Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee - Senate

All right we got Senate bill six seventy five with Senator Leding. I sent over all right areas okay. It certainly eighteen sixty one okay. All right center let me talk. It is yourself and your guests to the same you're recognized proceed with your bill thank you Mr chair state senator Greg Leding district for all ski skews me going to hand out to members Mr price going to get that out to you all. Okay and the program just introduce yourself to record and get that hi my name is Gerry Kanik okay interview with the president of Arkansas systems climate league and also the citizens first Congress great. And I'm George Wallace and I'm here on behalf of the Serra club and also the citizens first Congress correct welcome German. Senator Greg asked proceed thank you and any committee because it's been a long day and I've got a long agenda I will be proved my presentation and that this gentleman speak but essentially what we're doing with Senate bill six eighty one if you to establish a task force to find ways to attract clean energy jobs Arkansas take advantage of some of these new technologies in order to foster economic development within the state it would create a task force composed of twelve members the Senate pro tem and the house Speaker would each get to a point chair and a vice chair and then other members would include the chair of the Arkansas pollution control and ecology Commission or their designate the chair of the Arkansas Public Service Commission or does it need the secretary department of commerce there does any and then some additional members there. That it again is to bring people together from across the injury both the public sector and private sector to look at ways to further invest and promote clean energy technology in Arkansas and with that I will let the gentleman with me okay a little more color. The end of my insecurity Hanneke I've been living with purpose Arkansas for about forty years I'm interested I've always been interested in the firemen on public health issues in fact one of my for your careers was with the Arkansas department health so I'm concerned and I feel like I'm reasonably knowledgeable about those issues so. It's undeniable that in energy transition is happening not just in the US but across the world we're transitioning to cleaner of lower emissions energy systems and so the question is how do we respond we respond what what do we do. obviously if as we move toward clean energy of it's a big win for public health the more we can reduce emissions and pollution that's in audit of an immediate benefit for off of lines and and public health as well as environmental pollution. Of the other side of that is job creation and economic development. The conventional wisdom has all of our energy sectors move toward Zero emissions of what we can expect is that the electric power sector is going to grow as much as double over the next thirty years so that reads immediately as of job creation and economic development. So we need to ask ourselves. How do we prepare our workforce in terms of education requirements of occasional training So that's something that we can we can look at. If there's a secret sauce to this task force bill it would be that it's requiring involvement from a wide array of stakeholders with different perspectives of electricity and internet access to energy affects its foundational in our society it affects all of our lives deeply. And it's important that. Difference of perspectives be represented as we make these decisions going forward and how our energy system will be transformed. Another of. Benefit that this. After bring about is strategic planning of. We do have a certain amount of that now that's been adequate up until now but with the transformational changes were were potentially looking at we need much more than a three year or even a ten year planning horizon. Some of the big changes that we may need to make we'll have to be strategic early on if we're going to accomplish our goal you know of. Twenty thirty years from now and those changes are not always obvious or intuitive so it's going to require a lot of input from a lot of groups and experts to make sure that we don't make missteps of going forward So again what we're looking for here is the fastest least expensive and the best path forward or various recommendations of in the end the task force we would be making recommendations to the General Assembly for any needed legislation or changes in regulations there was a of a sure that we can travel down this path with the greatest chance of success and again what that might look like is it an electric power sector of at. With low emissions or near zero emissions at reasonable cost. With reasonably low cumulative cost by the end of our reaching our target. reasonably rapid attainment of that little mission target. All the while maintaining high reliability and high resilience so we think we can do it all but it's it's complicated and of we think that it needs to have everybody at the table to twelve with a good solution set so All right we're tension and I look for any questions you might have so district arc yeah you're recognized proceed I'm sorry this Arkansas need a climate plan I think that we do I want to read you a statement from one groups approach to climate change. The climate is changing and humans are are contributing to these changes we believe that there is much common ground on which all sides of this discussion could come together to address climate change with policies that are private school flexible predictable and durable we believe in a policy that approach that acknowledges the cost is about action and inaction in the competitiveness of the US economy. That's the US chamber of commerce's policy on climate change they go on to say if you look on the landing page of their our approach to climate change they say in action is not an option. When carrying others and I started working this we had a goal of can we create a. Plan that would make Arkansas Carbon neutral electricity emissions by twenty fifty and we looked at three different states that already have client plans we looked at Virginia Utah which surprises We looked at Washington state and we spent a lot of time talking to the people in Washington state and there were two things that we. That we learned from that one is that we can't come up with the plan unless all the stakeholders are involved you know it's as environmentalist we can't do this one of the things I got from the chambers approaches that tackling climate change means of. Allowing business to lead we hope that if this Task Force is created when this Task Force is created the that business will lead and we also learned that tackling climate change means creating business and market based solutions. We need the business community involved in this we need to understand about in this because that's where innovation comes from we need to look at this from a market approach to getting there the other thing we learned of. From Washington is that whatever we come up with it can't be punitive we don't want to come up with the climate plan for Arkansas that would punish any business in Washington what they have done is Offer incentives they said just goals and that's all we're talking about here is setting a goal if we made it good that be great if we don't we've tried but in Boston they set goals and provided incentives it if I think it went all over ten year increments if you. Reach go this far in ten years you you might get a tax break if you go this far in twenty years and so on so it it'll be in and we hope to come up with an incentive based plan to develop a good climate plan for Arkansas so we're not left behind this is coming you know they're building electric battery plants in Georgia and Tennessee what can't we have an electric battery plant in Arkansas if we have a climate plan that adopts of the changes maybe we'll see that. And that's all I've got to say I appreciate your attention today I would ask you to vote for this yes Sir thank you and we got some questions by members and so first stop on a recognized when recognize Senator Hammer senator Hammer you're recognized preceding question thank you Mr just a of where are the companies that represent the power grids in the mix of things can you show me where they're going to have a seat at the table. What do they have a seat at the table. What we hope they do I think they they should they need to have a seat at the table yes right but are they on the list. H. the. There's one representative for investor owned of. What and the miscible. Okay and then the second question I noticed that there's per diem allowed in here but it also said that the meetings will occur digital I'm just wondering where's the money going to come from for the meeting. And I know we're legislators meeting money would come from the where where's the rest of money going to come from for the meeting. Well our goal was that if we made digitally that only the legislators and their staff would be compensated than the others what if that's not. Clear that can be we've put in there that they're gonna be rules made for the meetings and our original plan was that to keep this at lower cost and that. Only those legislators and staff would be compensated percent to their normal per diem. So if they have a physical meeting the task for members would not be reimbursed the daily rate or the per diem rate that was our goal and if it doesn't read that way. I'm just also know the task force is temporary with expires October thirty first of next year so this is an ongoing thing so we do see whatever because there might be being quite minimal okay I know you got other questions then they will go bump you Mr okay Senator Solomon you're recognized her. Yeah I see online Page seven line twenty R. six I think it says the task force determines necessary they may hire facilitators so is there a line item budget for the house that paid for. And who are those guys are people. If the alarm needed to hire additional staff to staff the task force. Yeah so it is our budget for that or is that how that happens my understanding we discussed that earlier in the session was that there are funds available to eighty eighty Q. that running an appropriation but we were told that that wouldn't be necessary okay thank you. All right members. Senator Hammer given a question I do Mr. Thanks so why do we need legislation to this it seems like the department of commerce would be the one that would handle this given the outline or eighty Q. what is that the necessitates having legislation in order to bring this all together. What we learned in Washington state was that ninety. Struggle to do it legislatively Without bringing all the stakeholders together the idea of the task force is that we would bring all the stakeholders together and would be able to come up with a plan Rather than just relying on what agency to do it I mean I would love for the department of commerce to do it but our experience looking at Washington state was that it took creating the task force and bringing everyone together that has an interest in this to get it done and I would just also women the legislature has created task forces in the past I think the idea is that if the legislature takes the step it'll show that there's a broader consensus broader support might have that the the muscle of the legislature behind I would also knowing that this is a in the bill does have bipartisan support the house Majority Leader representative McCollum is a co sponsor as is representative Pilkington and then the last question is and please don't take this wrong but. The green new deal. This is the Arkansas version of the green new deal not. Why not. Because what we would. We're not forcing anyone to do anything this won't legislative that someone has to do anything it may provide incentives it will set a goal but it is it is not designed to be as broad as the green the bill is designed to be a crime Climent planned for Arkansas focusing on Arkansas businesses in Arkansas jobs. Thank you. All right members you're more questions all right we have simply got Mr Ted sold signed up to speak for the bill I'm sorry. Mr Thomas please forgive me. Thank you members of the committee I'm Ted Thomas with the Arkansas Public Service Commission is always nice Speaker I'm speaking on behalf of myself not my colleagues I view the claim it is an urgent problem but even if you don't the reason we have an urgent problem is because the folks in Washington DC view it as an urgent problem and they're going to do regulation and they're going to make us do stuff and it's going to cost a lot of money to do those things unless we prepare and the answer to the ultimate answer to protect rate payers from the cost is technology. And what we are working on in terms of policy is any technology that you can think of whether its nuclear carbon capture wind solar EV's demand response we're trying to think about what our policy should look like and have a market based way so that consumers and cost can drive that technology. The limitation that were running into the oil is litigation in opposition and I'll give you one technology as an example and that's what there's a thing called aggregation that if you want to have a more interactive system were you thinking about your managing your electricity in ways you don't do now you don't have time for that if you're a small business or your or your family if you're a big business you don't want to do a one story at a time you want to group your stores together there's a policy called aggregation that allows you to group businesses or families together into one entity. So you can participate in various programs. We already have a bill on this so the answer is not to pass the bill we have navigation bill in twenty thirteen. So the APSC Walmart wants to do this. They want one stop shop the utilities think they should be the only one that do it so that cuts that means Walmart AS four stops and so this is turned into a litigation fights. So we open a docket because we want to work because Walmart file an application we opened the second docket. Because we don't want to Walmart only policy if you can put fifteen Kroger's together if you can put fifteen car dealers together or you can put twenty five hundred residences that have nest thermostats together we want you to be able to do that. Then what happened is when when mice so who wants to do this program or the RTO that manages the granted of a file to do that then there was one federal case because the utility opposed it. The sponsor of the program the filed a second federal case. And then the for the federal regulator opened the third case so now we have five litigation proceedings over aggregation for program that Walmart wants to do in Arkansas. That is applicables like ten hours a year when we when there's a Maxygen event now we had one of those in February we have about one a year that last six eight ten hours and we have five litigated proceedings. And all they want to do is aggregate. Their stores. To participate in a mice so program it's applicables ten hours a year. Now I can bring you innovation after innovation after innovation and I could sit here as I believe that we're fairly well prepared for with the new administration will do. But if you have to litigate like that for every yard of progress we're never going to get there and if we don't get there on technology your constituents are going to get hammered on their electric bills and that's what I care about and how does that relate to this bill this gives us an opportunity to discuss and to form a consensus on what we need to do. What do we need to do as a state to build legislative support and to build sought public support for doing something other than having five litigated proceedings for something that only applies ten hours of the year. We have good preparation we're ready to go but if we're going to do policy by litigation we're never going to get there what we need is a forum to discuss these issues to build consensus so that we can do things and we can make progress it and other than combat by litigation and with that I'd be glad to answer any questions. All right members are there any questions by the by the numbers Committee. This up Senator Solomon you're recognized for a question. So why would we do this in an interim study with public health committee. I'm fine for doing it however what I need is a form correct thank you thank you Mr thank you senator. Members are there any more questions. C. nine Mister Thomas thank you for your testimony. Senator Leding. You're recognized to close your bill Sir thank you I'll be brief in just to quickly address senator Hammer comments about the green new deal can assure you this has nothing to do with that for everyone I know better I certainly wouldn't waste my time certainly would waste your time bringing anything resembling the greener delta of the Arkansas state legislature but there are opportunities out there for investment new jobs manufacturing opportunities in one Arkansas to be able to compete again I think you know in interim study could work but I think the the the the presence of a task force gets a little more wages with a more serious we do want leaders from industry the private sector and the public sector to be involved Task Force couldn't make us do anything it would just be there to provide recommendations so that we could best position Arkansas to compete for some of these opportunities and again it's got bipartisan support temporary officiated vote. All right members central it is closed for as bill what's the pleasure of the Committee. Welcome motion by Senator Davis to have a second. Seeing no second senator your bill fails thank you Committee. Thank you for listening thank you Sir. All right senator garner will start off with Senate bill five ninety we gonna concurrence for the house amendment yes we do Sir quick at what this bill does basically we just exempted a few place make sure it's clear for public private industries a one included we got rid of it for COVID nineteen just any kind of future mass mandate to have actually come to legislator I think this is good bill and I'll be a call from a bill okay. We do have some people signed up to speak on this bill first offer to start with this Karen Walker's. Mr. With a motion by Senator Solomon second by Senator Davis thought but the promotion all in favor. Opposed. Motion carries all right members. Senator garner you close your bill. All right servers clusters but. Was placed a committee. We got a motion by Senator Davis second by Senator Solomon all of. Any discussion on the motion thank you Senator Hammer. Share on voice and I understand we've all been here a long time but so if people been in this room that in here since one forty five some of them sit here wait for sign notes into the stationary thing I am going to voice my objection to this because it means we will not heard on the Senate in opposition or input on to this bill and I'm going to go on record of voicing my opposition I respect the process but I am going to voice opposition that we did not let the people in the audience at least have what we've allowed other people to have and that is at least two minutes on this bill and I just want to get that out there on record thank you thank you Sir Hammer. All right members who got a motion on the floor with a much by Senator Davis second by Senator Solomon all in favor. So I say aye. Opposed. Resolution senator. Thank you Sir I think I have one moment to concur do Senate bill five forty seven thank you Mr chairman this bill had to do with the direct sellers it flew the disk Committee and everywhere else when you get over to the house and they forget they fit realized that the department of labor had excellent quick adjustment makes compliance with certain things we change that everybody across the board good with it and I just what a close for the bill. All right members Senate body signed up to speak for against this bill servers close for his bill what's pleasure of the Committee. The motion to adopt second by Senator Wallace all in favor signify say aye. Or curtesy skews with the currents. I. Read it again members. I. Opposed congratulations Senator Garner. All right next up we've got to house bill seventeen forty six and I believe that is representive Underwood. And if you dare you might bring Senator Gilmore down there with you. All right representative your please introduce yourself along with senator Gilmore and you'll all recognize proceed Senator Gilmore district twenty six thank you members committee and with me sir and would you want to do so thank you committee representive Underwood district ninety. you're recognized procedure real. this bill it is simple it just allows shampooing drying and simple hair styling services provided without the need for a cosmetology license this is we already have this exempt under the natural hair braiders Act already sent the national hearing back from requiring you to have a cosmetology license and interestingly under that act we already allow shampooing services to be performed without out a cosmetology license this certainly services are safe they don't require any use of dangerous chemicals or can't dangers devices I do briefly want to mention it you know why I brought this bill. This bill because of a constituent of mine and anally and she desperately wants to perform the services she actually had a seventeenth birthday party that was salon themed and she has a mannequin named crystal that she practices or services her her skills on However AnnaLynne has down syndrome and so this doesn't mean that she doesn't have the ability to work in a salon to provide the services but it does mean that Arkansans currents regulations makes it makes it much more difficult for her to be able to obtain a cosmetology license and perform the services so a couple things I do want to mention just very briefly we did add a couple of consumer protection items first you do have to in order for the services you do have to register with the department of health if there's complaints made against you and you lose your registration you would not be permitted to provide the services secondly you also have to form the services under the supervision of a licensed cosmetologist. I think this is a great jobs bill that will create employment opportunities there are several states that's already doing similar things thirty states exempt hair braiders from licensors over twelve states are over yes over twelve states are exempt shampoo or soap and for states exempt these type of services and so I know it's been a long day I'll keep it brief if you have any questions and I'm open to that thank you what one thing I would like that I think what's representive Underwood states it is a good jobs bill this will allow people who may not have opportunities to get employment find out employment and one of the things that I do want to point out as I've aged Vista just this morning with several cosmetologists and barbers in my district and there's a lot of misinformation going around about this bill visit with them shared what this bill does read the actual bill to them certain portions of it and they all told me this is a great bill. This is a bill that they could support this would actually help their business and their industry in my district so I think the same would be true for your areas in your districts as well so I I just want to again reiterate this is a good jobs bill allows people to find employment that may not have opportunities now. With that were happy to take questions. All right members the question numbers committee has seen some Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question Sir so. Based on your bill our. Our cosmetologist going to be. Are they going to be forced to hire or supervise anyone or speak to that if you would not serve the appreciate that Senator that's a good question no they it's all permissive they would not be required to hire anybody or to supervise it but if you were to provide the services you would have to be registered with department health and you have to be under the supervision awesome because office and then what would you say. To someone who has gone through the process of going through the licensure paying the fees doing everything they've had to do up to this point as far as how this does not disadvantage them or disrespect them for what they've gone through to get to the point they are no and that's also a great question and that's certainly not what we're trying to do here I think obviously cosmetologist provide a very a great service and it takes a lot of talent to do that and so this does not change the scope of their practice at all they still be able to provide the full services they're currently going to provide the services would be only limited to champagne follow trying in simple hair styling services so they would not be permitted to provide the full services that current cosmetologist are are providing. All right members are there questions by members committee Senator Solomon you're recognized for a question the Department of Health weighed in on the. I believe they are neutral and they did kind of way and on on some of the amendments that I made for the supervision of it they're neutral thank you thank you Mr thank you senator. And one thing I may Mister chair point out that I want to applaud reserve Underwood and his work on this bill I think he is done quite a bit to work with concerns from. For much everyone I think the bills but amended multiple times so I applaud him for his efforts to find something that I think we can all live with. Thank you senator. All right members there's no further questions we do have some some of the audit signed up to speak for against this bill and so we're gonna start with the four and go to a person with against to go to a four so we're gonna start with Andrea Wilson you're recognized to come up if you'll please identify yourself and tell us here with. My name is there's a button right area my name is Andrea Wilson I am the owner of the salon professional academy insurer would as well as I'm a member of seatac. I just wanna start with I know you guys have had a very long day and I've got notes but it takes about five minutes just so you know what you're dealing with. I'd like to start by acknowledging that thousands of emails phone calls and messages that many of you received from individuals opposing this bill well I'm grateful for the volume of communication from everyone concerned I apologize for any messages that became disrespectful and anyway because that definitely was not my intention or the intention of many others. Today I'm hoping that we can find a solution for both sides. I worked in the beauty industry for twenty four years and have held many different positions I currently own a cosmetology school insure would and I'm Asetek number. Throughout my career I've had to defend the value of stylists and fight for the integrity of our profession it began when my teacher in high school told me that she thought I would do so much more with my life. Many people in our industry have similar stories this constant battle to be taken seriously becomes extremely frustrating over time and that's where you see the emotion axle escalate. In addition to the normal comments we continue to be met with legislation that attempts to deregulate our industry. And the value of the services that we offer. With that said we impact the public enough that when coronavirus happened we're immediately shut down. The concern of deregulation is a big topic when discussing this bill with other licensed beauty professionals another significant concern with this bill is that having unlicensed individuals working in someone's compromises the consumer expectation. Consumers expect their stylist be licensed and they expect a certain level of service because of that. They do not ask to see the stylus lessons when receiving services in a licensed establishment. The public can definitely supports licensure in the beauty industry I expect the same credentials with other licenses. Tuesday morning as I had my husband in the emergency room sorry. The only proof I needed that the woman treating the doctor treating him or the doctor was her name tag. The average consumer will not ask for proof beyond that. The massive opposition of H. B. seventeen forty six as it is written are people who feel that this bill threatens their livelihood their businesses and their ability to provide for their families it opens the door to the masses to perform services without a license. All of which is an unintended consequence of this bill. One night as I was dead in attempting to defend the profession I love I started consider the other side. Specifically. Sorry guys think about what I would want if I had a child with down syndrome. This led me to research. In my breast thank you have broadened I still stand behind every concern that I have for industry and the people in it but I started to think about what it would look like if we just didn't try to kill this bill but instead what would it look like it to advocate for the down syndrome community. This leads to more research and I came across a pilot here dressing assistant program that was launched in Ireland. The program is called beauty in all its forms. It is a joint initiative between Ireland's number one professional hair care brand in down syndrome Ireland. This program gives adults with down syndrome the opportunity to train as her dressing assistance in order to secure long term employment. It also acts as a tool to foster social inclusion. Since the program began in two thousand thirteen it has delivered training to ninety one people with intellectual disabilities. This program is now active in Brazil Guatemala and it will Italy. The opposition of this bill has never been about in a moment. It is only about the unintended consequences as I considered all of this from a mother's perspective I came to the conclusion that I would want my daughter to be the champion and a positive outcome. Creating our own pilot program with AnnaLynne would help pave the way for individuals that seek the same career path with similar challenges and barriers. It would be the first of its kind that I'm aware of in the United States and it would solve the negativity surrounding this bill. That is something that I think we would all be proud to be a part of. This committee has the unique opportunity to provide progress to a community of people that deserve it will completely turning the opposition and to support. I am for you to consider amending this bill tonight before passing this bill. With the language that defines a registered hair stylist as those defined by the center for Medicaid and Medicare services. The opposition would likely support the bill as it goes back through the House Committee I know I would and I can speak on behalf of many others that have shown up to the committee meetings with me for weeks. I understand that it is late in the legislative session and that amending this bill is a significant undertaking. But I'm asking the committee to please consider this option respectfully I feel like we still have time to get this through the session thank you. All right members or any questions by members of the committee. All right Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question thank you Mr want what you want that amendment. So that we can advocate for a certain group of people versus open the door for anybody to compete with like what you were saying the people that work so hard to entertain the for cosmetology license and. Why would you not. I guess maybe I missed something attachment described here why you would have the case for other groups are you just wide wide. The wonder would there be other groups you'd want including on that amendment. All of the groups that. under CMS. The reason this bill came about was for AnnaLynne okay so okay part thank you. All right Senator Solomon you're recognized for a question Sir Hey this is just you talked about the how important your profession was yeah this group in this committee were primarily responsible for our pushing back on some of the restrictions that close to you and I particularly was one that ran a bill to try to refund the money so just to be clear we respect your profession and whatever the outcome of the vote if we stand strongly behind you as professionals and we've demonstrated that so I guess to put that in the form of a question would you agree. Yes thank you thank you Mr thank you Mr Solan our members are there any more questions. Briceni miss Wilson thank you for your testimony thank you. Now we got somebody to four and a recognized miss Jenner permit quarter. And you're recognized if you introduce yourself and your side to speak for the bill yes thank you I'm Jennifer reporter from Rogers I'm the advocate and mother of AnnaLynne. I think we've understood the AnnaLynne wants to work in the community and she wants to work in cosmetology and she wants to do some simple things in the salon more than just. The sweeping of hair falling of pals and greeting clients she has the desire to work with hair however she does have some obstacles but I feel like in this industry she could be trained to do this becoming fully license just is not an opportunity for her. And What I've really I've thought about you know with all this licensure I just I don't understand but what I want you to compare is. One of my examples of of doing this is some people you know oppose this Like you know we we oppose the licensure on that but if you think about it to become a pharmacy technician. in the state of Arkansas a person does not need any formal training. And all one has to do is pass a background check and pay a fee to the state board of pharmacy that a person can be trained to do pharmacy be a pharmacy assistant and dispense prescriptions and you know just except the prescriptions and dispensed our products. We'll there's been a big argument That hair styling and shampooing is dangerous and I've just want to say that I disagree with that and that a assisting the pharmacist I think dispensing prescriptions is more dangerous. A for cosmetologists who feel like this may lower their professional standards by allowing someone to wash and dry hair this bill does not mandate that If you want to only hire fully licensed cosmetologist to work in your salon you're free to do so and salons will not be mandated anyway and to hire assistance by house bill seventeen forty six if it was passed and so we just want to be able to change change the scope and allow of people with disabilities easier access for employment in their communities and I want to thank you for your time I know it's been a long day yes ma'am thank you for being here all right members are there any questions. All right scene in this quarter we thank you for being here thank you thank you. All right next we've got this when Middleton to speak against. Miss Milton if we put your name and tell us here with the record to be recognized proceed. Is it on yeah yet the girl my name is Glenn Middleton I am the current president of campus president of Arkansas college barbering Arkansas beauty school in Arkansas technical school I'm here representing our schools in this industry because I did not come from the barber hair design industry I was actually in higher education in traditional education and I got the opportunity to work in this field and before I became a professional in this field I can truly say that saying the words simple here styling was. Not income sing what this bill is saying it when I got into this bill I learned very quickly that the people that are trained in this industry have a huge task in front of them and it deals with public health in two thousand fourteen I went to a natural hair salon and I got a service done and what I found from that what I took from that was a staph infection in my scalp and it because it was because the style is drop the call on the floor multiple times picked it up it kept putting it in my head and I didn't realize that by doing that she was bringing bacteria from the floor into my scalp and I went to the doctor I was on antibiotics for that and I learned from the school that that is not allowed you can't if you drop implement on the floor there is a process to clean that employment before you actually put it into someone else's on their body or on their skin I learned the same thing in the profession as I watched my students recognize what license where I looked at it and realize that these tiny dots on someone's head were not slaves but we she sprayed a solution on it okay alcohol solution the flick started moving and she was like miss when we can't treat this person we need to send me not coming from the profession would have thought that that was placed we are not opposed to animal in being allowed to be in this industry what I'm opposed to is things like simple hairstyle if you're not trained properly to recognize into understand what you're doing to people you can cause big issues this bill does not limit this to people with developmental displays or to intellectual display this bill will also in the open the door for the masses to come in so someone who is not suffering from that who decides that they. They do not want to go through the trap proper training and just open up with them on into simple here Sally we'll have a ultimate affect on. The public we want to work with the other side in a in come up with the solution I think Andrea outlined that very well I'm not going to go through that but this does exist already the barber board I spoke with rex Bailey average spoke with Ricky Bryant who are on the bar report there is a technician licensed that exist that allows people to come in and do three hundred hours and get trained properly I believe that representive Underwood in his first statement said that why would you allow someone to go into debt for twenty thousand dollars to get a technicians license that is not the case we calculated this at our school if you were to do this technician license it will be under four thousand dollars a student who is fully eligible for pale can get half of that covered by federal dollars for free the state of Arkansas office funding for up to five thousand dollars to the department of workforce services as well as Arkansas rehab for up to five thousand dollars so these students can ultimately go to school for free get proper training and be done within twelve weeks of up starting school and we can allow them to go out and safely treat the public so those are my concerns and I hope that you have listened to the emails and you are open to working with us to coming up with a solution for this bill. Any questions all right members are there any questions. All right scene up there okay seen none yeah Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question okay the bill does say that they're going to be working under the direct supervision of a registered hair styles. What it what is your response to that because the bill specifically says they have to do that I would want that language to be explained X. expanded to show what that directs the provision would look like that means that if someone is in the front of a shop in your in the back of a shop in there perform services without you if the person is there are they actually supervising you are they allowing you to do the services without the what little to no supervision I think like I said the bill is a good effort but it needs to be reworked if we put this out this and there and allow for the masses to come in they can take these loopholes and create bigger problems for our industry. Thank you senator are there any other questions by members. All right seen the missile to thank you for being here next up we've got a Mister mark recorder. To speak for. Good afternoon thank you for allowing me time you know it's been a long day I'm here to advocate for my daughter a little quarter. seventeen years old as you've heard and would like to enter the century industry in some capacity. I'm aware that a lot of the cosmetologist and beauty schools are against this bill I truly believe there are still a lot at that they don't understand about what we're trying to do. And. I've seen a lot that's been told in the community about what this bill is about and in. I want to be clear. This bill is only asking the law be amended to allow washing drying and some hair styling. It is not requiring. Any salon or mandating that they hire anybody to do the services. They are allowed to hire who they want to work at those services and there's a launch if they want to only hire fully licensed professionals from beginning to end to do. From shampooing all the way through the cutting and coloring that is their right what I'm here to advocate for is not stopping other salons to maybe see the world a little differently and would like to expand their businesses to where they can allow somebody to wash some hair while they're doing some styling. To speed up the process for allow them to have maybe work on more clients per day and generate more revenue for their salon and pay more taxes which benefits everybody. This is a jobs bill. Plain and simple. There may be. Hendren jobs in this there may be a thousand I really don't know but this is a jobs bill. And whether it just gives my daughter job it affords the opportunity which is what we are all about in this country is affording people opportunities. And that's what I would like to see is the opportunity for people to if they want to enter the hair industry and take a stepping stone from the smallest to enter to go all the way through cosmetology school but this could be a stepping stone think of a high school or who says you know I really want to get in the cosmetology and work in a salon as a summer job but all they can do is sweep floors. No. Why can't they wash somebody's here under the supervision of a. A copy of fully licensed cosmetologist learn a little bit more about the profession. Get them excited about Haiti you want to do more. And I believe that's all I have to say thank you. Thank you all right members are there any questions. Right C. nine this report with that we've been here thank you all right representive Underwood center Gilmore. All right recognized to close for your bill. Thank you committee at I'll just close and say at mystic order kind of covered some things that I did want to say this is certainly not about devaluing cosmetologist in fact you know I think it helps them away because they can hire people to perform certainly certain services that while they're doing other things that those people would not be permitted to do without a license I it although this bill was inspired by in a land I did open it up to allowing other people to provide the services these limited services is I do think it's a good jobs bill just like will said earlier if you want to enter this field it gives an opportunity to learn the trade and then decide if you want to move forward with getting a full cosmetology license or if you don't you know like to feel that all and then finally I just remind you that I added the two consumer protection measures of being registered if you lose the registration from you to the from the department health then you would not be able to perform the services and you know the supervision requirements so with that I'm closing this and again or has anything come close all right members you for an explanation of the bill was the will of committee. The motion passed by Senator Hester second by Senator Solomon all in favor say aye. Opposed. Resolution center Gilmore representive Underwood bill passes thank you thank you any. All right members next up we've got representative flowery with house bill eighteen hundred. Represented at the table your guests if you all introduce yourselves until sherry with you're recognized proceed yes. Thank you in there is an amendment before you that they would need to be adopted okay first senator Hammer signed for it. Right all right members that Mr prices get not a member not to you all give off a couple. For a minute or so to look over it. All right members get a chance to look over the may not take it entertain a motion. In a motion to adopt by Senator Hammer six by Senator Solomon. All in favor please say aye. Opposed. All right motion or amendment has been adopted president Lowery you're recognized proceed please introduce yourself and your guest. Thank you very much I representive Mark Lowery and Mister Langly to introduce himself Michael Langley with contractors licensing board Mister Langly welcome you are recognized perceive your bill thank you very much of house bill eighteen hundred is a bill that to we've worked with contractors licensing board on it was actually brought to some but to me by someone in the roofing industry one of the issues that they raised is that it the especially in times when there's been inclement weather of this storm chasers are kind of referred to as roofing companies that come in from out of state all this does is require that roofing companies registered with the state of Arkansas it's not a license it's a registration to so that the the contractors licensing board knows who these companies are specially they're coming in from out of state they would have to register with the state the Amendment that you adopted has two different elements one of them is that uh to register as a roofing contractor you would have to carry a of fifteen thousand dollar surely bond the original language said performance bond and representative of Mark Perry pointed out to me that there may be misunderstanding their performance stop bond is typically per job and so that would be very cost cost effective so we change that clarify sureties bond and then the other issue was one that the of contractors licensing board asked for that this that they would be given until I believe January one of twenty twenty two to to actually promulgate rules and to be able to implement this this is protection for consumers a lot of times during these whether the incidents roofing companies might come in. And bad actors they might go to a homeowner and say listen listen we we can without you having to go through your insurance company we can do this ref but we really need some money down so we can go buy supplies and they will be back together they take the money and they never show up again so one of the things that this does is it arms the contractors licensing board to be able to especially during a and inclement weather situation to to maybe be able to issue information directives out to the public to let them to alert them that they should only do business they should only contract with companies who are registered with the state of Arkansas and that way it would be we kind of a buyer beware but it also gives some extra protection that they would be able to access the list to find out if the company actually is registered so at this point I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to Mr Langlais to give you more information. Thank you representative this bill does something that is probably fairly rare it certainly is in the construction industry in that it reduces red tape and provides consumer protection same time. As a result of this the contractor will have to get a license which is what they would be required to do they will only have to get a registration that's lower cost of the don't have to take testing don't have to provide financials can come in and get operating immediately it will cost of on average a hundred and fifty dollars a year for the bond mon provide fifteen thousand dollars protection for homeowners in this industry if they don't have that kind of the for those who don't know what in the insurance industry I'm sorry in the construction industry on the residential side. Contractors are not required to Kerry insurance or to be bonded in a way currently that protects of homeowners income take their money walk away with so of. It's it's it's incidents like. Sleet storms or hail storms or flooding some tornadoes that because of the biggest exposure because we have storm chasers and this is the first step of a good bill where we allow people to be in business much easier take the load off of their backs of having to worry about if somebody has a claim or suing them or anything like that the homeowner has protections I'm happy to answer any questions. All right Senator Hester you're recognized for a question Sir Hey Mister Langly Currently now if there's a storm and somebody comes in with local home or whatever and they're gonna go redo a roof it's ten thousand dollars or are they required to have a Arkansas contractor's license to do that on a residential home yes. They are if it's five thousand dollars of the required anything over two thousand dollars. They're required to come in and get a license but as a roofer they would only have to get a registration so they would have to fill out quite as much paperwork wouldn't take as long to get approved they would have to provide the the Bonn the okay SO so my immediate concern was we were doing something someone did not have to do moving to registration. moving up to registration but after testimony I'm understanding this went from they had to get a license now they just have to get a registration correct. Okay thank you all right thank you senator Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question Sir thank you I'm just could you hit the quick high spot on the liability and who's responsible for what's the criteria to make sure you know it's not going to turn into a bad consumer bill where they get. Coming in doing shoddy work and all that stuff we have people come in and do shoddy work on a regular basis which is kind of prompted this bill the issue is the ability to recover if you have somebody of what we'll call a chucking a truck comes and puts on a roof does it does a bad job on it the problem is he doesn't have a bank account he is doesn't have anything or he's not an employee you can't recover money against him he's essentially judgment for this provides a bond which for up to fifteen thousand dollars and let's say he does three the total fifteen thousand dollars then that's three people who can get their money back the other problem is a match in being a consumer. who needs a roof put on. Your seventy five years old you barely have enough to put the roof on you then pay to have the put roof put on the person walks away with your money and now you're left without a roof without the ability to pay for a new roof and without the ability to even try to take somebody to court to recover this is just simply a mechanism to have somebody puts on a bad roof that day there's somewhere to look to recover some money and roofing bad roofers or. The biggest problem that we have in the construction industry because of things like the tornadoes and stuff for people just chase the store and it's a good bill. Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question are simply speak against this Mister no Sir so the contractor board all the all the people that are in the contracting industry the associations any opposition against this notion okay thank you. All right Senator Hester. yes so. We moved from we moved to registration a lot of things a couple years ago when it from my perspective in very successful hundreds of people moved registration this is kind of along those same lines and I I guess I was gonna say would you agree but this is very helpful I would say we're gonna move people that would work without anything because they're not gonna go through the effort to get a contractor's license will likely get this registration it's actually good for the consumer would you agree I'll. I would agree that. Thank you I would agree with that I think this is we we actually discussed this in our offices if this does go go well there are other portions of our industry that would be well served by the small. Senator Wallace you're recognized for a question Sir thank you chair sure what happens to the the refer the comes in from out of state. That doesn't go through this it doesn't get restaurant and he does work are. How do we track him down to do it. We have to include three investigators who go out and after storm what's assume there was a storm we will send all of our investigators out of that area alerting people and at the same time investigating to see if somebody's putting on a new roof making sure that they have a license if they don't have a license still be brought before our board and one of two things will happen they'll continue to work in front of us and we will find them at four hundred dollars a day or we will run them out of the state and we may not get our money but they're not gonna come back into the State Farm yes Sir your rest all. I'm a refer the comes in from out of state. and you may have mentioned this I didn't hear how long will it take me from the time I hit the state line to see your office to get restrict and be able to go to war we can normally get that done within a week through the temporary license of legislation that was passed in the last session. Senator Hammer you're recognized for a question Sir so how does that work in a tornado situation where all of a sudden we get flooded with refers that are coming in here and. You know a week's time I'm I'm just gonna get my mind recommended weeks time you have more refers and you take care of well yes Sir we do we already have more refers and we can take care of just within the state but we also have insurance adjusters and folk so it actually takes longer than a week to get most people serve as a result to to get from my roof was taken off to getting a report on Takes a significant amount of time in times of emergency we will do everything we can to expedite licensure if it's going to mean protecting consumers this will add to that verses people just rolled in here and and put on roofs and the run off with the money okay and one last question are the states around us doing this yes Sir okay so we're not are we an island or we're not we're we're not completely an island but we are close in the closet even though it's a couple of states over this is modeled after Alabama okay which is you know has similar problems with weather and that's who we took it from but yes other states of the south and east of us thank you certainly do thank. All right members are there any other questions. Our. C. none representative Ralph Lowery you're recognized to close your bill thank you very much and and I appreciate very much Mister Langly being here to to answer all the really technical questions here at the I think it the bottom line is this is going to help consumers the application process this required name physical address phone number I mean information that our consumers would want to have to be able to track down whether a company is legitimate or not before they actually contract with the roofing company and so I I think this is a good good step forward and I'd I'd appreciate your support for the and a do pass. All right members represent Lowery is closed for those on a motion by Senator Hammer second by Senator Gilmore all in favor please say aye. Opposed to regulations representative your bill passes. Hello a incident review my we've got since you're on the Committee we've got to represent of Ladyman in think represent Christiansen I've been sitting here waiting so if you don't mind going to skip over and checked them real quickly and we'll come back to you representive Ladyman you are up. Represent women you're going to be presenting house bill eighteen ninety is that correct. And if you'll just give us your name and your district for the record you're recognized proceed. Representative Jack Ladyman district fifty nine. thank you Mr chairman Committee this is actually similar to bill you got presented earlier about creating jobs reducing pollution. And adding an energy plan for Arkansas this is much smaller much more targeted and has I think better goals and what you heard on the bill previously. So H. B. eighteen ninety is an axe to create a study on the commercial application of existing technology to reclaim and repurpose spent nuclear fuel rods. Starting in August of twenty sixteen various committees commissions companies and federal agencies started discussions on recycling or re purposing splint spent nuclear fuel rods that are generated at all nuclear power plants. This discussion centered around noon nuclear power generation technology that uses a spent nuclear fuel rods to generate power and was much safer than traditional nuclear power generation this new technology has been proven in Argonne national laboratories in Illinois working through the university of Illinois at Chicago what is not been proven is the feasibility of commercial application of this new technology here in Arkansas we have nuclear one power generation plant that is operated safely for more than thirty years. Nuclear one and many other nuclear plants around the nation have simply stored there spent. Fuel rods in a designated area on site. This new technology if proven commercially feasible could solve a nuclear waste problem that currently has no solution. What this bill does is to create an interim study to be run by the joint public health welfare and labor committee in cooperation with the university of Arkansas Fayetteville argon national laboratories in Chicago and the department of energy and environment. The goal of the study would be to prove the feasibility of re purposing nuclear fuel waste. Federal grants are available for this project and the University of Arkansas has agreed to develop programs utilizing these federal grants to reach this goal. So I want to go out I don't want to go into a lot more detail but I I would ask that you approve this with bill so that an interim study could be created so so let me just expand a little bit on my written comments there. This new technology if proven commercially feasible. Could cause major corporations international corporations to build new smaller nuclear plants in utilize spent fuel rods to generate power these new smaller plants would have to be constructed somewhere I worked in the wind industry for many years and we would build components large components ship onto a side assemble those in generate power from wind turbines. This would be a similar technology were these components would be built in a factory shipped to a site in a nuclear plant would be built that would be much much smaller than what we have a nuclear one. So if this technology is feasible and is developed here in Arkansas through the university will we would not only improve the technology we would train engineers and technicians on how to build these plants and how to operate these plants so if a major international company. Decided to take this technology and run with it or our own energy companies like inter G. or others. Then we would have the bill up to. The ability and train the people to be able to do this so this could be a major job creator within the state of Arkansas because these companies would come in here and say here's this technology we've seen that it works that we need places to build these components we need people that know how to build them and where would they find that other than here in Arkansas. So with that I'll I'll ask you for possible. All right are there any questions why members. All right scene I don't see anybody signed up to speak for against this bill so with that representative of. Senator late first okay with that representative Ladyman you're recognized to close for your bill I'm closed all right we got a motion to pass by Senator Solomon second by Senator Gilmore all in favor please say aye. Opposed congratulations representative of your bill passes. All right representive Christiansen you're recognized to present house bill nineteen ten. Thank you Mr chairman members the committee to just give us your name real quick in your district. State representative Craig Christiansen District forty seven. You're recognized proceed committee house bill nineteen ten six to take care of a problem we've had in the fire service for many many many decades speaking as a former fire chief and former chairman of the State Farm prevention commission I can tell you that We do not currently have an agency in Arkansas that can do certify a firefighter for firefighter becomes a bad actor sold nineteen ten would take care of that loophole it would allow our fire protection services board which is also the outgrowth of the act of the old eight thirty three board and of the fire academy advisory board to be able to set rules waivers and other things regarding felons in the fire service and be able to do things that would benefit the fire service across the board this is I had great assistance from the attorney general's office on bringing this forward support from the fire chief support from the fire protection services Board and specifically support from director Rachel Nicks from the Arkansas fire academy. This is something that will allow one of the things that happens with firefighters is that retention and recruitment seems to be the problem in any service organization these days. There are many times senators that you will find folks who had an offense earlier in life only to redeem themselves and move forward and through the process the fire protection services board with then be able to create waivers to bring forward somebody who might be necessary or also to decertify and that is something that we do not currently have a law this is important for us to do and I would encourage very good vote on this all right members we have questions by Senator Hammer Senator you're recognized for a question thank you does this apply to full time and volunteer firefighters it would fall apart across the board senator Hammer because if a full time firefighter who is a paid employee or to commit a felony and be then of charge and ultimately convicted with that then the fire protection services ward would be able to remove him or his civil service process could remove that but this is do you certification it has nothing to do with his employment with the department he would then be certified is this all all felonies I'm not familiar with that seventeen three one oh to set all felonies or is it just there if you will if you go to an all pulled up for you right now if you go to ACT nine ninety of twenty nineteen which in Arkansas Code is seventeen dash three dash one oh two it covers Martin motor arson burglary burglary sex offenses et cetera but it would allow latitude with this with this board to bring somebody forward who is deserving okay thank you. All rights are there any other questions by members. All right scene I don't see any by the signed up to speak for or against this bill and so seeing that representative Christiansen you're recognized to close your bill Sir thank you Mr chairman it is a good bill I encourage us to move forward and help state of Arkansas and I ask for a good vote. All right members represent Christians is close for his bill we have a motion and a motion by Senator Solomon second by Senator Wallace all in favor please signify by saying aye opposed gradualist representative your bill passes like you committee thank you Mr. All right I guess I don't see Senator Leding in here so we're going to pass over Senate bill six hundred and go back. Two House Bill eighteen fifty five. Senator hammer Senate you're ready to present you are recognized to present house bill eighteen fifty five. Kim Hammer state senator district thirty three. Please recognize yourself in for. Hello I'm David grace I'm a lawyer here in town I was for the authors of this bill Mr Chris thank you for being here Senator Hammer you're recognized procedure thank you Mr first following tellement resist Bill is an agreed upon bill by multiple individuals including the associated general contractors of Arkansas associated builders and contractors of Arkansas worked with university on this bill and to my knowledge there's no opposition the bill for the second time and expediency I wanna let Dave go down and we we just briefly on it and uh then we'll take questions Mr. If that's all right. That is just fine. Thank you of as I said I'm David grace I'm a lawyer in town I have the. Large experience in the world of construction of a law and litigation represent a number of security companies which led me to become involved in this of the Arkansas currently is the statutory laws in two places concerning surety bonds pertains only to payment bonds of it is I'll close DO because if fragmentary and in one instance is it directly contradictory which is created some significant issues if you do this kind of work purpose of the bill is to provide are to establish a uniform structure for the enforcement of payment bond claims and to establish for the first time a statute of limitations for performance bond plans there for major things that this bill does first of current law creates two different statutes of limitation for payment bond claims one of six months the other is one year. And last well you've got to work pretty hard to figure out which one is six months or which one is one year is a serious traffic for people who don't do this every day so the first thing we did is being rated one year for everything private bonds public works bonds fits payment bond it's a year. Of I think everybody who's ever worked on a case like this agrees that that's a good idea of what we create a performance bond statue limitations of the current law firms bond is a common law bond statue limitations is five years from whenever a breach of contract occurs that is a very vague idea when you're dealing with the construction contract we've created a statute of limitations for response that is two years that runs from when a contractor ceases work or when he receives final payment that is a typical contractual limitation period Arkansas law allows bonding companies to create a contractual peer to limitation in the bond the only way you can find out what the limitation period is is to get the bond and read it there is not a statute of the typical of contractual peer to limitation and the various performance bond forms that are in use throughout this country and in Arkansas such as the a a form of the ConsensusDocs form is two years from when the contractor ceases work for which the potential completion is achieved that here you limitation is been approved in Supreme Court case back in nineteen seventy five and it's typically recognized all across the state and all of types of construction the third thing we did was we created back up current law says that you have to file a payment bond this is a mandatory requirement for all payment bonds filing with the concerted Clerk so that people can get the bond. See what it says protect themselves accordingly and also to confirm that there is a bond since they're not necessarily required for private construction although it's a mandatory requirement there is no enforcement mechanism and I can tell you that they don't get five. Which is a problem if you're trying to get a hold of the bond and you're running out of time to find that when the limitation period as for example are hot who to notify who the bonding company is all sorts of things the news the the bill says that the contractor then filed the bond the owner doesn't have to pay him until he does so we're pretty sure that'll get the bonds filed in addition to reward the contractor once he files the bond this statute says that once the bond is filed mechanics mature woman's leans cannot be filed against the project any claims for labor or materials are pursued against the bond this is not uncommon in other states Louisiana for example has a similar law to this although there laws a lot more confusing a lot harder to satisfy I think then this one is the fourth thing we did was we created put lawyers and and my world call a little Miller act requirement of which is based on the federal Miller act which governs payment payment bonds on federal projects it requires a supplier of labor materials who is not in privity with the bond principal to get the five principles and the surety notice within ninety days after the supply labor materials that they haven't been paid for them as a condition precedent to being able to enforce a claim against the bond. Most payment bond forms have a little Miller act provision already that contractual provisions enforceable it is a serious trap for the unwary because it lets you read the bond you don't know about that requirement you don't give the notice you can't enforce your Klein of having represented by Woodbine sureties pretty much forever I can tell you I've used that provision many times to prevent a paid by liability by making it a statute everybody's gonna know what's there and they can protect themselves according. That's been most of it it's. There's a little more but is not that important at least I don't think so but I was certainly entertaining questions this is a pretty arcane area I recognize but is really an important area for people and and and the construction business. All right Senator Hester you're recognized for a question Sir you mentioned earlier that the they are required to be filed with the circuit Clerk is is that just the payment bonds not performance bond that's correct it's only the payment bond a performance bond only protects the project owner sure they've got the bond so they don't need to know about it I mean they already have it it's performance bond does nothing for bond claim is the payment bond is for the protection of people who don't have a copy of the bond the list is filed of record is is is this just relevant to I guess some I could read this because it just relevant to construction and public notice to commercial or just public or private or. At the current law requires bonds for public works right still does and that's included here. Private but bonds for private work are optional and they still are optional they are not required but if a bond is required then is governed by the statues they also pertains that and mention this but it also pertains to bonds for charitable organizations and churches there's an existing statute which is hard to understand we kept the statute we tried to clean it up and make it a little more understandable but bonds are optional for charitable organizations and churches but if you don't follow up on that exposes the durable organization or church the lands from anyone other than the general contractor that's been the law forever we didn't change that. A and M. and a final question no it's it's very challenging the residential world right because of of notice but if for landscape yeah for lanes if if if I was going to hire somebody to build a home for me and I was concerned about that side of the sort of thing I could require the contractor to put up to through this put upon follow the circuit Clerk and then no one can follow lien against my. Property just to be honest I don't think that was the intent of the statute I don't know if that could be read to do that or not It bonds on residential construction aren't standing Lee rare right in in the in the last forty years I've had to do cases where there was a bond or on the house and and it it it's just almost unheard of because it's cost prohibitive to get them from the sponsor of residential try again well thank you for spending the time to clean this up. Think Senator all right members are there any more questions. All right scene I don't see anybody the signed up to speak for against this bill and so with that senator Hammer you're recognized to close your bill thank you Mr chairman I think that all parties have worked you know and course represent Cozart builder so I know he is sensitive and probably like some other members are aware and you know association general contractors like mention so said builders work with universe are you there's no objection to the bill so I appreciate a good vote and make a motion to pass all right members that a motion to pass by Senator Hammer is your second second by Senator Hester all in favor please signify by saying aye opposed regulation senate bill passes. All right members we got I think just one more that's going to be Senate bill six eleven by Senator Wallace but we're gonna need a motion to suspend the rules to take up the deferred list so your motion but a motion by Senator Gilmore second by Senator Solomon all in favor please signify by saying aye. Opposed all right. And Mr price is going to is there is a minute here so Mister price going to pass that also give him a mentor to. Thank you Mr chairman recognized proceed state senator Dave Wallace is to twenty two first of all members if you get a chance to look over the amendment we get a motion to adopt. But a motion by Senator Wallace a second by Senator Solomon all in favor please it might signify by saying aye aye opposed. Minutes been adopted so Ross you're recognized process member my intent with this bill is to bring it out of the first list and if it passes I'm or move it to Intrum study. We will not go forward from there all right members a question president Wallace CNN center you're recognized proceed. Members what this bill does is a study on our nurses and the nurses count in hospitals as well as a nursing home By moving to the interim study we're going to bring in a group of folks the hospitals nursing association nursing home we also S. BlueShield in center to come in The representative of a a RP it's just a look and see. If we're staffing are hospitals that include with nurses. In nursing homes. And with that I'll stand by for your questions all right members you for an explanation are there any questions by members. Right scene I don't see any by the signed up to speak for against this bill so with that senator Wallace you're recognized to close your bill but I am closed and I make a motion all right we got a motion by Senator Wallace second by Senator Solomon all in favor please by secret signify by saying aye aye opposed graduation Sir what's your bill passed. Interim study. What is to come before this