State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs- House

State rep District sixty this is a bill that puts in statute special language that's been re occurring we did ask that they take some of the special language out and actually turn it in the statute so we didn't have as much special language this really deals only with the executive branch agencies institutions are covered by their own code sections this does not preclude the use of federal funds so they have a grant and what needs promotional items that this will not affect it and the DFA office of a county will be drafting a uniform definition into financial management guide which will define the promotional items. And with that I'd take any questions. Committee members heard a presentation by representative Cavenaugh. Any questions from committee members. Representative to Ladyman you're recognized for a question. A representative Cavenaugh do you have an example of what a promotional item is what we talk about this is the definition that they're going to use for for Marshall Adam I'll just read it this is a new definition that they're coming up with new promotional items are those items of tangible personal property which are purchased for the express purpose of advertising promoting or otherwise increasing public awareness of specific state programs or agencies promotional items do not include items which are offered for sale or for which members of the public or employees or charge a purchase price. Cozart you're recognized for a question. Representative Cavenaugh C. like it looks like it's a five thousand dollar limit per request is that correct yes Sir how many how many requests because they make committee discontinued making that request in it says that they can do a written request and each fiscal year. Just one. Yes Sir okay thank you thank you Mr. Your questions any other questions from committee members. Say no No additional questions from committee members. Anyone in the room is no one signed up to speak for against the bill unless you're someone in a room of failed signed up. Say none. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized close for your bill thank you Mr chair this is just a bill we did ask them the draft from the special language I have been reoccurring and I appreciate a good vote. Amendment committee member representative Cavenaugh was close with the bill. I have a motion by representative Dotson of do pass any discussion on the motion. Say none all in favor say aye All opposed say no congradulations representative Cavenaugh your bill has passed thank you chair thank you Committee. Committee members next item on today's agenda the Senate bill four ninety six. The representative called for you going to present the bill for Senator Rapert J. correct okay. Thank you Mr chairman thank you Committee I would like to invite my new good friend Mr Daniel Schultz down from the state board of election commissioners to also speak to the bill. Representative Paul you're recognized everywhere though just to have your guests to to the table to identify himself for the committee. Daniel felt some director for the state Election Commission. Okay representative off you're recognized all right thank you Mr chair Committee it's a really great honor today that I'm able to present this bill Senate bill four ninety six to you I committed early on in the session to help with election reform this is a good agreed upon bill that's been in the works for many years really I want to thank my friend representative jim Dotson down there who can help me out he knew this bill was going on and I was looking to do some changes and appreciate Mr Daniel Schultz alternate over to here just a second for helping out with this process is well. Thank. Thank you representive so this is a a bill that is really designed to help the the efficiency of the administration of the election process what it does is it right now the special election be called in any month of the year for most elections this will set for dates a year once a quarter to call special election that's important for the election ministration because election is a multi month process absentee ballots had to start going out forty six days before the election so what we like to do is is have things arranged so that and and most cases there won't be overlapping Alexion's we also have a problem with having election in the the months a practical problem in the months before a major election in a legal problem in the months after the preferential primary because when you're starting a special election is going to be carried on in the month after the preferential primary current law sets that special election on the same date as the run off but at the time you start absentee voting you won't know whether you're going to have a run off because of that forty six that you accommodate line at so what this does it gives us once a quarter that that would be the second week of the quarter so February may August and November to call a special election and the only exception to that is in the presidential year that they were day shifts to March because of the moving the private merry in a presidential year up to March so one year it's March may August November the following three years it's February may August November. The bill also makes uniform the calling requirements for all special elections there's some variance in the current law that we're trying to. I have one rule for everything. School board elections is that considered a special election no the annual school that in that's an excellent point Mr chairman the school board election is not a special election but the bill also aligns the date of this annual school election with any special elections which are called in that month so that's another important thing current law has that whether one week apart so you'd have if you call the special election in the month of an annual school election they were you have one one week in the other the following week and this will set him on the same day okay she just for clarity make sure I understand so you're saying that if you're a member of the school board and you also hold another elected office of such is a J. P. your head and your the election cycle come to do it the same time we are school board election and the J. P. election use that parties ample they're both come due at the same time as your bill allow for them to be able to run for both those options order they have to pick one over the other well I don't think this bill affects that question because the us it would have to be up to in order to call a special election that would coincide with the annual election it would only be for a vacancy you wouldn't call so the annual school election I guess if you call for of it as well and I think vacancies in the JP or filled by appointment I don't believe that would be a problem under this bill anymore or less that is under current law okay and then just to be sure because that's extremely important that we understand that to make sure we don't disenfranchise someone that wants to run for school board if they hold another elected office in that county or anywhere that they there they should be allowed to do that so I just wanna make sure that That is your this bill doesn't prohibit that from happening there may be some issues there but this bill wouldn't make those any worse or better. Okay. But any other questions from committee members representative love you're recognized for a question. I think I'm not my question answered because I I was Confirm with representative Dotson road I was thinking that we've already seen this bill before but he clarified that represent a rates bill was twice a year this is four times a year I guess in this is is this just for school board elections or is this for. This is for school board municipal elections. That's great news for all special elections okay this one off special nation yes okay. But school boards are not considered special elections correct the annual school election is not special it's just there it's there general election is just set at a different time under current law. Okay it further questions from committee members. You saying none. You have anyone signed up to speak for against the bill no one signed up to yeah we have the do you want to speak for against the bill. I can't I'm sorry I can't hear you. Sign up for the bill. Okay if you would just have to say is seeded into the table and I understand you're signed up to speak in favor of the bill is that correct. Yes thank you Mr chair welcome Lindsay French association of Arkansas counties I'm here today representing the county clerk's association we've been working for almost a year now with the state board and secretary of state and others on this bill at the county clerk's unanimously support this bill to answer your question a J. P.'s already cannot run for school board that was a part of Amendment fifty five passed in twenty sixteen I can't run for another civil office but also is Daniel alluded to those J. P. positions would be filled by appointment by the governor so they're not special elections for any J. P. or county elected offices those are filled by appointment. We are you saying there are some County elected positions that can't run for school board no County elected officials can run for any other civil office including school board since twenty sixteen of that constitutional amendment passed that gave them four year terms part of that was not allowing them to hold another civil office J. P. is a two year term that's correct but they they got included in that as well. Okay. The questions from committee members. Saying none. Representative Paul. You're recognized anyone else who signed up to speak for against the bill. Say No representative to procure recognized close with your bill. Thank you Mr chair again I just want to stated this is a I highly negotiated bill it's great upon it came out of the Senate with Quite a handful of votes and this is a good step for for Arkansas in the election process in I'll close with a motion to pass. Remember RepresentativeHouse clothes he made a motion to do pass. Any discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor say aye All opposed say no graduates representative Paul could Bills phased thank you Mr. The motivation agenda is house bill seventeen seventy seven. The representative council. Thank you Mr chairman and committee so today bringing representative cloudy just a second please we have a motion I'm making a motion to expunge the vote by which the amendment M. L. D. two eighty four was adopted. All in favor of expunging that that vote on the amendment. All in favor say aye. All opposed say No representative patch my understanding that an amendment now has been engrossed so you're recognized to proceed now with amendment as with your bill thank you Mr yeah that's right committee so because I pulled the bill down even though we had voted to adopt the amendment and getting Grosso Act we did that separately and this is the bill as you may remember from last week that would allow Clerk the mechanism would provide clicks a mechanism to keep the address of voters who are victims of domestic violence to keep their address from being publicly available when I brought this before you last week yeah I had some good questions I heard three main concerns with the bill went back in a minute to address those so I will just run quickly through what those were the first was making sure that it was just the address that was hidden from public view I'm so we went back and we we just made that even clearer in the tax that this only applies to the address of the voter no other information the second was at second and third kind of combined representative Payton was concerned that there was no definition of who would be considered a secure voter and then there were concerns about how one would prove that they were in fact a victim of domestic violence so if you look on page three lines eighteen through twenty six we now define secure voter as someone who is a registered voter who request to have his or her address or addresses protected from public release and is a domestic violence victim. Who has been and then there are three sort of types of court orders enumerated there with cross references to the code the first one is just the general code about domestic abuse the second is the order of protection under domestic abuse active ninety one the third is sort of a catch all there are some other court orders and you know no contact order things like that that may be entered that don't have specific code numbers and so that's where those would be caught so anybody seeking this protection would need I'm one of those three kinds of documentation only to be found in a court order and I'm happy to take any questions if you'll have them. Representative later when you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair of representative County you said one of the things that you're amendment addressed was that it was only addresses right but if you look at line thirty five and thirty six on page one of one and two on page two if you read that it says upon request every county Clerk who maintains a computer that can puter list of registered voters within the council shall provide a list on compact disc or other electronic medium except registered voters who whose information is contained in a secure voter. As a secure voter. So where else in the bill I mean that says to me that they're exempt from that list so where else in the bill does it say that it's only addresses yes so. I'm I'll we went through this I know I'm a secretary state so I with the chairs permission I'd like to collocate naman to help answer some of these technical questions. Recognized that presented to the table and did it by yourself the Committee please. Thank you Mr chair current member of the Arkansas secretary of state's office. You're recognized it the intent of the the bill is just to suppress be address information whether that be a physical address or a a post office address in regard to the lines is forced the lists I would think that that would be addressed going down into the definition of secure voter. let me look for that here real quick. I would reference back to that Mine's eighteen nineteen twenty on page three which defines a secure voter as being a a voter who requested his or her address or addresses protected And inferred from that that the information that would be suppressed would just be the addresses. What you're talking about intent and inferred yes Sir that's not the letter of the bill well that is our understanding the that the way the bill is written out that it refers back to the definition is being a person whose address only is going to be protected under the law. The Division let Apollo representative I do think you're recognized Mister chair but that doesn't answer the question about that absolute on the first page. That's just the definition I mean I'm not opposed to the bill but it really doesn't address the question of. You know only suppressing the address the way I read it is suppresses all information of that person. Yes Sir I understand your question I don't know that I have an answer for that not being from a legal background I can say representative Levon we went through we were and making the amendments last time if you'll notice on the first page here. M. we amended since I presented to the committee we amended to address this concern you can see lines twenty nine through thirty one on that first page we added there shall not reproduce any address of a secure voter in any format and so you know as we're going through them line by line all of the sort of subsequent references would only refer back to that address portion if I understand what we did correctly. Well follows yes I need another follow okay you're recognized. I still believe line thirty five through number for two on the second page needs to address that issue. Of only the information other than the address for excluding the address or something to that effect. I don't know would you agree because I I can't go forward in this form. I mean I would be happy to talk about that with the legal lawyers every secretary state and see if that's something that we would be able to do and if so I'd be happy to add it you know at this point I can tell you that that they didn't think that was necessary previously but I would be happy to go back in added if it if you felt that it worked thank you. But let me make sure I understand representative lady means got the consumer concerns and you're saying that you will do an amendment to add that to make. That is that what you're agreeing to do all right to County sorry no I I would not like to pull down the ad like to just get you know try to go ahead and get this out I would go I will go ahead and you know I can talk about adding that on the Senate side if if we need to do that but as far as I was you know concerned with talking to folks we've we've. I think address that and if there was anything that was left out I can assure you that it was not intentional I would be happy to fix over on the Senate side though okay and to make sure the committee understand you will in take care of that if we pass it out here today are you willing to do that reportage to the sanity and R. is that correct sorry yes okay representative paid you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair and I really appreciate you getting these amendments that I was ready to pass that here and the definition looks good I think representive Ladyman is made a good point here and at the top of page two online one where you start that language it says except registered voters if you just say except registered voters addresses just insert the word addresses there I think you'll satisfied I'm I'm prepared to voted out here today but I think it does need that language I think representative like you Miss right on that happy to do that I would appreciate it thank you thank you Mr thank you. Hey NO one else signed up to the our no one signed up to speak for against the bill it will raise any additional questions from committee representative letting you have another one. Okay. We have a motion of do pass representative Clowney are you ready to close for your bill I'm class thank you we have a motion to do pass any discussion on the motion. Shane none all in favor say aye. All opposed say no congratulations representative council your bill is passed thank you committee that. Hello representative Lowery was running bills in another committee and the ledger paid be here in time or not I don't use I don't see him so we'll skip over and we'll skip to committee members down this be three forty six. Senator Rapert who's running that bill representative back. Representative back you're recognized version the Senate bill three forty six. Thank you Mr chair of with your permission I'd like to invite a mark from the association council to come up and. Not be able to have some. To the bill. Okay we would do is notify you set up for the committee please. Mark Whitmore association or to attendees okay did you Beck you're recognized. Thank you for that thank you committee I want to thank you Senator Rapert in really everyone has worked on this bill association of counties the sheriff's association there's been many others of. They really made this bill much better and putting a lot of amendments say they've talked a lot of people the Arkansas press associations they they've worked with those guys to make sure that they're okay with the bill or so all those things make this bill a good bill this bill is really of part of the back to blue packaging and and group of legislation that will will help really the law enforcement and that those are the paper out there helping us and protecting us every day. this bill was really I guess we could say inspired by Senate bill. Two ninety two that's a bill that allowed grants to the law enforcement agencies for non lethal type equipment which that's primarily a product of the a lot of that will be body cameras well they're really two issues with body cameras that that. We need to address the first one is. You know the cost associated with storing all this material yeah if you think about of the house is very data. Heavy and so that all this has to be stored so that's the first issue but the second issue is even more expensive for a law enforcement and that is the For your request related to these body cameras if you think about it if If if someone request six hours worth of video of from a place officer's body cam that requires a someone reviews that to make sure that you know there's a minor someone on that need to be redacted from that that has to be redacted from that before that the footage is given to the individual so the record the person who requested the information so with that it takes a tremendous amount of time so what this bill is an attempt to does this is sort of really covers all Pitsch on this it talks about how long as you keep those records and that's the first section of the bill which really addresses. right now there's I think it's county by county as far as the way they keep it someone keeping thirty day someone came from sixty days I'm told some concerning some K. from sixty and then so there's no real standard I guess you'd say on this the first section of this bill as you look down to it the real establishes and Lincoln's out the times that these are capped if there is a criminal investigation such and depending on what that criminal investigation is depends upon the length of time those are clearly spelled out in the bill. It also spells out that all everything is kept thirty days so that you know the the they'll be ample time for someone that they have a question about the camera they'll have thirty days to do that if if there was nothing on that that body camera thank at that point it could be gotten rid of there's no need to keep that because there was nothing there so really the first section sort of the chi in the high points it but that's really all it does it talks about the storage of the information and how long those records are to be retained. Now the second section talks about. The storage of this the contractors who are going to store this information some agencies will hire contractors or they can hire contractors to do keep this data And be able to to retrieve that data at that point so section two really deals with that It in the bill it also deals with the costs associated with those agencies that would have that data the retrieving that information if you think about it if someone wants a certain piece of information there's there's a couple things to look at on this it's like you have to locate the piece of information that was requested and so that could require going to a lot of video just to do that and then obviously anything that we need to be redacted offer that they are pulled out that video would have to be the video would have to be reviewed and then that would be pulled back so it allows for those charges. to happen. Now. The third section of the bill. talks a little bit more about the agencies themselves and how law enforcement if they were to be processing these this video how they would they could handle that if you think about it this would be him maybe a law enforcement officer that was trained a dispatcher jailed you know someone like that they could be going through this this information now the other thing that that this section three allows is for this is a little bit hard to follow but. You're allowed three hours of production free so if you walked in and you had a request for a certain period of time the first three hours of a production of that would be free so now that's every thirty days so as long as you have not made a request within thirty days the first three hours whatever you ask for would be free the production time of that first three hours to be free after that section three allows for the agency are the law enforcement to charge a maximum of fifteen dollars per hour for personnel and equipment related to re retrieving your information now. This does not and I've heard some people say that we're trying to stop the for your prices were not this this actually does the opposite of that what is saying is is that if you want a lot of data then a very reasonable price fifteen dollars or less than fifteen dollars an hour to retrieve that information so. Actually if you think about this a law enforcement a law agency would be if you made a request for the site twelve hours of video someone has to review that Betty I'll. That's that's extra because it's actual costs at these law enforcement officers don't have so what is says is we're gonna give you the first three hours free then after that we're gonna charge a minimal fee that might enable law enforcement to bring someone in that's all duty may want some overtime or something like that allow them to come in and offset some of that cost by having the requestor of motion take offense to that because my feeling that request. That would also mean that quite honestly that the school request could probably be process quicker because we have the facilities we can have an outside contractor do it we can have we can bring someone in to fill this request probably a little bit quicker than we could before because if you're depending upon these agencies the other primary responsibility is protecting us if I have a law enforcement officers whose. Going to be pulled into the office for twelve hours or twenty four hours to where the bridge looking and and video and making sure that everything's Marriage Act and and and felonies for request then that person's not out on the street where they should be so that's really the high level summary of this It really does allow us to be more transparent if you think about this. The body cams the cost of the camera itself as I mentioned is probably not. All those are expensive and we need to help with that because to those are not the primary cause the cost is all of these for your information so why not allow the the law enforcement to recoup some of the cost of some of the costs related to these for your request that that will be they can address the request quicker at that point of the so that the it'll be that plus they're more likely to have video of all this stuff the bill also addresses as I mentioned earlier the retention of the status of the stuff will be retained longer in a lot of cases and it is right now so the information will be available for a longer period of time if there was a at the if there was depending on what might be on there the what crime or are Page matter are not punishment but what crime might be on the videotape so all of those things I think will help this out now in closing and I and I don't want to. And I voted in closing they'll take some questions here is this you know we've all been associated with and it you can pick whatever it is if it's free I want all I can get right so maybe if we have like a minor charge to this thing this is you know. If you need three hours and it's free you might request two days to make sure I get both sides of that I'm not saying that happens I'm not saying it doesn't happen but. Why not say you know trying to find work work with law enforcement what do you want to see the cameras they want to provide that to you as fast as you can I think this is a great tool for for anyone who's requesting information to work with law enforcement and be able to get that information quickly. And mark had to do with anything. Mr chairman members a committee out representative that get an excellent job overview of the bill on the need for the bill we've got chair Felder ten Helder wrist on the task force depletion task force and that that committee that felt that body camera for very important toward transparency and a lot of our share some of our jails don't have body cameras and there is couple reasons storage is a very important part As represent the extent also once you do that that your they're gonna be lots more info I request and so our folks of increasingly thank that we need to prepare for that may be able to respond with a reasonable fee we did work with Arkansas press association they do not oppose the bill we amended the bill to their satisfaction so what we're doing is in essence I and and and from our experience the sheriff we got two shares. Sure filled with testify he's a large county Washington County we're Polk County Polk remain a as a small county they only have eleven deputies so um everything about seven total amount of so what happens is if there's a request to your permanent deputy off the street. And so we want to have a balance and that's what this bill does is not perfect you know don't don't make the perfect perfect be the enemy that could of also we have C. J. English CJ's the nine one coordinator for the state board this incompetence as well the state the city the chief of police and just in the the owner in a basic sense if we're gonna go forward getting body cameras for law enforcement for have more transparency in our jails this is going to be necessary or there's gonna be a lot of shares a lot of local police lot of agencies that are going to refrain from doing that justice is that simple so other than that of I thank our witnesses will help relieve explain to you why this is necessary. And the blood take any questions. Committee members any questions representative back. Represents love you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman a representative mix of looking. Now is this is this only concerning criminal investigations because I noticed that we inserted just criminal investigations why not any other investigation well I'll respond that that section of the code the first segment. Has to do with how long retain records and what we've done is that because it silent right now about About video audio video is what we've done is protected to where we retain that of through to a minimum as Mr backset thirty does not limit and also women hold on let me clarify but we're we're just we're singling out criminal investigations well actually we're not to the what the bill is if you look. The first section has do with the retention for holding on to records in criminal investigations that's what the whole sections of pipeline and what we're doing in addition to that if you would look at what we've done on the. Other big page two or actually having us retain stuff where there's been a use of force law enforcement compliance on line sixteen through nineteen administrative proceedings that we hold those those as well so even though the laws talking all about criminal investigations we're saying let's hang on to body cameras in these records when has anything has to do with the use of force law enforcement compliance administrative proceedings yeah that's what I saw the tomorrow of representative yes Sir correct I saw that part in. I can I can appreciate that part However who is going to make the decisions on what to hold on to on what not to. By law that's what the share some of the law enforcement agencies do now that's what to do after this. They're the executive branch state they follow that law that's what their duty is. A plugin of follow the. I can see in this okay representative dodging you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mister chair I. As I see what you're trying to do and and I commend you for the effort my concern comes to Really the the the costs associated with this that part of the bill in particular. And I mean I'm not sure how you came up with a fifteen dollar per hour limitation on their And how that necessarily I mean if officers are only making fifteen dollars an hour or if they're making more than that are less than that or or whatever sure but I guess the question I have is what's the limitation to the public on what's going to cost them out of pocket to make this request in it I don't necessarily see anything in here that makes a limitation on Verifying the expense to the one making the request her pay for it so for instance if if if you want to say so um this this took seventy five hours to get this thirty. Hours worth of video to the there's no justification required in here that I'm saying or maybe I'm just missing it well that are on the cost of. Part of the policing task force they discovered that our law enforcement agents are law enforcement officers are paid lowest so we know what their salaries are X. twenty eight thousand five hundred dollars on average entry salary it's substantially below the average salary of our Kansans just average or candidate is forty thousand so we're forty ninth out of fifty one in the United States county see on what we make our entry salaries our salaries so when you look at somebody working forty hours a week time it's two thousand eighty hours if you calculate a salary and by the way we have to pay a person health insurance that I think everybody in the room would agree that fifteen dollars an hour. Is very reasonable since our law enforcements officers make. Very low salary so fifteen an hour might affect a lot of people think that's. When you count insurance and stuff if you calculated at a twenty eight thousand that's the kind of figure you come up with which is based on or extremely low salaries. And and with regards to the Itemizing the the invoice to the public on on how many hours something takes yes or or just can take your word for it that Hey this took this much time trick yeah that so it's not in the bill correct it what it is is that we are given three hours free. When it takes that much time but our officers are responsible to charger invoice and same with the computer contractor that story. per hour working we got to share some restraint or that will tell you how they do that on personal time equipment. I guess some people might have wondered the impression they're promised folks are I'm not aware of a issue with that thank you. Representative love you're recognized if you have a follow up. This is sure I'll hold intent on our share of the testimony. Okay thank you J. no other questions We have several people signed up to speak. For and against the bill matter of fact committee we have a. A total of sixteen people signed up to speak on this bill so are representative nine dollars you're recognized. I make a motion recognized for motion. I thank Mr I can make a motion to limit debate to to two minutes per Speaker not including the question so as to allow time for for the committee to have questions. That's a proper motion. The discussion by committee members. Is not available motion. What is non debatable. All in favor say aye. Five. All opposed say no. For those of you in the audience the the debate will be limited to two powers two minutes per person this what will not include questions problem Committee members so we'll start with against the bill is Christopher Keller Mr Keller you here. Hello we would just have to say at the end of the table in the speaking against the bill and just remind you where you have two minutes and the. Every introduce yourself to the committee will. Clark will start to timers so in relationship pleasure. Thank you Mr chair Christoph Keller I'm a lawyer equitable grooms and Tull law firm I work which I'm told is a member of the for the task force he can be here today because he's in a jury trial which is something we have been able to say for thirteen months I know that there are many here free to speak against the bill so I'll limit my comments to one aspect of the testimony and it's this portion that that the the sponsor said that the first three hours or three free and that is not true. What the bill language says if you look on the fourth page. Lines three through. Fourteen is if the request takes less than three hours then it's free if it takes more than three hours you got paid fifteen dollars an hour that's not the same thing if so if you have a five R. request you're paying for all five hours I've got a couple other comments about it I I don't want to take your time too much because I know we have a lot of folks against the bill so I just want to hit on that point. Okay representative that thank you for we appreciate that representative paid you're recognized shall we got some questions from committee members if you don't mind. Representative to pay you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr Sir do you recognize that there's a cost in the retrieval and the editing of this information and if so do you do you dispute whether this is to hire too low in relation to that cost sure I absolutely recognize that there's costs and I think that as somebody who represents folks making making for requested that the four year contemplates that there's a balance right that the there are certain costs that can be recovered in relation for requests and they're certain that or not I think. My my issue with the bill is that this opens the door to to recover and labor costs which simply have not that's not been. Permitted under our for the bill which very proud about for the last fifty years following all of so you said you work for a law firm does your law firm bill by the hour and does it give the first three hours free and what is your rate for our. it depends on who our clients it does do you have any rates are fifteen dollars or lower it. It. I'm just I'm just trying to think how much some of my bills have been cut and whether that actually works out that way but no Sir my my hourly rate is typically much higher than that thank you thank you Mr. Unitive love you're recognized thank you Mr in in on the on the same note in regards to that who else besides attorneys makes these types of for your request sure lots of lots of folks concerned citizens there certainly are commercial folks that are doing this to get to get money I don't know if that's particularly true with with law enforcement body can information to you there are some commercial folks up there but but a lot of times it's just regular Arkansas citizens who are paying my hourly rate but have an interest in in documents that are public records videos that are public records and and in the context of law enforcement body cam records I mean what what could get more fundamentally public and. so that that's what I would say okay and then recognized thank you thank you Mr look in looking at the other. Parts of the bill what what other things were your concerns in regards to because I'm looking at the thirty day limit you know is that is that long enough for a criminal investigation for for attorneys or whoever to get in to get the information those kind of some of the things that that I had concerns with the. Sure you I'm not I'm not prepared to speak on what the proper balance is on the amount of time to keep those records that I thank I don't know if I don't know if it strikes the appropriate balance my main concern is been with that the the charge for labor costs and. I again I don't want to take too much of the committee's time because I know other folks are here today to testify against it I know that Robert Steinberg offered a different way of calculating that that that hourly rate that doesn't incentivize folks to run out the clock and charge as much time as they can which is another criticism I hear about lawyers representative paid I don't think there is no governor on this and so that the the I think that there are different ways of doing this better. Thank you thank you shall you say no further questions thanks a. You have a question. Yeah. About a representative Gonzalez you have recognized for a question thank you Mr so it if this were amended or the first three hours for free even if one over with that get you to supporting this. I personally would not but I do I do think it would be a significant improvement and I I I simply wanted to start with that because that it been such a point of emphasis in the previous testimony okay thank you. Say no further questions from committee members thanks Sir we appreciate it speaking for the bill is missed RC J. English. Register I you set up for the committee and you're recognized to speak for the Bailey member provide you have two minutes after you finish sale yes Sir thank you Mister chair committee members see Jane go executive director of the Arkansas nine one board here to speak for this bill and I want to start off with some of the current landscape of nine one and across the state we have your public safety answering points dispatch centers varying in size and a majority of our districts the Senator range from one to a communicator on staff it on shift to three those are that's the majority of our nine one centers and dispatch so the process involved in FY request can be extremely burdensome on some of these limited personnel centers insert some circumstances and I want to a communicator could actually be pulled from their public safety job to go to fill an F. I request. Unfortunately the process of fulfilling FO I request and I want center isn't as friendly as Hollywood likes to make it seem most centers have several non emergency lines nine one lines dispatch radio channels recorded for law enforcement fire and EMS in some cases this actually could be well over twenty channels recorded at a time twenty four seven three sixty five once an FO I request is filed it's not as straightforward to searching that particular call that the in the request or is looking for and everything associated with it comes up meanwhile at nine one coordinator dispatchers having to comb through all of these channels of dispatch audio not everyone phones and that can take several hours or days to fulfill when we're talking about major request and while many may think of the media when they think of FOR a quest a majority of our FOR request at the local level come from individuals and law firms and it's actually not unheard of for those that follow I request to be made and then once they're from building contacted they're not picked up so all those hours in time spent putting this together has now gone to waste I want us to share three quick stories from colleagues that I've gotten one personal one and two from others I'm out of time. Yeah sure okay manages a okay hold up just any questions from committee members. State representative paid you're recognized. thank you Mr chair I guess my question is what were you about to say. So I'll give I'll give one quick. The brief story here in two thousand fifteen a police department locally in central Arkansas decided to encrypt their law enforcement radios an individual within that community wasn't very happy with that so they're they're process to show that they were not happy with that was to make FOR requests day to then I one center for the previous twenty four hours of traffic and no one calls to that now one Senator so now now once there's got put in the middle of such a individual that wasn't happy with law enforcement agency that actually from from the coordinator I talked to the quote was that they did so to cripple the departments resources so thank you thank you Mr okay thank you representative lab you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair now I want to try to keep this in context now how many how many requests like that the receipt this is a ally are you saying is this is this something that constantly happens so it it would say it depends on where you're at many centers and majority of our request may be a couple hours or specific incident that's pretty simple to handle but when we get into certain areas we get burdensome consistent requests from the same people are law firms or individuals that are maybe upset with somebody you're looking for something that really that this is kind of unnecessary at the time I would say the majority of our request state within reason but there are times where we you know we're talking eight hours to pull seven days of a body of that they're looking for a certain call types related within the call period of a couple weeks so out of control that so I would say that's less common but it happens consistently. Okay so follow us on it is less common but it happens correct When you receive these requests for the specific I guess if you're saying if it's a specific area. so not because I'm I'm trying to get to a point to where like say for instance we had the speed trap that they the speed trap in Damascus this that this state for that in that was you know that went on for years and then it was legitimately proved to be true so are we talking about instances like that because what she may deem to be. Unnecessary was something that was proven to be true so means concerning no no I wouldn't say that that is the common a personal experience I had was at an unhappy system of fireworks complaints they were happy with the city so they came to the novel one Senator asking for seven days of audio of fireworks complaints for dispatch and I wanna nonemergency for two years of new year's and fourth of July because they weren't happy with fireworks so I mean I would say a lot of times we get consistent requests like that more so that when we're talking about burdensome requests I'm not talking that everyday FOR request mean those I don't you know for a a local coordinator dispatcher to pull thirty minutes couple hours of audio is no big deal more talking days or weeks or even months of audio request that don't happen as often but do happen I think there that's why we were speaking for this is that in those situations I mean that's a burdensome us pulling somebody away making them an FY specialist at that point and that's not what they're there to do it takes away from their day to day to day job thank you Mr you'll. If you have followed Richmond say no further questions. Represented by you have a question yes thank you Mr so in those. Senate situation you were just talking about burdensome requests does this bill stop the ability to make those request or does it just charging very reasonable rate of fifteen dollars an hour for those request it doesn't stop we're not looking to stop it thank you thank you Mr okay thank you saying no further questions from committee members mistrial thank you very much signed up next to speak against the bill is going to cut you Mr McCutchen. You would just metafile yourself for the committee and you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank you Mr chairman hi my name's joy McCutchen I'm a lawyer from Fort Smith I'm also the co founder of the Arkansas transparency in government group never in the fifty three years of forty have any public entities be able been able to charge to produce public records and that's the key public records the Arkansas association of counties who twice appeared before the for your task force and two times the for your task force has rejected this bill the association of counties say that they want to use dash cams and body cams we totally agree because it adds to openness and transparency however cameras are good to anyone if our Kansans can't afford to actually see the video this bill would cut off access to the videos and cameras to every day our Kansans the question's been asked who does this affect what about if the family members of George Floyd wanted to access these videos and they couldn't afford to get the videos on day one or day two or day three so that's an important question but there's a solution and my friend Robert Steinberg has proposed a solution that is one hour of recording provides one hour of charge time not whatever the government which does this bills about we the people for he is about we the people yeah I'm a private lawyer I may charge two hundred dollars an hour but the government works for us we don't work for the government in if some young person is abused in Arkansas and it's on video camera they ought to be able to get have access to as much as they want and not have to pay fifteen dollars an hour for an unlimited amount of time. Again this bill has been soundly rejected by the for your task force and the amendments as proposed by what I call the for your guru Mr Roberts time but there's been amendments and those amendments or so much of the apologize to Mr thank you but hello Digity questions from committee members. You saying representative love you're recognized. In the in the same vein as representative Payton. Sir what were you about the sun. When I was about to say is is that the amendments as proposed by Mr Steinberg have been endorsed by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette and the Arkansas press association so I think there's been a little bit of confusion about whether or not the Arkansas press association and hopefully they'll they'll speak on their own we have really endorse this bill because I don't date I think they endorsed the amendments and we want transparency but we want every day our Kansans to be able to to to go down to their county and get get the records that they desire and records are videos and not get a bill a and is this bill says a pre pay bill. every day our Kansans some of them some of us just can't afford that another lawyer may be able to and I may go get it but but I just asked the committee to consider as sound amendment which sets an objective standard on how much is charged here so we don't further week in what some call the strong this for you law in the entire country and this will we can for you it will it it will not create the open government as it's written I've I've I support law enforcement one hundred ten percent but we've got to have a balance here and if if if the folks against this of not begged and pleaded for an amendment which will serve both as an objective standard where folks just don't get charged whatever government wants to charge on because that won't help because we have another question for you representative Gonzalez you're recognized thank you Mr the you brought up the George Floyd case and this it in that particular case there was an active investigation going on right so what would how would this apply to that if there's an active investigation is and all that information still available especially to the to the victim at no charge at may very well be I guess I guess my point is is whoever the public is They need to they need to know how much they're going to be charged this weakens Fauria. and as written what I what I would call it is the that that this may be known as is the wrong doing a cover up bill because the poor folks the folks who can afford to get these records to get these videos Why are we singling out those folks and what we're when is when a sample of amendment would cure this a fair objective fee would would cure this nobody's again at least I'm not against this. But I'm against the cost because I think it weakens the open records portion of our for you and it could be easily it could be easily cured and has been asked to be cured. Follows. Recognized for Apollo thank you Mr so you mentioned several times about an amendment that would would fix this but I have not I'm not personally saying that amendment can you just very briefly say what what that would do what what would fix this will get you okay with that yeah a a fee based upon the amount of recording provided not the unknown amount of time that an agency might say they need for that they spent one hour of recording provided equals one hour of charged at time and that to me again that preserves for you because that's what I that's what I care about I want to open government just like I want open body cams body cams are a good idea that protect they protect everyone involved it's not a he said she said so so I think that would be the Amendment again. Never in fifty three years of four U. S. cents Republican governor Winthrop Rockefeller was governor of our state in past are for you in a in a Democrat controlled let's just legislature has there been charge for labor and we we go down a very slippery slope very quickly next session it'll be what we are we gonna charge for this record or we can allow labor this is where this is headed if you open the door with this then you open the panacea okay who's it going to be next what records are going to be next and we will no longer be known as having the strongest sunshine law in the state which a simple amendment here in my opinion and hopefully Mr Steinberg who wrote the four U. handbook will will have the opportunity to address that further okay thank you thank you Mr McCutchen I said no further questions from committee members we appreciate your time thank you Sir speaking for the bill is Tim Miller Mr Schiff you're free in room. You would just verify yourself to the Committee and once you've done that I'll remind you have to manage to make a presentation. Thank you representative tossed my name is Tim holder on the share for Washington County and have held that position since two thousand five past president this sheriffs association I'm here to speak on behalf of the other members of the association the seventy five sheriffs throughout the state primarily by giving testimony on what has occurred at the sheriff's office over the last couple years I'm also some numbers at you and then be open for questions but. We have a jail that has a hundred and eighty two permanent cameras which is four thousand hours of recording a day so the potential is there for lengthy in multiple a request now and we also have phone the phones for the detainees in twenty nineteen over twenty seven thousand detainee phone calls were sorted and sent to request yours and twenty twenty forty eight thousand detainee phone calls were sorted and sent out jail video for district courts four hundred fifty four request and nineteen and two hundred ninety six and twenty twenty as far as freedom of information request in twenty nineteen we had eight hundred and seventy seven in twenty twenty we had eight hundred and thirty one everything dropped a bit in twenty twenty with the covid extensive request that took over three hours and twenty nineteen we had thirty two in twenty twenty we had nineteen. large video requests which is primarily what I'm talking about today audio and in video we had in nineteen we had a couple that were one was twenty five hours of video everyone was thirteen in twenty twenty we had for that went way over and everyone was as many as thirty hours of video. I think that it's important for the script I understand that that somebody brought up earlier that when they're six hours of video you know that somebody's requested it requires somebody to sit down for six hours and review that video to redact information that cannot represent but you two minutes is up but with the the motion if we have any questions from committee members thanks to Whitaker you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair Sure if I'm really interested in these numbers could you continue sure and there's not there's not that many more thank you the representative would occur In Washington County Other than the detention recording which is but total four thousand a day and I know that are not one one specialist talked about this a moment ago but just in Washington County and twenty twenty we received a hundred and sixty just under a hundred and sixty thousand non emergency calls and another seventy eight hundred nine one one calls which are all subject to the F. O. Y. request and I will restate what many have said we are not here to water down the FY we believe in transparency but they are manpower intensive It's been stated that for. Fifty years the FOR in the state of Arkansas has never been water down to reduce but in the last twenty years. In the first thirty years we didn't have dash cams we didn't have body cams we didn't have nine one you know all the things that were able to capture now with technology with all those things requests are coming in at unprecedented numbers and it requires a lot of man hours to produce that we're happy to do it but I think that it's a fair request on on the on behalf of the sheriffs and other law enforcement agencies that there be some compensation for those that are exponentially long. Ladyman you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair sure Felder up I've got a question thank you started to talk about this when you talked about three hours of video so. A ten does it take longer than three hours to be to view a three hour video does it take more time than that is a lot more expensive than just the video time clock good question it takes three hours to review three hours of video the the additional time as the redaction trying to determine what information can release be released and what can't and then of course compiling of the reports and we have one full time employee that does nothing but review detention video and detention audio to make to to make sure those releases meet the Freedom or at the the privacy acts we have one full time civilian employee Jack the And does nothing but respond to all other info I request we have. Multiple people that pitch in and help on these because of their specific jobs sent in evidence all of our dash cam videos for their store she has to pull all those down and then do the same process so it's very involved it's not just the three hours compared to the three hours of video was much more. Recognized for a follow up just one other thing the nine one one coordinator talked about the fireworks thing as an example so that do you get any of those kind of requests were like it is example of the fireworks two years or long term that's excessive the do you those for two years running. Well whatever you would consider excessive we have a we have in the past and we've had a reoccurring request because of an annual event So we have had those the potential is always there I will throw this into Jack that the sheriff's office Washington County we have intentionally not gone to the body cams not that we don't need to go in my community wants us to have body cams and personally I want to have them but the problem is storage and then the redaction issues that that we're gonna be faced I feel that we're probably gonna have to have a part time or another full time employee just to retrieve that information we do get body cams I did serve on the governor's task force and I can tell you. Based on national sentiment in the state that I believe that every agency in some form or fashion is going to be required to have body cams in the next five years so I know that was our recommendation. Okay thank you sure say no further questions from committee members we appreciate staff and signed up to speak against the bill is bad Coker's. This call over to the pronounce that correctly. Yes okay thank you okay did you would just have stated in the table. What you identified yourself to the committee you have two minutes. You're recognized thank you. my name is Beth Coker I live in fable in Washington County and I drove down here today to speak to you about the importance of the Arkansas Fauria Law to ordinary citizens like myself in my nonprofit work to end mass incarceration in my work to shed light on the local government for eleven across the state I use the freedom of information act often it's necessary. It's a valuable tool for gathering information that our government might otherwise not want to share and to which we would otherwise not be able to see here's one example of foreign have how I used to for you to act in twenty nineteen one The Washington County corn Court was looking into the possibility of building a new thirty eight million dollar jail I and other community members gather data statistics much of which we obtained through the Fauria Act to prove to the court and the county that we can address our over incarceration by other methods that save the people of Washington County the taxpayer's the Russian County over thirty three million dollars last year it and sales taxes a lime. For you allows us to hold our elected representatives accountable. That's important and it makes government work better for everyone. Law enforcement agencies in a county government should be looked upon as governmental entities that provide information willingly and as a service to the community we already pay taxes to support them and the services they provide it's not fair to make his pay again to get information that belongs to us my husband and I retired we live on a fixed income there are many like me. For him fifteen dollars an hour plus charges would be a real hardship. The average are Kansas can't afford this and I can't afford this please keep that in mind when you consider this instead of weakening for you which is one of the best in the nation it would be more productive and efficient to direct County plans to hire personnel to assist Pacific Lee with for your request sort of like a for a a clearinghouse for the county. The representative images up any questions from committee members saying that ma'am thank you for your time thank you. Signed up to speak. For the bill is Mr Scott Salyer Mr Schaller. Serve you would use in a positive to the committee and then your two minutes of Sturch yes Sir my name sheriff Scott Sawyer and the ship Polk County Arkansas. I've been here for four years I've been law enforcement down there for twenty seven since I took office in seventeen I've been working really hard to update our our quick make some of those out data some of it was broken doing this on a shoestring budget budget my County population but twenty thousand I've got eleven deputies I'm sorry I've got ten deputies I'm number eleven we're under pet underpaid obviously under budget or under. Funded we don't have enough people and and they're overworked I'm a big fan of body cameras I have researched a live demo them I've talked to but you sure simply shift that have them and use them and I want them I think they can't do anything but help me in my department the maker cases better they restore public confidence in in law enforcement agencies and if if there's a dispute if there's a problem or complaint I can resolve it pretty quickly off the body cam video the problem is the cost and it's not the cost of purchasing the cameras again for all my gas for about six thousand dollars that's the whole department it's C. the long term storage. That I keep your nightmares and it goes on and on and on so every year the storage is going to be higher because I'm stored more. Information and then the the Burdensome if I request I've got eighteen cameras in my jail if somebody Senate FOR request for four hours of of jail video that's that's eighteen cameras that I'm gonna have to go through so it's four hours eighteen times we're not asking for a whole lot fifteen dollars an hour would not even cover the administrative costs to pay somebody to do that but it would help them offset my cost I have one person that data is administrative assistant at my department she didn't have time to to respond if I request constantly I do not have time one of my deputies have time if if we have to deal with something like that somebody wants all my jail cameras are all my body camera footage I was in red you Page two minutes is up any questions from committee members. Seeing none sure thank you for your time we appreciate you being here signed up to speak against the bill is share more. Shmorah remind you just once you identified yourself to the Committee you'll have two minutes. Sign. Hi Sarah Moore I'm from Washington County and I really appreciate and their US conversation we're having around this because I agree fully as important to space stay strong for us I want to make sure that we're thinking about the voice of every day our Kansans I'm kind of like was mentioned previously with miss Coker and Mr McCutchen but also in that conversation about washing council in regard to the gel I feel like it's very important that we think about the fact that I feel like we have incomplete information on something that's a very big change to avoid I haven't heard in a lot of the conversation specific costs for storage and what that's look like per county or per capita or across the state I haven't heard anything in regard to the manpower estimates statewide and per county I also think it's very important I think I've seen that here that people think it's incredibly important that we have local control the task force just got done with meeting and and came up with these conclusions for body cameras and haven't had the opportunity in the county to have the conversations about how we take care of that with their own budgets and have those conversations about storage and additionally and you know it used to be we talk about talk technology you know computers will take up this entire Ramin today everybody pretty much has a computer in their pocket and so I really haven't heard in this conversation as well on the technologies on the storage what options are out there I hear that you know each of us in each county are at different levels of our technology and capabilities and our budget but then I haven't seen anything in any total report or if Danny exploration of what that's gonna look like to get to look into things that might make it less burdensome and cumbersome to get to these and I also want to bring out we live in a very rule state and very impoverished state we talk about the fifteen dollars per hour and I'm really curious about where that's come from and I haven't seen any information that's gotten us to arrive at that I don't wash in county we had a conversation about county employees a pay per hour and about seventy employees make less than fifteen dollars per hour there was an in I. T. living wage calculator that was done in January two thousand nineteen. Jean and said that the individual and the stern fourteen dollars and eighteen cents per hour in Arkansas to brought provide for a family at the statement. If you but you two minutes is up any questions from committee members. Seeing none ma'am thank you for appearing before the committee also signed up to speak against the bill is. Alex gains. Alex gains. Okay. The. Thank you for that. Also signed speak up against the bill is seventy. About a. Thank you Mr chairman name is sunny El Dorado sorry about that okay it gets mangled lot of. It's my Spanish heritage. Anyway Hi here on behalf of the Arkansas freedom of information coalition which is an organization of about thirty people includes journalists lawyers average citizens some public employees agency officials and I'm here to basically I first of all let me just say I'm I'm very sympathetic to the cost issue for a. Particularly law enforcement and other agencies and trying to satisfy FY request however the law as it stands now excuse me does not allow. Any charges for personnel time except. In. Special requests for electronic information. Of the charge for personal time should not exceed the salary of the lowest paid employee or contractor who in the disks discretion of the custodian has necessary skill in training to respond to the request. My concern with this bill. Is not necessarily the fifteen dollars. but as was mentioned before the the three hours or less. but specifically. Allowing the charge for the medium of production it doesn't mention anything about whether a request your supplies the medium of production like a DVD are a thumb drive. But it also charges for supplies what are supplies who decides what the what charges are for supplies and who just who decides what charges are for equipment and finally. Maintenance costs why is the public going to be charged for amortization or maintenance costs of equipment and supplies that should be part of the agency's budget. That's basically it hi I have concerns about those issues those aren't properly defined for to to my satisfaction. Thank you from committee members. Okay said none thank you Sir for your time thank you so. If you don't wanna do that would you come back to the table for please. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized for a question for representative back. Thank you Mr representative back up I support the spirit of this bill and thank you your headed towards a good cause I do have some concerns and and I feel like we just keep hearing the same concerns beyond being brought up here but I do have some some concerns about the cost of it and the cost not having any type of of limitation on it would you be willing to pull this down and and add some of these amendments that put some type of limitation so we'll we'll have a known cost to this. Well I I'd certainly want to put some limitation I I have no issues as far as upon this now. The issue that I would have is I I don't know that that's going to address some of the other some of the other concerns but I'm more than willing to talk me the concerns have been brought up today though I will tell you have been offered up is amendments and were rejected by the very group that says that they brought him up so I'll what I'll do is I'll pull it down I will look at putting a cap on it It that's what the committee would like to see the maximum cap and We'll we'll go from there. Okay yeah I would be issued I'd like to work with the you know some type of reasonable amendments on cost and. Put some type of limitations on this if you don't mind pulling down a I have greatly appreciate the. That's no problem I move on to make sure it's understanding that you request has to pull this bill down and and may get the amendments and bring it back before the committee. Yes okay that your request and that's what we'll do the bill's being pulled and we look forward to and you bring it back to this committee thank you very much thank you. Representative Lowery as to your in room now so we had to pass over you're you're recognized to present as bill seventeen fifteen. You know me I'm always done really cool for thank you Mister Mister chairman if with your permission I'd like for a car on house to join me at the end of the table to help with presentation this. Would have you back before state agencies We mentioned you on this committee but glad you honor us with your presence today if you would just identify yourself for the for the committee Douglas. My name's Douglas House I'm now deputy Attorney General to the Arkansas Attorney General. Representative that I recognized thank you very much and the representative house car on house had a lot of different titles I didn't know which one he prefers to be but we're glad to have him back as a trusted colleague of members earlier in the session you did you took a very significant step in helping protect the integrity of our elections and that was by amending the voter ID law that takes away the signed statement in it instead requires that it ID actually be produced aware that's significant and specific to today's bill is talking about absentee ballot applications an absentee ballots of a lot of the the concerns that came up in the top twenty twenty election were based on concerns over the proper verification of signatures so we've dealt with that significantly by saying that if you're going to put to turn in an absentee ballot you have to do so with a photo copy of your driver's license so we made a big step but there's still a lot of other provisions related to absentee ballots that that we are dressing in this bill today let me just try and highlight of some of those current law allows for possession of ten ballots to create a rebuttable presumption of intent to defraud but the so the law changes that from ten to four in other words that an individual can't just walk out with ten applications at a time and then try and find people who would want to vote absentee the critical applicator the critical element there is that which should not we should limit ordered actually totally do away with unsolicited absentee applications in this log this bill does that the county Clerk or other designated elected official shall not. Distribute unsolicited absentee ballot applications it also creates a uniform voter statement across all seventy five counties right now there's not a uniform statement of it also protects the The absentee ballots after the outer envelope with an absentee ballot is open a county Clerk and deputies of the county Clerk shall not have access to the ballots the ballot paper work or the inner envelope the purpose of this is to it is to have ballot materials following the canvassing of absentees being sent to the county Clerk for correction by election officials that something that had occurred in the twenty twenty election specifically in Pulaski County Canceling school ballots of requires a stamp marked cancelled on the face of the ballot that again this is also not been a uniform provision at this point I'm just going to go ahead and turn it over to a representative House to give you some other highlights of things that did come up in the twenty twenty election that really brought about the need for this as well as some of the other election integrity of bills that we are bringing before the legislature to do pass you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman the representatives of. The the problem. Is a planetary matter if you go to the FBI and the department of justice's website you're going to see a lot of election fraud problems in cases that they've handled as late as March the nineteenth not quite about three weeks ago the FBI were arrested a number of people in North Carolina bringing the total to about thirty nine for election fraud you can find. Of reports by the department of justice and the FBI have been those websites voter fraud in Nebraska around the Maricopa county that would be Arizona E. I will remember that and. In you look at the policy of the FBI you see that that voter fraud and election fraud by officials is one of their higher priorities in terms of investigation when somebody says there's no such thing as voter fraud that's not true you can find those cases on online the problem with the absentee ballots is. The it has or not on the person casting the ballot when they do so you'll may remember some may may be remember the fella by names Haltom I believe R. Hallam I'm sorry over Crittenden County about ten years ago who was following the postman would get a call from somebody in the clerk's office would follow the postman is by absentee ballots were delivered to homes what knock on the doors offer chicken dinners and a bottle of vodka to have those votes he was caught by federal officials because they were bringing that liquor across the state line over in Tennessee and he was convicted in federal court. We saw some irregularities in Pulaski County people were notified to come in and fix their votes a tent was set up outside the courthouse those ballots were received by people who were not the county Clerk and we're able to take those and do whatever they happen to do with another words no oversight and in order for all of us to have confidence that the elections are fair and honest these procedures that are set forth in law have to have to be set out have to be observed in this particular bill one of my part first concerns is is when it was suggested that we reduce the number of absentee ballots possession of absentee ballots from ten to four it just created a presumption so if you have a big family and dad speaking up for six kids that still live within mom and grandmother and everybody else that's not going to be stopped because there will be a name associated with each one of those There's also a problem a lot of folks don't know this but in definitions of section the county Clerk is not an election official the county Clerk has to be designated to handle ballots in an election matters and but it does it does make it clear that once the ballots are brought in they have to be transferred over to the Election Commission for opening and that that's an important part what we did see were ballots that were being opened in the courthouse what happened to them after that we don't know but we do know that a lot of people came in to make corrections on their ballots I don't know what else to add beyond what representative Lowery his mansion I'll be glad to answer any questions about any part of this that fact in but I think it's a good bill and deserves your consideration thank you. Members we have any questions representive love you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair because I mean four thousand five. What you stated about the The Pulaski County clerk's office. Was that verify because you just you just stated that she had people picking up. Balance that were not officials that were not in they were just doing what the bill is what they want to do. Yes Sir I went there and personally saw the tent I went up to see who was in the tent I asked who was the county Clerk or deputy county Clerk president in that tent who is receiving the ballots and there was no one there from the county clerk's office inside that tent yes so as I was receiving the balance. There was a group they call themselves for FOR R. A. R. people I think they are affiliated with the Democratic Party but I don't really get too deep into who they are being funded by who they're so share it with. Following this chapter right here. So you're saying that the it and then. The people that were receiving the ballots were not employees or anything of the county Clerk they were just doing the ridges and grooves I've never heard of for some please don't associate them with the Democratic Party because I've never heard of before but you're saying that she had people out there that was not working for the county Clerk except imbalance I don't know what the county Clerk was doing let me just say what I saw there was a tent set up outside the courthouse I went up to the content found that what they were doing they were receiving ballots they would walk up to a car receive ballots from people asked who is the county Clerk or deputy county Clerk here no one responded they were all wearing FOR R. T. R. for our people T. shirts now. To set him up who sent him out there what social ation they have with the Clerk I don't know I know there was no deputy Clerk identified at that site I do know they were taken ballots from people off the street. Any other questions from committee committee members. reserve Richmond you have a question. Okay. Okay you see in. No further questions do we have anybody. There is nobody signed up to speak speak for against this. stretch. Representative Lowery you would you like to close for your bill well let me let me mention one of the areas that and I kinda cool touched on it a little bit with the issue of verification of signatures one of the reasons we went ahead and adopted the change in the voter ID law we're we accept only photo ID's as opposed to sworn statement sworn signed statements which to the testimony I gave that there is no uniform standard of signature verification that where that applies to this bill is in terms of comparing the signatures of two on the voter application to the original voter registration card that is that was not done in many cases specifically in Pulaski County every we we heard that you know there were approval of the absentee ballot applications ninety eight percent plus well that's that's almost unheard of even if if you just look at the issue of signal verifying signatures not saying that that was fraudulent it's just that the verification of signatures usually does not reach the ninety eight percent threshold will. What we do here with this particular law as we make sure that you are comparing signatures on the voter application the voter skews me the absentee ballot application to the voter's original voter registration certificate those signatures and that would help with that the integrity so for these reasons members I I appreciate your questions and I ask for do pass on this bill. Representative Lowery has the the Bill representative Leding. I have a motion. I have a motion to pass you discussion on the motion. Shea none all in favor say aye. Our parents say no regulations representative love your bill has passed you're now recognized to present house bill eighteen oh three. Thank you members AT NO three is label as the Arkansas balancing integrity Act of twenty twenty one and what it does is it puts the proper authority where it belongs which is with the state board of election commissioners to investigate any type of complaint that may come from a County Board of election commissioners as to the way the election was conducted we've also in this bill expanded the violations that would fall under the complaints that the state board could investigate there today could be investigate voter registration requests for and delivery absentee ballots if there are concerns about that the casting of ballots and tabulation they could investigate certification of election results administration of election the election processes or the conduct of an election or election associated with the complaint that it also gives them the power to issue subpoenas a subpoena may direct any law enforcement officer of the county or the Arkansas state police director to seize any public record that is with held in addition to written warnings cautions reprimands this bill allows for the issuance of a conditional warning of consequences that shall be composed of corrective action is not completed by the state board if the County Board of Election Commission commissioners determines that the expense is necessary well first I should say the County Board should prepare a budget estimate of all election expenses including staff poll workers equipment materials and such and get and send that to the county judge in the comptroller for each fiscal year if the County Board determines that the expenses necessary to conduct a free equal in lawful election can be met through in kind support that would be with this. Sense of the county Clerk for instance they could accept that income and support under the terms and conditions that would be except acceptable to the County Board bottom line is on this election integrity we're putting in the hands of those who are frankly if they have a fiduciary responsibility to make sure the election is done fairly and legally that would be rest with the County Board of election commissioners and so we're giving them more authority if they have complaints to be able to then either acidosis complaints or those issues be corrected if not then they can turn it over to the state board for any kind of investigation again alternate over to colonel House if he has anything else you'd like to add. Any comments RepresentativeHouse. One of the concerns probably forty to forty five counties the Election Commission turns it overturns the election over to the county Clerk or to an election director or an election coordinator or senior Clerk or someone like that and basically says go and handle it that's perfectly all right the County Board of election commissioners may delegate the authority to run an election matter fact they can delegate the authority to run the election to almost anybody if they're not a convicted felon and a few things like that. But one thing the County Board of election commissioners cannot do is delegate responsibility they remain responsible for the conduct of the election no matter who runs it up until now and I see Daniel over here against the wall the state board of election commissioner has been state board of election commissioners has been toothless they have to do very very narrow window when they can receive a complaint they have to do it within thirty days to receive a complaint within thirty days this broadens their authority now why do we want to broaden their authority I mentioned early on that the FBI and the department of justice one of their primary considerations is corruption of officials there's even records where they've arrested a circuit judge county clerks things like that where the election is been tainted. Frankly I think it's good policy that we take care of our own problems within the House it's better that if we take care of our own problems we don't have to face the embarrassment of the federal government coming in here saying why didn't you take care of this and that sort of thing has happened in the past in other areas so this lets the county the State Board of Election Commission or gives them the tools to do what they need to do to get things fixed thank you. Any questions from committee members. Thirty nine and no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative Ladyman you're recognized. Representative Larry ready totally your bill. Representative allow you ready closing your bill. Yes thank you members were taking gigantic steps forward to ensure the integrity of our ballots you know when I presented the voter ID law originally I never use the word fraud because frankly many times fraud is not counted or tabulated unless there's a prosecution we have a number of prosecutors that choose to not investigate or prosecute fraud if they determine that it didn't really change the outcome of the election and so there's no real central clearinghouse for instance is a part of fraud to the opponents will always say well don't bring up puts in Hallam that's just one incident well it's one significant incident that took place so the voter ID law that we've tightened by your by your vote that FCRA a big step the giving more power to the state board of election commissioners as representative house just mentioned that's a powerful part of it Really all of these different pieces we have several senator Hammer has some bills that are running over in the Senate they did special order yesterday so all of these actually of work together it's important for us to to pass each and everyone of these these pieces because they're pieces of a puzzle and so. For these reasons I just ask that you would support and I appreciate the do pass motions in the appreciate your support for the value representative Lowery is close with this bill we have a motion from representative Ladyman Purdue passes or any discussion on the motion. Representative love you're recognized for discussion on the motion of do pass. Thank you Mr chair and I'm going to vote against this bill I voted against the last bill and I'm going to continue to say this is a piece of a puzzle. The reason why you don't mention fraud is because there's no fraud involved. It's a piece of a voter suppression possible. In looking continue as a legislature to pass these voter suppression laws but it doesn't it doesn't change anything. You can't if you can't identify for our there is no fraud. You may have one or two instances where there's irregularities. But there's been in repair regularities in all elections in so these laws don't change anything except you're trying to suppress the vote. And that's the voter suppression puzzle that you're trying to put together with that I would encourage you a no vote thank you. Representative let has spoken on the motion. Representative Ladyman you're recognized to speak on the motion of a do pass thank you Mr chair. Well I think from what we've heard one from what occurred in the last election in the last ten years. To say that there's no voter fraud means that we've got minors on we're not looking at the facts the facts are there is a voter fraud we can express an opinion which represented love has and I appreciate his opinion my opinion is that we look at the facts and there is evidence of voter fraud and we we need to tweak our election laws this is one tweak that we need to make sure that every person gets to vote their ballot and nobody else was there ballot so I would ask that you vote yes on this okay representative Ladyman has spoken on the motion any other discussion on the motion of a do pass. Seeing none. All in favor say aye. All opposed say no VisualAge representative Lowery bill has passed thanks very much committee thank you next on today's agenda is house bill sixteen eighty representative Richardson Mr chairman. Thank you for allowing me to attend your committee that's good to see all of my dear friends and I love everyone of you and I'm issue. Thank you for allowing me to ten men be excused tell you don't know how much like you RepresentativeHouse. Okay committee member we have an amendment that's been passed out so as soon as we get that we'll get started with the bill. Sixteen eighty. Ninety one this. Yes. Yeah. Representative to register you're recognized to present your amendment thank you Mister Mister chair is just adding a Senate sponsor on the minute on the amendment okay representative to register has presented me but we have a. Motion of to pass own amendment all in favor say aye All opposed say No representative Richard you know present house bill sixteen eighty as amended thank you so much Mister chair and colleagues I'll be brief I've been working with the state police with the sheriff's association for a while to work on this in this particular bill is something that I think is is needed what it does is it it it it makes us have a policy in all law enforcement that we will address some of the challenges that a law enforcement goes through of identified as critical incident debriefing so as our law enforcement officers go through these these challenging times and we all understand what those are and how they go through this this is putting in place a policy that each law enforcement organization has to give these. P. I was about to say guys have to give these people of debriefing after these critical incidents whether it's a an accidental shooting a fight or whatever it is and it's not just of a basic the briefing but it it goes hand in hand with the bill that resented Tosh ran about the peer to peer counseling so it encompasses the peer to peer if the peer can't provide the support is needed for these offices then they're going on get a mental health professional to help with that so this bill does nothing but uh support our law enforcement and try to give them the tools they need because far too often we see officers start one way and retire completely different because of the things they've gone through the things they've seen so hopefully this bill will address that and with that open for questions. Any questions from committee members representative paid you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman I appreciate what you said about you know support them and give them the tools they need. Is it necessary to do this to give on that tool or or do they already have the option of doing this if they want to so my understanding is some law enforcement agencies have this not all of them do but this is just mandated that they have a policy to address this and and so that's my question if I could follow up mandating something that they can already do if they want if they choose to Why is it necessary that we mandated so give me an example so if if I'm a sheriff and I've I've got a friend of mine who's a deputy we've been friends for twenty years he's been in a critical incident because we're friends he may say I'm fine I don't need to see any thing I'm I'm fine and they share being in a leadership position will have a way to deal with that look this is a guy or gal that I know I trust what you're saying and I don't want to impact that relationships okay I listen to what you say this is basically taking some of that onus off of them as a leader and said look this is the bill that this crazy Democrat ran that is going to force you to go to get some kind of help and and that's kind of the the why we're trying to to put that in there. Thank you follow up on what you're recognized and that really helps me a lot with what you just said except for I'm in. I agree that it gives the share of somebody else to blame it on I need you to do this but with that said how merrily do we define the critical incident briefing. Any occasions or they're going to be that we have to do this well I I can't speak to how many times that they'll have a critical incident but I guess it would depend on the the organization and what's happening in those areas of I don't know how often maybe I can well I think you might give us a clue if you could go through so the critical it means your as defined at the bottom in section three of enacted law enforcement AC policies include without limitation policies regarding use of force vehicle pursue professional conduct of law enforcement officers bias based policing and the critical incident and at the beginning at the top of critical incident means an event that has stressful impact sufficient to overwhelm a person's usually effective coping skills including an event that falls outside the range of ordinary human experience. Go follow one more okay. So it is defined but it's going to have to. Who do we need to know who's going to determine whether to critical incidents are not with that definition. Somebody's going to look look at the at the incident that happened and it and determine its a critical. And so that that would be identified by the leadership so the share maybe in policies yes okay thank you Mr okay The representative to make sure recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman and I I like the intent of the bill my one question is is it that says that the law enforcement agency will be required to assist the officer recovering from the psychological facts and unfortunately as we know sometimes in these events is the psychological effects or or very long term is there any sort of limitation on this I mean if an officer is involved in a shooting in develops a PTSD or something is that agency gonna be required you know twenty twenty five years from now to still be providing services for that officer to help them cope with that is that. I think that's I think that's kind of already happening I mean the goal is to keep our officers sound in concert in and ready to go so it's my understanding that as the officers come in the the help that they need to always be provided form is not gonna be held against them and if it takes several years I would assume that would continue to go on all right thank you thank you Sir thank you representative you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman as I read this. And just put it in south Arkansas language so I can understand it what this does is says the end of the policy shall be adopted by the the agency. And if the officer may if he needs it ask for assistance. Any does ask it. The department is required to give it to yes it but the officer does not need any debriefing he doesn't get it right well not exactly that is is it may require the law enforcement officer who has been involved in a critical incident to participate in the briefing may yeah may you may use it is a tough one right there of may doesn't mean it's mandatory mandatory exactly it what we probably should at which shall but as we as we look through this of but again we're we're depending on our leaders in law enforcement to identify these things and be able to talk to their offices and that's what we're trying to do is make sure that we're talking to me given the needs that they or given the support that they need of I do understand what you're saying with may require of that law enforcement officer and and I'd be willing to look at but I think I think the the the spirit of the bill what we're trying to do is still being a copy if I can have a follow up you're recognized I mean I I'm okay with if the officer needs help giving help would be cities okay I I'm okay with the word may okay I think and again to your point I guess what I was talking about earlier sometimes an officer doesn't know that they need help and I think that's where the peer to peer comes in place which is a part of this which can help identify that. You're recognized for a question. I thank you Mr a representative you you you are more than one occasion this morning Mention the key role that law enforcement leadership would play in this team. Have you had a chance to get feedback from the sheriff's association the state police the F. O. P. apple peas the chief of police I got several but they're all in there might be a good time with it well I'd be happy if if any you guys wanna I've worked diligently with these guys to come up with this and and actually I promise director could I would bring her up here but but maybe we could have or just kind of talk about what we were doing. Thank you. Madam secretary if you would identify yourself to the committee please. Good morning I'm Jamie cook I'm the secretary for the Arkansas department of public safety and the director for the commission on law enforcement standards and training we've worked with representative Richardson on this bill of when I say we that's myself Colonel Bryant Chief Well Gary sides with that she sees I don't I think you just walked out Scott Bradley with the sheriff's association sure of Helder is here sure Sawyer was here he's here we all support this bill the reason why is because law enforcement officers representative talks you can attest to this we see things that people shouldn't see and that has an effect on us and we're trying diligently in Arkansas to set up wellness and resiliency programs that are available to every police officer all eleven thousand office so that we can retire in a healthy of way right now the average age for a heart attack for police officers forty nine years old forty nine years old as opposed to sixty seven for the average person in our community and our of the United States. A police officer lives twenty one years less after retirement then the average citizen in this country we have got to do something about that wellness and resiliency is absolutely the way that we can keep officers healthy thank you to representative Taschen senator Wallace run are privileged communication bill bill that expands our availability of peer support members this bill just requires departments to have a policy this is a message of our law enforcement officers in this state that we're gonna take care of you and I think that's all that I think that's what it does most of our departments lecture of holder will could testify to they have something like this we took this verbiage from our wellness program at the department of public safety so I think that it just it just endorses something that we're trying diligently to do here in the state of Arkansas that's take care of our good officers. Thank you madam secretary Preciado testimony did leave me a little depressed to consider the longevity of retired police officers so anyways but it makes you feel any better I'm forty nine years old so I take under stand your pain yeah. raise okay if you have questions from committee members represented Payton you're recognized. Thank you Mr and I really appreciate everything he said I want to support this bill the devil's in the details in the words and everything so at the bottom of page one do you have a copy of the bill with you their own line thirty one at a paragraph starts it says shall require the law enforcement agency to assist the law enforcement officer who's been involved in critical incident in obtaining additional services. So we're we're mandating with the shall that will help them get additional services what are the parameters on that on what types of additional services I mean. What how far left field can they go in demanding something that may not. William reasonable again it. I would I would think we would lean on leadership so the sheriffs and the and the chiefs to determine what that is again all the while we're trying to do with this and and they shall do this is to make sure that we provide the necessary tools they need to be healthy and I don't know what that is it could be. Eighty eight I don't know of anyone to speculate but it's really good but it has to be with regards to the critical incident that they've dealt with this is it just you know I woke up this morning I got a headache and I want you to deal with me for the next ten minutes but this is based on the critical incident that they've dealt with and then we're going to support you because you've dealt with this for as long as it takes for you to be well. I understand that reasonable people cannot follow you recognizable people can disagree on what reasonable. So some guidelines need to be set the. When we say and they shall we're we shall require the law enforcement agency. To obtain additional services and that is about is brought to you can get. Okay. Representative Payton if I may we have a minimum standard for law enforcement officers in the state of Arkansas and they're required to meet certain psychological I don't know with the testing or whatever but you if if they don't they're sometimes unfortunately officers deal with things that they may or may not be able to recover from and at that point in time it becomes a fit for duty situation and and so we would have to you know send that officer to the fit for duty we have a lot of retirements medical retirements due for that very thing that they just cannot recover from some of the psychological events that we encounter. The vast majority of time they can they can recover if we get home at the beginning and we start talking to him all along like every year well that that's not my question okay I'm sorry I didn't understand your question I'm just worried that you question representative paid thank you Mr who determines what intentional services would be reasonable because we are mandating that they obtain the additional services. Who did I mean. The officer who has the injury. May have a different opinion from the management on what additional services are reasonable. This mandates that the management provide additional services I would assume that if it's officers asking for those services is going to get on since we mandated. Correct and I'm not sure if I can answer that question in a way that you're looking of all I can say is that based on the incident that has occurred with the process with an officer the goal is to stay with them and support them as best we can for as long as we can to we realize that as Mr just said they've gone through a fit for duty if it's gotten to that point and it has gotten to that point and then it's different at that point but it's up to the leadership in each one of these law enforcement agencies to work with offices to see what that looks like and again I don't I don't I know I'm not answer your question but but that's what I'm trying to get at. The representative would be fair to say that there's no way that you could ever put into law to be able to cover every conceivable situation that might occur and and if I'm understanding correctly you're given the opportunity for the officer to have of any type of issues that they may have I think the department would recognize a high it should be a critical situation and and would progress that with the officers that correct and is available to them so you just trying to say that shale if they feel like they have a need for something they want to make sure that that opportunity and that the issue is made is that correct that is absolutely correct okay and I'd like to say that representive Dotson just pointed out to me what I was missing and it is in there in the line where it says a law enforcement agency shall adopt a policy that there's only everything I was worried about was after that so. Good. Dodgin so in the. Okay see no further representative makes. Okay she no further questions from committee members of I can't remember now the did you have you already close for you will close some done okay the representative you ages because of the bill we have a motion. I have a motion the just a minute we have a motion do pass as amended. in the discussion on the motion do pass as amended saying none all in favor say aye. Jose NO graduates refuge ridge your bill has passed. Representative you Senator Solomon. the representative million you're going to present the bill yes Sir all right you're recognized to permit approved president Senate bill one ninety six yeah this is a for your bill of this bill has been amended the admissibility in the social Asian council should work this bill they all agree with this bill what this bill does if if a person comes in and and request information that they do not yet the end up filing the lawsuit go to court and we in the one that they asked information from pays attorney's fees. Of the and that's that's the significance of the bill the bill did pass on the of the Senate on the Senate floor for thirty four of votes for this bill you know everybody agreed to this bill ninety and so it's pretty plain pretty simple we'll. and of your committee questions of. You'll have any. Any questions from committee members. Hello everyone signed up to speak for against the bill representative of million you're recognized closed I am very is close with this bill we have a motion upper representative Wardlaw do pass any discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor say aye All opposed say no graduation your bill is passed. Next on today's agenda is house bill sixteen twenty six. Representative Brooks. Representative Brooks you're recognized to present your to help someone did the table read register identify yourself for the committee. John Wilkerson general counsel a municipally they represent the brochure recognized thank you Mister chairman Keith Brooks represent district thirty one portions of Selena classy county I'm open a representative Jett gene the we have the same consistency is what president Milligan just that so a relatively simple straightforward for you bill brought to us by the municipally dealing with a public employee salaries if since public employee salaries are part of the public record it just allows that if a request for Sauer publicly is made that the consortium isn't required to notify the employee before disclosing the gross salary amount since already public. Without because I take any questions. The questions from committee member representative level recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman I guess this is to the municipality What what instances this occur because now what I don't work for municipality I work for county government in my sellers the requested what actually is out there so what what are we trying to resolve with this bill for saying what what instances occur right so Little Rock in particular is really the one that is dealt with this issue there's an AG opinion that says that gross salaries are they're they're always going to be allowed to be released but some cities keep very the salaries as part of the personal records what's considered part of the personal record the personnel record when it's requested any part of it you have to go to the employee that to say Hey we're about to release your record interpret personal record the employee can then go to the AG and ask for an opinion age is going to say listen it's it's a personal record at least when it comes to two salaries to meet Jesus has said it's not gonna be exempted the salaries at least so when the salary is part of the personnel record we still have to go that extra step but the salary just part of the budget but sometimes it is when I have to go through this problem so are this is not a problem this this extra hurdles all this is doing is saying look at the the the salaries no matter where it is in a personal record budget wherever it's exam so we just release it when we're asked to actually I just want to the task for the FY task force made read with it it just makes the process a little cleaner. Thank you. The questions from committee members. Say No representative Brooks no one will hold me hold on a minute. John Wilkerson well let you okay others look go million so you signed up to speak for the bill so okay you've already done that so representative Brooks I'm going to close yes Sir all right. We have a motion from the representative Jean. If you have a motion to do pass any discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor say aye opposed say no congratulations object but I Commissioner of Education Committee members that's it for today's agenda thank you for hanging in here we'll see you Monday morning at nine thirty this meeting is adjourned.