of the Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission, an ex-officio member of the Capital Zoning District, and an ex-officio member of the INA board. What is the
Speaker 24
14:09
INA board? I have no idea, but I'll look it up and tell you here in just a moment. Actually, Mike, you were at the Secretary of State's office.
Speaker 19
14:22
Do you know what the INA board is? No? I'll look it up and I'll get back to you. The Treasurer of State operates as the state's banker. It handles $70 million in daily deposits from various local, state, and federal sources, processes about 2,000 to 3,000 checks a day, and reconciles 3,000 accounts daily, oversees the state's investment portfolio, and this number has gone up. That portfolio is now $11.6 billion.
The number of employees has stayed the same, but the salary range has gone up from, it is now between $48,000 and $186,222. And the treasurer serves on a number of board and commissions. The auditor of state is essentially the state's accountant. It's the office I work for. It was originally created as a check and balance of the state treasury. It has audit authority, although that audit authority has largely been sent over to legislative audit these days.
We issue every state warrant from any office in the state. So any agency that is making a payment, whether it's a paper warrant or whether it's an electronic warrant, it is issued through our office. If you ever get your tax return and it's a check and isn't direct deposited and you peel the edges off, we print those in our offices. We've got a big printer, and we do that every morning. We're the payroll officer for all the elected state officials, which is why we staff this board, and we administer the state's unclaimed property program, which you've probably heard called the Great Arkansas Treasure Hunt.
And we're a member of these boards. Salaries have gone up a little bit in our office. They now are between $47,255 and $165,160. The land commissioner is responsible for all state public lands. They research and notify people on payment of delinquent property taxes. They conduct public auctions of delinquent properties, process applications by former property owners to receive excess proceeds.
And they serve as a leasing agent for natural resources, process requests for patent information on land deeds, and they serve as a custodian of Arkansas's original land records. If you've never been to their office right down the hall and seen those original land records, they're pretty neat. That's worth going over and seeing. General Assembly, as you all know, is the bicameral legislature here, 35 senators, 100 House members. They remain a part-time position despite ALC meeting year-round these days.
Regular sessions in odd-numbered years, fiscal sessions in even-numbered years. Sessions last about 60 days. The governor can call special sessions. They're responsible for making our laws and
Speaker 24
17:10
creating our budgets. And with that, I'll just see if anyone
Speaker 19
17:16
has any questions. Is there anything you feel like I left out? Anything you'd like me to try and add the next time I do
Speaker 14
17:26
this presentation. I do have a question for clarification on the auditor of state. You said
Rose Mims
Unverified
17:31
you have here granted executive branch audit authority. Now, is that just for executive branch folks? Give me some help on that. Sure. So the auditor
Speaker 35
17:44
of state was originally created by the 1874 Constitution to audit all
Speaker 19
17:50
of state government. So not just the executive branch. I say I wrote this and I wrote executive branch audit authority because with
Speaker 21
17:59
the advent of the Bureau of Legislative
Audit coming up in the 60s and 70s, they really do all of the state auditing and we do not perform that function any longer. Even with the executive branch? Even with the executive branch. The Bureau of legislative audits, the executive branch, they audit us. We still have the statutory authority to do it. It just isn't done. Okay. That has been shifted
Speaker 31
18:25
over to BLA. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else have a question?
Rose Mims
Unverified
18:40
It's always good to go back because, you know, we've slept a few
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
18:48
times since the last meeting. And, you know, I appreciate you
Rose Mims
Unverified
18:56
giving us the recent comparisons of constitutional officers from around the state with the caveat that some of their responsibilities are not exactly the same.
Um, so, um, if there are no other questions, we will move on to our next agenda item. Um, and our next agenda item is a consideration, we do this at the beginning of each year, a consideration of the stipend for those of us in the ICC commission.
And so I will entertain a discussion of, in the past, we have not done that. We have not asked for a
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
19:48
stipend. But I will, I think I need to raise it again and see if anyone wants to make a motion to consider a stipend for the ICC. In
Rose Mims
Unverified
20:13
view of silence, don't everybody speak up at once.
And please, I don't think any of us are shrinking violets. If we felt that that was appropriate, we would raise our voices. So in view of that, I will consider that our prior vote stands, that we will not be asking for a stipend for coming to each meeting. And, as mentioned just earlier by T.J., we do have to consider amounts to be paid to the members of the General Assembly for their per diem, reimbursement for expenses, and reimbursement for mileage under Article 19, Section 31, I-3b.
So they have to have this before they come into session, right? The
Speaker 21
21:14
Constitution requires that y'all provide this before a regular session. Yeah. It's not required before a fiscal session. Right. So y'all considered this at the last meeting before the regular session. Okay. Y'all, it is within your purview to make revisions if you would like to, but there's no requirement that you consider it this year.
Rose Mims
Unverified
21:36
Okay. I will open the floor for discussion as to whether we want to make it for this year,
so it's really biannual, or to pass that for this year. And I really don't have
Speaker 15
21:51
any figures on that at this time, so I'll open it for discussion. In other words, what we voted for
Rose Mims
Unverified
22:00
the last time remains, right, for two years. Yes. Madam Chair, TJ, do you remember
Speaker 50
22:08
what we set it for last year? I think we tracked federal reimbursement rates.
Speaker 21
22:14
You did, and I was just about to pull up the resolution, and I'll put it up on the board so you can see it. Give me just a second. And I also looked up, and thank you, Marty, INA, you had asked about it. They are the Information Network of Arkansas, and it
Speaker 54
22:31
is a board for thought leadership in Arkansas. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Rose Mims
Unverified
22:37
So, uh, we'll, we'll see what the, I don't know, even know if the federal reimbursement rate has changed since then, but, um, we did that.
We, we adopted the federal reimbursement rate last
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
22:50
time, and we'll wait on TJ to pull that up. If
Speaker 19
23:14
us who are. All right. This is the recommendations that were sent on September 24th, 2024.
Number one, you recommend that the House and Senate follow the mileage reimbursement guidance published by DF&A's Financial Management Guide for Arkansas State Employees. You recommended that they follow the expense reimbursement guidance published by DF&A for Arkansas State employees, and then you recommended that the House and Senate follow the per diem guidance published by DF&A's Financial Management Guide for Arkansas State Employees to the extent it exists, and if that Financial Management Guide does not provide adequate per diem guidance, alternatively, you recommend that they follow the U.S. GSA
recommendations. So there were no amounts
Speaker 21
23:56
given. You just said to follow the most recently published guidance by the authorities in
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
24:06
those sectors. Anybody want to make a comment or make
Rose Mims
Unverified
24:11
a recommendation about whether we should forego this consideration during this session? Madam Chair, I'm fine keeping
Speaker 50
24:22
it how we voted last year.
What I would say is maybe a note for next year's consideration that we get the amounts so we can understand what DF&A has -- includes in those manuals. But given that it's good for
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
24:38
two years, I suggest we just leave it as is. This would be
Speaker 14
24:46
my recommendation. MS. Any other comments? MS. I agree. MS.
Rose Mims
Unverified
24:49
Does everybody agree? Okay. We -- that will be the vote to have it considered,
which we would do anyway for the beginning of the next biennial, and also have those figures, whether they're in the form of policy or manuals, so we can see exactly what those figures are. Now we come to the real meat of the coconut, so to speak, commission review of salary adjustments. And I would like to bring up something that we have regularly done in the past, which is invited a, usually it was Mr. Shelnut who came and gave us an economic forecast.
And I think that's one of the considerations we have to look at, which is the economic conditions for the state of Arkansas. And so I'm not sure who that is now.
Speaker 15
25:53
Do you know, T.J.? It would be Mr. Silva at DF&A, their chief economist. And
Speaker 21
26:00
he had a conversation. The ALC happens to be meeting this morning. I was sitting in the ALC meeting this morning and I listened to his economic report so as best I
heard it okay which was the state is that working
Speaker 35
26:33
now yes the state is currently 74 million dollars ahead of the last quarter this quarter is
Speaker 19
26:39
on pace they don't anticipate fluctuations away from their forecast for the remainder of the fiscal year. There are some markers out in the future that could indicate some downturn,
but they don't see that downturn coming in any sizable way this
Speaker 24
26:53
fiscal year. That's the 10-second version of his 20-minute presentation to
Speaker 14
26:59
the ALC. One of the questions we normally consider, You'll notice in the letters
Rose Mims
Unverified
27:06
from different folks that have submitted letters, they're asking for COLA, some of them. And I'm not real familiar with what the stats are right now
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
27:19
on the inflation rate since our last meeting. So I think we do
Rose Mims
Unverified
27:30
need to have that information. And I don't know if, um, if, um, the state's economist, uh, looks at what may be happening with exports, um, in the agricultural field and how that will affect the state. Um, and so I'm, I'm, I guess I have some questions and I'd like to have people on the commission, our commissioners, uh, state whatever questions you have that you would like to get information before, um, making a recommendation.
um any anybody who has questions that they yes robert uh
Speaker 85
28:24
got a comment okay you know based on the slide that tj uh had a few minutes ago if we stay consistent with what the governor did for the for the state back in june You know, those employees who had an exceeds expectation received a 3%
and then meets expectation, which was a 3%, I believe. It was a 1%. And that's consistent with what we've seen outside the government. Is that what you've seen in business? Yes, ma'am.
Speaker 19
28:57
Internet search for one of your questions. What is the current inflation rate? It looks like as
Speaker 24
29:02
of August 2025, we're showing the current inflation rate in the U.S. at about 2.9%. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 14
29:17
Any other questions or comments? I should also
Speaker 19
29:21
note, I don't know how you all plan to go through these salary adjustments. Is there more than
Speaker 21
29:28
one microphone on? Let me get a little feedback. Sorry. there were some letters sent in by various offices. So when y'all get to those particular offices, if y'all plan to take them in turn, I'll just highlight that either there was or there was not a letter from that office. I understand, and I
Rose Mims
Unverified
29:53
think our decision at the last meeting was
Speaker 14
29:55
we were not going to require a letter, but that information would be
Rose Mims
Unverified
30:16
helpful. Thank you. Officers, and I'd like to, in using the comparisons you did, let's start with the governor.
So here we have the salary comparisons for the governor, if you want to pull that up so it can be seen quickly. We know, as you said, the governor of Arkansas is, the median is 158 and the governor is receiving around 166. Any comments or questions or discussion?
Speaker 50
31:04
I have a question, Madam Chair, and it's for TJ. You referenced it, saying that they weren't required to submit letters, but was there a solicitation to the various offices to submit input if they chose to? Or was it just those who on
Speaker 35
31:23
their own decided to submit it if they so desired? We sent out correspondence
Speaker 19
31:28
to the different offices that this commission has a purview over and just said, reminder, this meeting's coming up.
If you want to send in some sort of letter, if you want to make a comment, let us know. But obviously, there's no requirement to do so. And frankly, this commission
Speaker 21
31:43
was created because of the realities of those offices. It's not always possible to do so. I hear you.
Rose Mims
Unverified
31:59
Good. And I guess what I'd like to get a feel for from the members, do you want to look at each
of these individually and then as a group, or do you want to look at them individually and
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
32:15
decide? I'd like, you know, you understand what I'm saying. on the constitutional officers,
Speaker 101
32:26
that category. Yes? Madam Chairman, I think I would appreciate examining each office individually. Okay.
Rose Mims
Unverified
32:32
And I think there is some difference in each office generally. So any other comments?
Okay. We will do it individually then. Any discussion on the governor's salary based upon the information we have been given, as well as the economic forecast and the inflation rate? Madam, don't. Yes. You want to turn on your, is it
Speaker 105
33:10
Looking at the median and mean of the governor's pay, it seems like we're already above it. And considering that there may be some headwinds coming, I do believe we should give some kind of a raise, but maybe on the lower scale. So I personally would be leaning more towards like 1%, just preparing for what, especially given that you've made the comments about our
Rose Mims
Unverified
33:43
and the headwinds, their feelings. I'm not going to get into the politics of it, but the exports, especially in the soybean and rice area, which are big, and in the situation with international trade, period.
Rose Mims
Unverified
34:10
Just to clarify, Madam Chair, that was more for discussion. Okay. Discussion. Any comments based upon
Speaker 85
34:18
that recommendation? I tend to agree on that. We're 7% or 8% above the mean and the median. So, you know, something on the lower scale, such as 1% or so for that particular position, for the government position.
Speaker 16
34:50
entertain a motion madam chair I'd make the motion to
Speaker 15
34:58
increase the governor's pay by one percent okay second second
Rose Mims
Unverified
35:02
second thank you any further discussion one now that the motion has been made and seconded. If not, I'll call for the vote. And all in favor of the motion, please signify
by saying yay. All opposed, say nay. Any abstentions? Okay. That will be adopted unanimously uh, on the governor. Now we will go to the attorney. I'm doing this in the order of the slides, the attorney of the attorney general's, uh, salary. If you'll notice, it's almost right
on target with the median um and uh surrounding uh oh would i say oklahoma has a hunt is uh 20 000 more um tennessee is quite a bit more so it it's probably interestingly texas is about the same the Attorney General and then Kentucky so I would entertain most of a discussion
Speaker 15
36:26
about any raise or adjustment to the Attorney General's compensation with
Rose Mims
Unverified
36:36
all the factors we've already talked about. Ms. Zimmerman.
Speaker 117
36:48
Ms. Chairman, it seems to me that we should maybe proceed with a 1% increase for this office.
Speaker 117
37:10
not, I'll entertain a motion. Madam Chairman, I so move 1% increase for the Office of
Speaker 9
37:16
Attorney General. Okay. Thank you. And a second?
Rose Mims
Unverified
37:23
Second. Second. Any further discussion? If not, I'll ask for the vote. All in favor of this motion, please say yay.
Yay. All opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions, that will be the decision, the recommendation of the commission, that the Attorney General's salary will be raised by 1%. Now we're at the Secretary of State's office. We have been given information about the duties. I'm not going to repeat all the duties of each of these offices.
The secretary of state for Arkansas is substantially lower than the $106,500, and the median is $146,260 and mean $147,000. So we need to consider that disparity. Anything, TJ? And I would just add the Secretary
Speaker 21
38:33
the constitutional offices that did provide a public comment.
Their letter is in your packet toward the back, and I can
Speaker 42
38:49
put the letter up here on the screen as
Rose Mims
Unverified
38:53
well. Yes, let's do that. This was by the Secretary of State, Cole Jester, and I believe his response, and I appreciate him submitting this. he expressed the feeling that it would not be constitutionally appropriate for his office to
request a salary adjustment because it belongs purely to this commission. That's interesting. Anyway,
Speaker 82
39:19
so I appreciate that. And I think the figures
Rose Mims
Unverified
39:24
we have, as well as the factors we consider of economic and inflationary as well as economic forecasts. We have plenty of information, in my view, if there's no dis- if you all agree.
Anyone want to discuss this particular information in this slide? Madam Chairman, it does seem
Speaker 101
39:56
that we're egregiously low for this office. Fellow commissioners, what
Speaker 50
40:09
numbers show that it's very low. I think one of the difficulties we have is making a comparison
between the duties of the Secretary of State of Arkansas versus the Secretary of State of the surrounding offices. I don't know whether or not they're substantially the same or whether or not there's deviations that are reflected in the salary amounts. So while I do think that it does appear low, it's well below the median and mean, I think before we were to take a step to dramatically raise it to make it closer to that,
Speaker 53
40:53
I think we need to understand a little bit better
Rose Mims
Unverified
41:03
the responsibilities of the office compared to those other states. Okay, and you have all the duties we've already got in this packet, which include the election office, business and commercial, capital facilities, Arkansas Capitol Police, all the State Board of Election commissioners and two or three others.
So I'll entertain a suggestion as to whether you wish to postpone this decision until we come back for the next meeting. I can just tell you that
Speaker 35
41:42
in my research, the secretaries of state and surrounding states are largely similar.
Speaker 19
41:47
I mean, you have business and commercial services that are generally handled by Secretaries of State in other states. And then you have election services that, if not handled fully within there,
they're at least a member of the Elections Board in those states. And, you know, I would say those are the two main functions of the Secretary of State. Mr. Harry, I mean, I know there are
Speaker 126
42:11
others, the Capitol Grounds and the Capitol Police. And I think we are one of the few states that do that. So there are
Speaker 63
42:20
more responsibilities. I would, in my research,
Speaker 126
42:23
and it's limited, I'm going to look to, so Michael Harris sitting in the back, worked
Speaker 21
42:28
for the previous administration at the Secretary of State for the better part of a decade.
In my research, I think our Secretary of State may do more than the Secretaries of State and surrounding states. Is that your? Is that –
Speaker 14
42:40
you want to get to a microphone so we can have this on the record, please? Sorry to put you
Speaker 24
42:48
on the record, Mike. I'm sorry, but that – And Mike no longer works for the Secretary of State,
Rose Mims
Unverified
42:56
so he might be a good independent arbiter here. Thank you, Mike. If you'll
Speaker 129
42:59
say your name fully and then – Yes, Michael Harry. I'm actually a current employee with the Treasurer.
Okay. But the main difference that separates Arkansas from Secretary of State would be the facilities and the Capitol Police themselves. It's a sizable police force now. I think there's like 60 officers that patrol the Capitol grounds. But not just the building, but the grounds itself that the Secretary of State has authority over, that varies. But as far as responsibilities go, that's pretty unique. Yes.
Speaker 14
43:44
appreciate that. Oh, no, you're fine. Thanks. Well, you were wearing two hats today. As usual.
Speaker 15
43:53
Any other questions or concerns? Any thoughts or suggestions by a commissioner on any adjustments to the Secretary of State's salary?
Speaker 134
44:05
I keep going back to what happened in June for the state employees, and
Speaker 85
44:19
everything was in the range of 1% to 3%. So I'm less inclined to venture too far outside of those barriers. I mean, if we, you know, if we said, you know, a 10% increase on 106, that would be like $10,645, which I'm not recommending 10%.
But, I mean, something, you know, the governor's range was in the 1% to 3%. I mean, I would probably support something along the lines of 5%, you know, just to say we, based on the information that we have and based on the potential economic outlook for the state that, you know, a cautious, a cautious approach. Okay. Mr. I would
Speaker 21
45:10
I, and I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion or influence this, but while the, the, the merit increases or the performance
increases were between that one and 3%, you did have the pay plan change. And some of those pay plan changes, especially for executives, professional level attorneys, accountants, and police and corrections officers were pretty dramatic. I mean, some of those positions were raised, I don't know the exact numbers, but I would say 50% in some instances. Now, those weren't uniformly given. Those were just appropriations that were offered. They were about the position.
It was about the position. So what you have in most of the state government is you have
Speaker 19
45:52
classifications by position. And every position classification falls within a range. Then they're appropriated a budget. And the person running those agencies can determine where in that range they can pay people using the budget that they have. Some people in state government
Speaker 21
46:04
received very sizable raises last year. So I only say that to say it wasn't that there was a 3% cap on the raises in state government. In limited instances, it was considerably more
Speaker 144
46:19
than that last year. Thank you. TJ, I'm curious, you did a similar comparison last year. Would you happen
to have the data from last year so we can see what the surrounding states did as far as raises for their Secretary of State? Not that we would be
Speaker 126
46:35
bound by that, but it would be a good comparison possibly. I do. I have
Speaker 21
46:40
to be on my, it's on my server at the office, so it'll take me a second to log in through
Speaker 14
46:46
my VPN, I'll be pulling that up, but it's going to take me five minutes to do that. That's
Rose Mims
Unverified
46:54
fine. That's fine. Why don't we put this one on hold and go to the next constitutional officer and get that information? Our next
Speaker 15
47:05
one is treasurer and is the auditor of states in the
Speaker 72
47:11
treasurer? So the way I was microphones again
Speaker 19
47:20
but so like I said in my intro what each state most of them have a treasurer as you can see other than Texas as a comptroller in Florida that has a CFO. Most of these states have something like our auditor although they probably don't call it the auditor because as I mentioned we no longer audit. We're really more of an accounting function, and we run the unclaimed
property program, which is a large program. So you may actually have an officer of unclaimed property, or you may have a state accountant or something like that. I think it makes sense to keep the treasurer and the auditor batched. They were created by the Arkansas Constitution as a check and balance to one another. One of them controls the bank account. The other one is allowed to write the checks. So that's why I've sort of batched it this way. And I should note that one of the other letters that you have in your packet is from John Thurston, the current
treasurer of state, and he kind of goes on to
Speaker 21
48:19
explain in greater depth than I did in my short slide what the treasury does. You know, I think nationwide, and I worked in the treasury for seven years, so I know a little bit about this too, in the last decade there's been a real push either for treasurers or whoever the state investment officer is to move away from very simple investments like CDs and go into a more active investing portfolio.
So now that Arkansas has an $11 billion portfolio, I know they're working hard to invest in corporates and different mortgage-backed instruments, and they're looking, they have a short-term portfolio and a long-term portfolio, and they try to match their investment laddering to the cash flow of the state. So they're constantly monitoring all the debits and credits for the entire state to ensure that they can have the maximum time in the market, but still ensure liquidity to pay the state's bills. It's a, in all of these states, it's not just Arkansas, but nationwide, whoever
is doing the investing of funds for states, it has become a more modern procedure. And I think that's what, what Treasurer Thurston
Rose Mims
Unverified
49:44
letter. 100,000 figure, 100,500, is just the treasurer or?
Speaker 19
49:51
To date, this body has kept the treasurer, the auditor, and the land commissioner in lockstep. Those salaries have always been the same. I think
Speaker 21
49:59
it's up to this board whether or not that should
Speaker 24
50:04
continue to be the practice. Okay, that helps because these others. Yes, sir.
Speaker 19
50:18
Since the inception of this board, the treasurer, the auditor, and the land commissioner have all had the same salary.
Speaker 21
50:28
So when this board has risen one, it's risen the other two as a
Speaker 144
50:39
batch. Mm-hmm. T.J., back to your chart up there. When you say the treasurer and auditor, each of them are making $100,500, but are you also implying that those two positions is what it takes to be comparable to the other positions
Speaker 19
50:55
around our state? No. So the other states, I just picked one.
Some of those states, the treasurer does what I would call the core functions of both offices. Some of those
Speaker 21
51:06
states, the treasurer only does one of those core functions, and then they have outside offices that may not even be elected to do the others. Some of those states, the treasurer invests all of those funds, not just the state's cash fund, the agency cash funds, or the trust funds. So, as I've said in previous years, there is not a one-to-one comparator.
Speaker 19
51:34
what I tried to find were the offices that were the closest. And so I would argue that our treasurer and our auditor are the closest to these offices that you see here. They likely have a second office, even if they're calling it the treasurer, and we'll just call treasurer one and auditor the other for simplification. Another office that
Speaker 24
51:54
would be more comparable to the auditor. Some of them don't have the separation. You know, and then some of them have this CFO, who I don't believe
is an elected position, is an appointed position in Florida that handles all state financial operations. I know that's not the answer. It was helpful because
Speaker 144
52:17
I was, in my mind, I was thinking we were combining those two salaries to be comparable to the other states. That helps me understand they're separate.
Speaker 21
52:30
Yes, sir. And I am unable to log into my VPN from here. So I'm not
going to be able to pull up last year's. I can circulate it
Speaker 19
52:39
later. I can tell you that the changes, well, we know what we paid our treasurer and our auditor last year. I can pull up that chart. And I can tell you that the changes in the surrounding states, for the most part, were within the realm of what you would consider a normal change, you know, somewhere
Speaker 21
52:57
between 2%, 3%, 5% increases to where they were previously.
Speaker 50
53:10
Any further discussion? Madam Chair, I would just comment. I think there's wisdom in continuing to keep at least those three sort of financial offices, uh, considered together, um, I don't think it's good to split those off. And, um, and I think that it does appear that we're lagging in those areas in the surrounding states. I'm, um, um, also in agreement with Commissioner Clark about not going too, too large to close the gap in any one year. So, um, my, my sense,
I don't have a recommendation right now,
Speaker 53
53:49
but my sense is perhaps a little bit more than what would just be considered a COLA increase as a
Speaker 14
53:55
way to try to begin to bridge that gap. Yeah, a lot of times you do it over a period of years. Any
Speaker 15
54:09
further discussion of a possible recommendation?
Rose Mims
Unverified
54:15
What I'm hearing you say, Mr. Fowler, is that the pay plan, the change in the whole structure of employees on the state level, there was COLA, but there was also, and that was merit-based. And then there was also trying to do what we're trying to do, which is get the salaries so that you can attract people from private enterprise.
Speaker 21
54:49
At least that's what I'm hearing. And it's probably worth noting, and I don't want to single anyone out in state government, but I know that among the positions that got some of the larger increases based on the ranges, it included the investment personnel at the
Speaker 9
55:07
Treasury. Okay. Okay. That's good to know. That's good to know. Yeah.
Speaker 159
55:21
Ms. Zimmerman. Madam Chairman, as I review these numbers and look at the discrepancy in our Treasurer-Oderland Commissioner and even the Secretary of State, I think that we do need to consider something above the 3% just because there's so much disparity, but in light of economic conditions, And I certainly appreciate the nod and concern to farmers, because I am one of those.
And economically, it's just horrible. And there is no market, even though farmers are having great crops. I think that we have to take the general feeling of what our state looks like. But I would propose that maybe we go back and include the Secretary of State and do a 5% increase for Secretary of State, Treasurer, Auditor, and Land Commissioner, considering each one of those separately. Just not because of any other reason than we do need to attract wonderful people in those offices.
They're very difficult and time-consuming offices, and I think that we would be negligent as commissioners to not take that into consideration. any responses to okay and any other thoughts on this
Rose Mims
Unverified
56:54
uh no i was just going to second it okay well will do you do you want to make that a motion yes okay
Speaker 101
57:08
i i so move that as a commission we move forward with a
Speaker 159
57:13
5% increase for the following offices, that of Secretary of State, Treasurer, Auditor, and Land Commissioner. 5%, please. And a second
Speaker 15
57:24
has been done. Any further discussion? If
Rose Mims
Unverified
57:29
not, I'll call the vote and ask for those who are in favor to please say aye. Aye. Those who are opposed, please say nay.
Speaker 15
57:43
Any abstentions? That will be our vote. 5% for those
Rose Mims
Unverified
57:53
three constitutional offices. Oh, four. Yes, four. Excuse me. Four constitutional officers. In view of that, let's go to the next one. We've done attorney general. No, we haven't done attorney.
but let's do Lieutenant Governor, which is part-time. And let's see.
Speaker 15
58:36
we have Attorney General, Lieutenant Governor, and General Assembly left to do in constitutional officers. Is that correct?
Rose Mims
Unverified
58:52
did the Attorney? Okay. One person. Never mind. Let's look at Lieutenant Governor then, and I don't think we had any figures on that, And that's because it's kind of an odd position. That's right. I can bring up the
Speaker 126
59:05
slide that's had the historical changes to the position here in Arkansas, but I don't think there's a comparator position
Speaker 69
59:12
in any other state that's a worthwhile comparison. Okay, let's look at that.
Speaker 69
59:36
salaries. So you're currently paying the Lieutenant Governor $49,067.75.
Rose Mims
Unverified
59:47
Basically, as I read this salary vision's history, the Lieutenant Governor has basically stayed in the same kind of position, even pre-2015 in terms of salary. But others were raised substantially by this commission in 2015. So I'll open the floor for discussion.
Speaker 172
1:00:27
Was that due to response? Can you go like the
Speaker 69
1:00:35
responsibility? So the lieutenant governor's primary responsibility, it is a part-time
Speaker 21
1:00:39
position, its primary responsibility is presiding
Speaker 24
1:00:42
over the Senate and providing a tire-breaking vote. So when the Senate is in session, the lieutenant governor sits up there and presides, just like the federal Senate and the vice president, and if there's a vote, that's when they get to speak up. And then the other primary role is next in line of succession. So when
the governor is out of town, if the governor becomes infirmed, the lieutenant governor would step up and either act as governor or if, God forbid,
Speaker 19
1:01:11
something were to happen to the governor, the lieutenant governor would be the next in line.
Speaker 134
1:01:18
I don't know if this is the case, but I mean, it
Speaker 85
1:01:24
seems as if... I don't know if this is the case, but it seems as if the lieutenant governor salary has been kept similar to that of the general assembly speaker in the pro tem.
Speaker 108
1:01:36
Now, whether that's the right approach or the wrong approach, I don't know. But I presume that when the legislature
Speaker 55
1:01:48
is in session, that the lieutenant government is there, is present. I'm
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:02:00
sorry. Constantly having to be reminded to turn on the mic.
Anyway, so are you suggesting we may consider those together, although their jobs are really different? No, I'm not suggesting
Speaker 182
1:02:17
that, but as far as the salaries, it seems as
Speaker 85
1:02:22
if they were kind of grouped that way. Maybe. I don't know that. Okay. Any comments? My only comment, and I'll
Speaker 50
1:02:33
move. I think it would be appropriate to keep the increase the same as Governor and AG and a 1% increase.
Okay. I agree that I think that the salary number seems to be in the appropriate range, at least for them.
Speaker 9
1:02:49
For these duties? Yes. Okay. And is that a motion? It was. Okay. It was. In
Speaker 15
1:02:59
a second, please? Second. Okay. Ms. Zimmerman seconds. Any further discussion if
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:03:04
not? Let's call a vote and ask everyone who is in favor, please, to say aye.
All who are opposed, say nay. Any abstentions? If not, that will be adopted for the Lieutenant Governor, a 1% raise. Now we get to the legislature. the general assembly and we have our salary revisions you can see and and of course we've
gone through the duties of the general assembly um as pointed out by clark it's the salaries now the speaker and the pro tem i presume are they would take the same increase if we give an increase or we recommend an increase, so I'll entertain discussion on that issue for the General Assembly.
And I think we need to be cognizant of the fact that there are per diems, there is mileage, There are other, and I think some get office expenses. I don't know. Anyway, I'm just sharing that this is not the sole compensation.
Speaker 144
1:04:51
Madam Chair, I think it would be similar to the Governor and AG. And I think that
Speaker 105
1:04:56
would be in line with the General Assembly Speaker and Pro Tem as well. So I would lean towards 1%. Okay. Second? Second. Okay. Any further discussion? All
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:05:11
in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed, please say nay.
Any abstentions? that we have covered all of the constitutional officers by that latter vote. So we will now proceed in our list to the judicial branch. And I will say on this part of it that the prosecuting attorneys probably can indirectly have an interest
in what the judges, at least on the trial court, get, because the prosecuting attorneys raises are calculated based on that. There's A and B. And so in saying we're doing the judicial, I think we know we're really including the prosecutors, correct, Mr. Fowler? I mean, that's up to
Speaker 24
1:06:21
this commission, but historically, yes.
Yes, there has been a mathematical formulation that informs the prosecutor salaries, and this, this, did that formulation.
Speaker 19
1:06:29
And I should know, the letter. Representative. For any or all
Speaker 21
1:06:45
of those, if y'all would like to hear those public comments. Thank you.
Speaker 196
1:07:22
good morning good morning please um chairman tuck um you have the misfortune of me not being the president oh i thought i am i am carlton jones oh circuit judge a judicial district south okay um now i am a member of judicial council i'm on the board of directors however the chair I mean our president is unable to be here so um you get me instead well I think that's
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:07:56
a good that's a good fair substitute uh and let us know what what you understand from the board uh and from the president of judicial council what their request is during this well um chairman took uh commissioners you know we do
Speaker 196
1:08:15
what what we are here to say is this and you have a copy of our letter um it is in your packet every one of you has had an opportunity
to review that so it's not any necessity for me to go over it um i believe though and in my experience um this commission has been you know fair and cognizant of the salaries and the Adjustments that are made based upon the executive branch. We mean that's historically how that has been made We've appreciated that and we continue to appreciate that and we would hope that you would still consider that at this time you know to be consistent with what You know this Commission which is charged with that responsibility to do
Has done with the executive branch decisions any questions or comments
Speaker 15
1:09:17
okay thank you very much judge and i'd like to pose the question that i posed earlier with constitutional officers
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:09:32
do you want to consider these categories that are listed from the supreme court down to, uh, the court of appeals judges, do you want to consider those as a group or do you want to consider those categories
Speaker 66
1:09:52
individually? I personally prefer to consider the categories individually.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:09:56
Okay. Any, any objection? Okay. Let's do that then. So, um, do we have a representative? I know of the administrative office of the courts is here.
Um, whoever will be speaking on behalf of both the Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court. This court, the, I don't believe y'all have ever done that, Judicial Council represents the Court of Appeals, Circuit Judges, and then the District Judges Council has a district. Okay, that sounds good. So we will rely upon the Judicial Council's letter, which basically, as I read it,
would like us to consider a cost of living adjustment. And here you have the salary revisions for the judiciary. um, with categories. So, um, I'd like to start with the Supreme Court. Um, the chief justice's
salary, you know, if we're going to do COLA, those would be together because, uh, for that category, then we'll do court of appeals. Then we'll do circuit judges and then we'll do district judges. Okay. So you see that we did, the commission did, and I think this was actually before my time. Salaries were raised considerably in March of 2015. In the past, we've had some
information from the Center on State Courts, and I would say that in that information, we were pretty well recently in tandem with other surrounding states. Would that be accurate, Marty? Okay. Thank you. So, let's do the Supreme Court, which is now at 215,000,
about almost 216,000 per year. Of course, I can speak to that job, but I will say this. I am And when I was on the court, I became engaged to get married. And my husband, a retired FBI agent, Henry, said, don't you all just flip a coin? I said, I don't think so.
Because he was watching me, reading all the briefs, that I, there's a lot of work. And it's not just the opinions and the debating, it's all the motions, it's the business of the court, because the Supreme Court, so to speak, heads up the whole judicial branch. So I just wanted to throw that in for your consideration.
Speaker 101
1:13:33
Chairman Tuck, did we have a misplaced letter last year when we were making
Speaker 159
1:13:38
our consideration? Yes, we did. And so we didn't get that until after the fact. Can you remind me of what
Speaker 101
1:13:45
didn't happen that should have happened? Yeah, that was the year before. The year before.
Speaker 19
1:13:53
So last year you considered essentially two years of salary
Speaker 14
1:13:56
adjustments at once. I remember it as being two years, yeah. Okay, just wanted to make sure. Yeah.
Speaker 50
1:14:07
Madam Chair, I'm going to make my comments and thoughts, I'm going to make it as a group for all of the judicial positions. I do think certainly cost of living adjustment is appropriate. The way I view the judicial positions is a little bit different the way I view the other executive positions or political opinions, and so I do think that probably a slightly higher cost of living adjustment is appropriate for the judicial positions and the range.
I'm open to ideas of what that is, but I think somewhere in the 2% to 3% range to reflect the increase
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
1:14:47
in just the cost of living would be more appropriate, and so it's not a motion at this point,
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:14:53
but those are my comments, and they
Speaker 117
1:15:00
apply to all the positions. Okay. Any discussion, comment? I agree with Commissioner McCready. Something around the 3% for cost of living is
Speaker 15
1:15:09
what I'm thinking. Any further discussions?
Speaker 85
1:15:14
If not, I'll entertain a motion. Robert. Madam Chair, I move that we propose a 3% cost of living increase for each one of the positions. Chief Justice, Supreme Court, well, each one listed here, including the district
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:15:36
judges and attorneys. Well, the district judges will do separately, but they're now a part of the state system, finally.
How many years? 20 years it took us? to get a unitary system. Okay. Okay. And so that would be 3%? Yes, ma'am. Okay. 3% except for the district judges, and we'll do them separately because they have a letter separate. Okay. And the prosecutor separately too, I assume. Yeah.
Speaker 15
1:16:09
Yeah. Any further discussion? Do we have a second? Did I hear a second? Okay.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:16:20
Okay. Thank you. Um, any further discussion? If not, I'll call the question all in favor of the motion as seconded. Please say aye. Aye. All opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions with that? We have decided on all of the judge positions to get a 3% COLA raise, except we will do the district judges and prosecuting attorneys separate.
And that's not any reflection on the district judges. It's just we like to do them separately. Um, we will now go to the district judges and you have their, uh, how they have, um, their salaries. And like I say, you need to understand that we went through a long period of, uh, integrating the district judge, uh, bench into the state system.
So you will see that they basically have come forward in the same manner, actually, as the other judicial officers more recently. I do want to let you know that the district judges and circuit judges are now working together in many cases.
And, you know, Judge Jones can probably speak to this, but does anybody from the district judge counsel want to come forward and speak? Okay, great. Thank you. And if you'll just repeat your name, and so we have it on the record.
Speaker 209
1:18:35
Good morning. I'm Billy Jack Gibson. I am the district court judge for the 33rd Judicial
Speaker 210
1:18:41
District in Arkansas, which covers Hot Spring County and Grant County. I'm here today on behalf of the Arkansas District Judges Judicial Council. You have seen our letter. We really have put forward two things in our letter to the commission. First and foremost, we as an organization, we wish to uh express our gratefulness to the commission for the work it's done in the past and we would
hope and consider you know that it continues to do its good work moving forwards um madam chairs pointed out the fact that we are now in all the district judges in arkansas are now full-time beginning the first of this year right of 2025 whereas prior uh the framework of the district judges throughout the state was vastly different with part-time judges and full-time judges. But now, this year, we are finally all full-time. And so in our letter, we have wished to point out to the commission that there is a wide
gap between the salaries that the district judges make with the circuit judges in consideration to the difference between circuit judges and the Court of Appeals judges and the Supreme Court justices. Our group is not specifically asking for the commission to take action on that. We merely wanted to bring that to the commission's attention. Okay. And we have reached out to judicial counsel, and we seek to have a joint commission that we can look at that in the future
and perhaps we can come to some sort of resolution to submit a proposal
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:20:25
to the commission in the future. So now that everybody's on the state payroll
Speaker 57
1:20:31
and is full-time, the thought-time work with the judicial consistently.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:20:49
And as I said, I'm very aware that the district bench is helping the circuit bench now,
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
1:20:58
which, by the way, may be allowing and enabling the judicial system to be, I'm not
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:21:11
going to call it, well, yes, more efficient in how it is handling matters on a local level.
Because usually the district judge is more local than the circuit judge because the circuit judge rides the circuit, kind of like Methodist ministers. And so this may also have had and will continue to have an impact on the number of circuit bench seats we need to fulfill the goal. I will tell you that, and you all probably know this, that just as with doctors, lawyers in rural areas,
and you probably can speak to this too, Mr. McCready, in the rural areas, the lawyers, there's many fewer lawyers. And there's been, so to speak, a dearth of attorneys moving to rural areas to take over practices that have been there for generations. I mean, I've witnessed that even in Cleburne County in Heber Springs,
where the lawyers are just working the heads off because they don't have as many lawyers. Um, and that, that also has an impact on state district court judges. If you don't have a lawyer living in a state district court area, you got a problem. And so I'm, I'm just sharing with you some of the things that are coming up in the pipeline
in terms of the judicial branch. I'm not as up to date on it as the folks who are in the audience, but I do know that I've been very involved in access to justice issues, and that is becoming critical. So basically what you're saying, you want us to know that this work is going to be done in coordination with the Judicial Council. Is that correct?
Speaker 209
1:23:44
That is correct. Other than reaching out to Judicial Council at this point to express our idea,
Speaker 210
1:23:50
we haven't covered any ground in that regard. I believe that Judicial Council has been meeting this week, and I suspect that after that meeting we will have a better path towards that resolution to that joint committee. Okay.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:24:06
Thank you. I appreciate you sharing that, and thank you for coming. Thank you. Anybody else from Judicial? I know that Bob McMahon is here.
He's kind of the, and you're on behalf of the prosecutors, right? Why don't you come forward now for the prosecutors? Because, as you could see, a lot of this works in tandem, whether it's just the way it's been done in the past of how A is calculated and B is calculated. So, Bob, if you will start off and tell us who you are and then go forward with what you all are requesting.
Speaker 215
1:24:52
I know you've submitted a letter. Yes, Madam Chairman. Bob McMahon, Prosecutor Coordinator, representing the Arkansas Prosecuting Eternity Association. We would stand by the proposal that's in our letter. Just to remind you that that is tied into something that previous commissions have adopted as to the protocol to follow and that this very commission adopted last time. So we are just asking to continue what you have already done, and those percentages would make our Division A prosecutors 95% of what the circuit judges get, and then our Division B 85% of the 95.
Okay. And we just ask that
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:25:39
that be continued. Well, I appreciate you all coming and listening to this process because I want you all to know, as I told my husband, this is not the flip of a coin. And it may take time, and we know on the judicial side
that justice does take time to do it deliberatively and impartially. So thank you very much. If you don't have anything else. No, ma'am. We want to thank
Speaker 217
1:26:09
all of you on behalf of all the 28 elected prosecuting attorneys. We very
Speaker 215
1:26:13
much appreciate the hard work that you all do each year to make sure that we're taken care of.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:26:25
Thank you. I'll open the floor for discussion.
Speaker 15
1:26:32
So I just wanted you to know you're basically doing the district judges
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:26:37
right now, and you've really done indirectly the prosecutors already with the circuit bench. Okay, so I don't want you to think you have. It's just the district
Speaker 15
1:26:51
judges at this time. Silence is golden.
Speaker 134
1:27:04
In order to remain consistent, I stick with that.
Speaker 14
1:27:09
3%? Okay. 3%? Any other comments or a second? Madam Chair, I'll second. Okay. Thank
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:27:20
you. Any further discussion? If not, I'll call the vote. All in favor of the motion by Commissioner Smith, and seconded by Mr. Hussong.
Please say yay. All opposed, please say nay. Any abstentions? With that, I believe we have the full... Do we
Speaker 126
1:27:51
for all of the judges above district judges and then
Speaker 19
1:27:55
the vote that just occurred was for district judges. Correct. I don't believe
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:28:07
there's been a vote... The prosecuting attorney, the vote, the formal vote, to adopt the prior procedure that we
have followed, actually, since I've been chair, I believe, and further back than that. If somebody wants to make that motion, please do. I will move
Speaker 50
1:28:30
that we keep it how it was last year and as requested by the prosecuting attorney's representatives.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:28:41
Okay. Second? Second. Okay, second. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, please say aye.
Aye. All opposed, say nay. Any abstentions? I will declare that we have a full vote on each of our categories. And I want to say that I'm really appreciative of the Auditor of State's office in preparing us for this meeting. You know, we really do rely, Wendy and TJ, on your work.
and updating your work from the last time. And the only thing I would really like for us, we have to come back again. The calculations have to be done, and then we have to come back again to approve that. And then there will be a notice period, right?
Speaker 126
1:29:58
So what will occur is we will make a four-month period. The commission will have to come no more than 30 days from now,
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:30:23
review any. Okay. So what I'd like to do now is set a date. Yes?
Speaker 225
1:30:28
No, I will ask one question. Sure. Now, they are going to come and give us an outlook of the income of the state at that meeting. Did I
Speaker 126
1:30:49
do is I could forward the fiscal ALC today, which is
Speaker 225
1:31:03
Farming right now in our area which probably 30 40 miles of bark up in that area a lot of the farmers up there depending on what the president does, are not going to make it. They're not going to farm. Oh, okay. They're not going to farm the next year. So I think that's one of the things, too, that we need to know is the income of the state. Oh, Clark, you need to turn your mic on.
Speaker 230
1:31:34
So I just would like to know that because maybe I'm in
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:31:42
business playing in some towns. - Well, and I agree. I was gonna say for the next year, I'd like to have either a written report of economic conditions by the state economist, but for the purposes today, I'd like to have the auditor of state forward,
each of us, and put on the website of the commission the report that's available. I will do
Speaker 21
1:32:15
that, and just so everyone knows, since it's been a topic of conversation at ALC today,
Speaker 24
1:32:21
the situation with farming, tariffs, exports, it was a topic of considerable conversation at ALC this morning. I'm not surprised. During DF&A's financial report to that committee. Well, yep.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:32:38
Let me say, based upon my having been raised by an extension agent, I'm very keenly aware of Arkansas farmers. So if there is no other, I agree with what you've pointed out, Frank. Yep. Thank you so much for being so
Speaker 117
1:33:03
thoughtful. and mentioning that just a quick little overview if
Speaker 159
1:33:07
I may personal privilege but on our farm we
raise enough rice to feed every man woman and child in Arkansas the average is 11 pounds per person a year plus half of Mississippi when it is at a point where you can't even cover your cost you can't even break even the cost of doing business as a farmer is so egregious that you can have your best crop over ever and you're still in the hole and there are no farm subsidies that
I'm aware of most of us don't have crop insurance because we gamble on being able to make a crop but there's also mother nature this year has not been cooperative as we would like so it is dire You're right. There's many, many farmers that will not be able to be in business next year, and it is a crisis that I don't think most people have really wrapped their heads around to really know what that's looking like. So thank you so much.
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:34:16
Well, agriculture is a main industry in Arkansas. Yes, it is. And then that has a ripple effect in business. You know, it affects the businesses, too.
Speaker 101
1:34:31
Well, and then not only just the agricultural idea, but it
Speaker 159
1:34:34
affects duck season, which is coming up. And if there's no rice planted and the ducks don't have any food, and then the farmer then doesn't flood up, the ducks have no water.
Just think of what that does to 60 days of the economy in Arkansas with duck hunters coming in. So there's a lot of consequences. There's a
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:34:57
lot of consequences. So thank you. Well, thank you, and I appreciate you sharing that as a point of personal privilege. My brother, of blessed memory, his name was Bill Davis, and he was the agriculture council in embassies all over the world,
from Turkey to Kenya to Japan to China to Mexico, and helped negotiate NAFTA. but he was there to represent the American farmer and to make sure the American farmer had markets outside of Arkansas. And so that's why I'm peculiarly aware. Now, my father was an extension agent, as I told you.
Well, he was concerned with the Arkansas farmer. Now, sometimes those interests didn't merge because most of us have small farms. We have a small farm. And so my father's position was he wanted to help the small family farm. And so that's kind of, it was interesting to hear them debate when I was a young person and my brother was advocating
and also my father went overseas to help small farmers in other countries anyway thank you so much for your attendance for your interest for your service on this commission and let's get our calendars out and look at when all of us can agree on coming within the next 30 30 days you say Okay. That
Speaker 21
1:37:06
And to clarify, one of the strange quirks in this time period, it's not after 30 days, it must be within
Speaker 141
1:37:23
30 days. Oh, within 30 days. A reasonable period within 30 days. to
Rose Mims
Unverified
1:37:34
the law well okay we can back up a little bit I think that would that will work if for me is in November the 14th how's everybody for November the 14th
any conflicts because I do want us all to be here and of course we need to let a commissioner Mays no we'll set it at 10 o'clock okay there's nothing further I
Speaker 15
1:38:21
second okay we are adjourned and wishing you a good weekend
Agenda
No agenda available.
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Rose Mims
Unverified
Aaron Lowry
Unverified
Speaker 8
Speaker 13
Speaker 19
Speaker 21
Speaker 24
Speaker 14
Speaker 35
Speaker 31
Speaker 15
Speaker 50
Speaker 54
Speaker 57
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
Speaker 82
Speaker 85
Speaker 36
Speaker 101
Speaker 63
Speaker 105
Speaker 108
Speaker 16
Speaker 117
Speaker 9
Speaker 42
Speaker 53
Speaker 126
Speaker 129
Speaker 134
Speaker 92
Speaker 144
Speaker 72
Speaker 65
Speaker 159
Speaker 43
Speaker 86
Speaker 69
Speaker 172
Speaker 55
Speaker 182
Speaker 196
Speaker 66
Speaker 209
Speaker 210
Speaker 215
Speaker 217
Speaker 225
Speaker 40
Speaker 230
Speaker 127
Speaker 141