State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs- House

The week from Wednesday whatever that date is. So I'm not sure but the. Thirty first of. March thirty first made he tells me so anyway so next meeting we had today we March thirty first. if you're in the army junior here to speak for against the bill there's a sign up sheet just outside the door. Just make sure you. Just make sure you sign the sign up sheet and we'll we'll get you Signed up to speak for whatever bill you signed up to speak for against first item on today's agenda is house bill twelve twenty nine it's concur in Senate amendment representative Bentley. Representative mentally. Movin on the on the agenda The next item on today's agenda is house bill thirteen thirty two my representative board concurrent Senate amendment representative Boyd. Representative Boyd. Thank you Mr chair I didn't say I'm sorry Justin no no no problem you're recognized thank you Justin Boyd here to present the Senate concurrence in an amendment to house bill thirteen thirty two this bill is to harmonize school elections with other elections this amendment makes the harmonization complete there was an error in drafting and so with that that's really all I had have if you have questions I'm happy to get someone from secretary of state's office tell me answer questions. Any questions from committee members. Hey no one signed up to speak for against the bill. I have a motion for representative Wardlaw do pass any discussion on the motion. Hey none all in favor say aye All opposed say no graduation representative board. Did you Richmond you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair if if you want to I can run the amendment for representative Bentley get Kelly Boyd here who could to explain that amendment if you want to stay on track that's up to you Mr okay I appreciate if you would just a permit have shaped it into the table and Mr if it's permissible I'd like to ask Mister Board to take a seat and explain amendment. What if you will read the just to densify yourself for the committee. Thank you Mr chairman I'm Kelly board chief deputy commissioner state lands. We appreciate you being here if you would explain the concurrent Senate amendment on house bill twelve twenty nine by representative Bentley house bill twelve twenty nine had two problems that the Senate identified one of them was we have a prohibition against people from outside the United States purchasing land from delinquent tax auctions the reason being we have no way of notifying them in case they don't pay their taxes in the future they ask us to go in and put it in the code that if there's a prohibition from people outside the country we use the military reference home of record so if your home of records not the continental United States Alaska or Hawaii you're prohibited from purchasing land at delinquent tax options if you do so and we find out you within three business days we cancel the date we keep money because it's already gone to the county then we re optionally that just prevents the notification problem with other thing we did was take out the first option which is the only site option it will not be done online right now they had a concern about taking it outside the county we understand will still do post auctions and negotiated options online. Any questions from committee members. Representative Ladyman your. Property. Say no questions from committee members no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative to reach for you closed. Yes Mister I'm closer than the motion do pass I have a motion of do pass any discussion on the motion. Say none all in favor say aye aye All opposed say no congratulations thank you for a representative thank you Mr board. Thanks to Adam on today's agenda is house bill fifteen fifty nine representative gray. Represent the rate you're recognized present your bill thank you Mr chairman if I could have permission to have secretary Elizabeth Smith sit at the table with me. This bill would used to densify yourself to the Committee thank you I'm Elizabeth met the secretary for the department of inspector general. Okay represented well you're recognized thank you so this bill have I know it's nine pages the first couple pages strikes language from the fact public finance section of the code and moves it to the department of inspector general and they updated some language I can let Secretary Smith talk to that as well added some subpoena power for the executive agencies. And that's how majority of what the bill does all that Elizabeth Smith our secretary Smith go into specifics. Thank you representative gray has given a good summary of the bill the Powers of the office of internal audit had been both in statute as well as an executive order they were in two separate places and so what we were trying to do is combine that into one location and also have it'll be within the department of inspector general and as present great stated we are requesting subpoena power and there are additional information if you would like for Ricky quorum is here he's the director of the office of internal audit if you have additional questions thank you okay we'll see if we have any questions and then the. We need to bring him to the table. We can do so representative. Love you have a question you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair got sky asked several questions but. what what part of the bill is was that an executive order. Alas Ricky to come and explain the details between the two which were statutory and the executive order that would be okay okay. If you love you say you get three four questions no one else signed up to just go ahead and Who would issue questions thank you thank you Mr chairman my name's Ricky quantum bombing on the director of the office of internal audit so the question about the executive order and this office was created back in two thousand and one was created an executive order governor's executive order was issued and that executive order pretty much outlined I responsibilities center at forty. Subsequent to that there was some sign language added by statute. But we've been operating through an executive order for twenty years now and it's really like an audit charter and audit internal audit departments typically happen on a charter and that audit charter establishes their role there at forty in the responsibility and so that's that's where the language came from from the executive order executive order eight and eighteen dash oh one. Okay so then sold so this department it is it's because I was trying to figure out. Thank you sent in section three home page. I guess this page five how long process Page four. Why is it that you exempt by the General Assembly and employees of the legislative branch all those all those groups why that that your why is that your exemption on. So those exemptions existed previously and executive order and so they were brought over but in theory the entire internal audit is a a tool for management within the executive branch and and the goal is to provide auditing consultation services for executive branch agencies. So that's why the authorities not extended to legislative and judicial branches. Okay. Thank you. Thank you reputable of saying any further questions from committee members represented to play near recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman I'm trying to skim over really quick I noticed that some of the languages being stricken dealt with the reporting to. the legislature another's. Then I found this section that says anytime investigation is done they'll be reporting. And In in who they're reporting to I don't see the I mean I see Arkansas legislative audit is receiving the report that doesn't go directly to. LC or anything like that and now serves it goes to the governor's office Secretary Smith and to the Legislative on it just from Transparency perspectives to keep them informed there is a report by statute that we're going to be required to produce every year related to the department of transportation and that was statute that was added last general session. that particular report is required to go to Legislative Council. Yeah what else to say to you that prior statute that they had that streak in it didn't the reports didn't go to the Legislative Council so they still the same it's on the bottom of page five who will it goes to a. Okay well I was just giving over real quickly there and I appreciate. You're answering the question so every investigation is done we'll go to legislative audit but only the Department transportation goes to council that's correct and that's just this is I believe it was Senator Dismang that ran the bill last session that added a review of department of transportation and. And he actually had it to first report to twenty twenty one and so in consultation I talked to Senator Dismang and they don't currently have the staff to do that extensive of the review be to do this year so with that thought was either we need to strike that out and not do the review we got extend the time frame to give them time and hopefully get some more personnel in order to do that review so that's what we've done is extended it two years okay thank you Mr. You would say my might wanna help thank you representative played representative dodging you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair I guess my question kind of goes to your subpoena authority that you're requesting if you could explain it how's that different from what you're currently doing and why do you need that so currently we we do not have subpoena power. subpoena well as I mentioned are thorny lies within the performing audits of the executive branch agencies. We've never had a problem getting information from the executive branch agencies themselves what is important is whenever we're working on a project and which were audit team make a sub percipient that receives sponsor state agency for example we're working on one right now in which the server second received cares Act fines through a grant administered by parks heritage and tourism that serve recipient is X. suspected of Filing false documentation and application but we can't seem to get that documentation from the suburbs if the. Seventy very helpful for us subpoena power in that case to subpoena those records it's very rarely needed medication and it is yes so in that services representative yes you're recognized in that sort of situation with the If you have a if you're suspecting something and that would be considered violation of the law in the way that was done could you turn that over to the attorney general's office in the in the past week at any time when performing investigation what appears there's It needs a criminal investigation we referred to legislative audit we refer it to the state police and if it's a federal funds would also referring to the respective department inspector general at the federal level. Yeah. Follow. Recognized. So you haven't really had a major issue with this previously just want this for just in case in the future. We've had issues where in the past for example one agency where audit team Possible misuse of a P. card and some retailers when we went to them asking for detailed receipts they would supply the information someone not because they required a subpoena so. Yes we've been able to get by without it in the past but in some cases we've had to draw incomplete conclusions before we wrapped up our investigation. Thank you. Say no further questions from committee members. However you want to add up to speak for against the bill representative. Okay are you ready to close for your bill yes thank you Mr chair and and so just also wanted to add to be very clear that this was sent to part to lake audit the Amendment that's on the bill was an amendment they ask for but they at I guess what you would say is there neutral on the bill it's not their bill so I did want to let in their their request and I appreciate a good vote. Yes I make a motion to pass. The representative grade close with the bill. Any discussion on the motion of a do pass. Hey none all in favor say aye. All opposed say no congratulations graduates represented great youth pastor bill thank you Mr chair committee. Next item on the agenda is house bill sixteen thirty five representative Millikan. The Bill Clinton million just have a seat and you're recognized to present your bill. Thank you Mr chair if you would allow I'd like to have miss archer come sit with me in the table. Appropriated. Would you would just by yourself to the Committee. Hello I'm G. one archer founder of women's own worth. Thank you thank you represented two million you're recognized yeah today it house bill sixteen thirty five bring it to to the Committee on on behalf of women's own worth of what this bill does is it's women that's been have. Domestic violence I've been involved in domestic but domestic violence if it trying to protect those women trying to give a little more sure to you know of you can or it's just a page in a and in the top of the next page is a real short bill but you know these women you know I met with the freedom of information act and they endorsed the and from the bill I have to meet with them they voted in favor of the bill there is a. I mean back up here though there should be an amendment here I'm in the building I have an amendment to this bill. Okay that's right I'm sorry that you and I'm sorry thank you but but anyway You know they they asked me the question in the. For more information about you know when you do something that's you know in public error in public your your private information goes public we know the women we're talking about here that's being abused as a master balance you know they didn't they didn't want their information and to be public they were trying to keep it private and we're just looking for ways to to Help them secure a make them safer. But if you allow let me start your she would like to expand a little bit you're recognized thank you thank you for allowing me to speak I also want to thank everyone for all y'all do for Kansans in Arkansas all the time I really appreciate it. The hope for this to be a the help that I would want and a lot of people in Arkansas one is healthy future for our children and for families so passing this bill would ensure people that have suffered domestic violence that have already reached out to the courts and been granted an order of protection which means that the judge has the significant evidence in front of him or she that has enabled them to grant that border protection so we would hope that you would see this bill as a safeguard for families a lot of people say why doesn't she leave this is really going to help a lot of those women and men that have left the situations and are in a safe environment now to protect them to continue to thrive in our community and state. The questions from committee members represent the club you're recognized for a question thank you Mr you know miss archer can you can you give me like and a specific example of where this bill would really really Will really impact you know yes state somebody was granted order protection they left in there and a new home they're doing everything they can that change their phone numbers they get into a car wreck and now that the user got wind of that correct went to the police department and ask for a. The police records that Tom that Estonian of those records would be able alerted that yes there's an order protection by this person and they could meant and any personal information such as their telephone number and their address good deal thank you thank you Mr. Representative you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair of so. This would cover all request for information for someone who is. Protected under domestic abuse law is that if if there was an order of protection granted for that survivor yes Sir. So would that include information PM sorry and could have call up. Recognized so would that cover information request related to elections because we have another bill it talks about this very same thing. My forte is not on election so I'm not sure about that question and. That the I would say that it would protect that that person's individual person information from any for your request where they would possibly be able to get there. Addresses released and what at what everyone really needs to know this I'm sure you are already aware of that for you is created to help citizens know how government is running and it wasn't created to potentially jeopardized people's lives. No. Thank you. Representative letterman saying. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized for a question thank you Mr I'm completely supportive of keeping these people us safe as much as possible but how would how would my sheriff's office no on that example use while ago with the car wreck how will my shares office know that person is under protective order when someone comes in to get a accident report. Most orders of protection it should be on their database that's how they're able to protect the person that has it. So if this person has a Rick six counties over. And somebody runs in and asked and that's pretty common by the way to attain those accident reports we all know we got a nice chasers everywhere nowadays so so when that happens is there some sort of flag it comes up because I mean they wouldn't be looking in a database that would just be grabbing number report dates five or ten Bucks that they charge to hand that report out so I mean how would that person's information the flag is what I'm getting at. Well I'll health it would be flagged all across the state no matter what county you're in if there's an order of protection that that covers the whole state not just that county that it happened again. I understand that you need to follow other. Thank you for following meters no. Those arrests reports are held in a I mean does rest those orders are held in a different place than the accident records so. It's hard to believe how many accident records are pulled every time there's an accident it's hundreds of times for different reasons and different people and some companies have automatic pulls on an app what I'm trying to ask you is how or the sheriff's offices how are these courthouses are these collectors how are they supposed to pull that are going to be some of new flag put in the system for people under these protective orders. I don't wanna get our courthouses in trouble for doing something they do every day. That now all the sudden they have to redo Act all this information from and there's nothing in the system to flag them for those people right well I think that flagging something on a computer is pretty easy nowadays I would think that Here at that capital and in this state agencies that case study and it was placed there and is very knowledgeable at how to do their job and custodians are put in that position because there to me very smart at knowing when not to release this wouldn't be the only time this isn't something that's not already in place for state employees by the way if your state employee right now they you know you're you're and personal information is protected is not released on your state. And on your police reports and when it is ask for the person that's a state employee is alerted that there is going to request further information we're not asking for that we're just asking for a small little bit of help for the survivors that could be me and also men and women that would be helping in families that we would be helping. Okay Wardlaw gin is another question is like. Okay let me know but she no further questions from committee members. If you have someone in the audience and the the we're not signed up though but you're but you're you're recognized. Just make room and we have someone speak against against the bill. Thank you Committee my name's Josh Curtis OR for the association of counties this is always a tough bill to come speak against our county courthouses are very cautious when they deal with victims of divest domestic violence we're very constant of their records however the way this bill was presented it doesn't the idea and the idea behind this is a great idea but the implementation of a bill like this is undo uble The witness stated that flagging something in the computer it sounds easy and yes some of our larger counties may be able to do that but some of our smaller counties do not have the software to do this let me let me just tell you what all this bill would include to redact this this is a clear in the bill but it says all public records we're talking about deeds mortgages tax records assessments that messes up the chain of title the title companies are they have testified against this bill in the past and they're not here today I wasn't aware this bill was going to run today so I apologize I would have a tax collector and some circuit Clerk here if you're talking about one report redacting a protection order that's doable but that's not what this bill says this bill says every document with any personal identification of any of these victims One thing we passed last session I think this committee passed it was represent Lundstrum passed a bill that create a task force to study redacting information from documents it was targeted at law enforcement officers are specifically under cover law enforcement officers people that are vulnerable to to a tax we we had title companies there we had County folks there we had several attorneys there and that committee and actually met in this room back before covid and discuss that the redacting of the documents that we're talking about would affect change the title and affect tons of business transactions and therefore be more detrimental to law enforcement officers so we studied a way that would allow these law enforcement officers to set up easy LLC or trust and we actually talked to attorneys that would do some of that Senate represent less warm was on that committee and he talked about he was I think he was vice chair of that committee he was willing to work with some of these law enforcement officers we're willing to work with some of these victims let me let me go back to one of the points I want don't take up too much your time say order of protection I I work for the law circuit clerk's order protections filed of a female or male files or protection against the somebody they're in a relationship with or a couple days later they come in and drop that or protection just like that windows are county clerks County assessor's County circuit clerk's tax collectors window they know when to drop that information when they know that okay we went in there redacted it when do we know to put that information back online to unredacted that information so it's just tough to implement they ran some of these bills in Florida we've actually had some speakers from for. Order to try to come to some of our continuing education courses that we put on for these tax collectors and circuit clerks Fortner unfortunately COVID that kind of hurt that this last year but they're trying to repeal what they've done in Florida and in other states that they've tried to redact all this information so with that I'll be happy to answer any questions Mr okay thank you ms because have a question from representative will yes Sir thank you Mr so back to the same line of questions I was asking a lady while ago how would these share snow or the sheriff's office is no to redact that information on accident report. Hi I don't see a streamlined process that is in place that they would know immediately or the process to which the sheriff would tell this Clerk or tax collector every document to redact information I don't see how we can implement that follow up. Ganesh so they should lay out a process in this bill that would alert those shares are county offices correct and that's not done at the current moment in this bill right yes Sir that's correct thank you. Representative Becky recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair and. I guess I was trying to understand. Your concern about this bill at it maybe you answer my question already is Michael is it more that we would know who need to be redacted or do not or is it more that the redacting the costs associated with redacting on that all of this information that's a great question representative back I think it's both I think the cost obviously is and and play but all the documents I mean say it say if it's a. Elderly person that we're going to try to redact all the information and they've had several houses they've had several mortgages they've had several tax assessments throughout the years several tax documents throughout the years sure some of the larger counties with great software we could probably pull those records and do that some of the smaller counties I don't think we can and I'm not in speaking to the point of the title companies in the mortgage companies in the bankers who oppose some of the same bills that in the last couple sessions their problem if we could do that their problem would be title searches and and who's got mortgages and all those different business transactions that answer your question or motion back thank you. Thank you Mr Mr president of other questions from committee members. Thanks use thank you committee Mr okay. Two million. You're recognized to Close with the mail yeah I'll tell you what the and I believe I believe we need to after the questions that's been asked you know I mean it let Mr Curtis said you know you had to come speak against the bill is trying to protect woman you know like I said earlier these women are not the ones that these women are not the ones that Put their private information in the public but I understand the questions it's been asking that the bill does not address any of that But I want to pull the bill down let me pull this bill down and just look at and work on it but we're going to keep working on it skews me you know it's it's a it's a don't want to keep analyzing these women for something they didn't do I know I've said that over and over but that's what this is about and thank you for the questions you know and we'll work on this and we'll bring it back and see if we can the. Satisfy some of the questions Kay representative Millikan it multiple the bill does And so we'll we'll look forward to you coming back if you've amended the bill or the later date thank representative Milligan committee members without objection we're going to. Alter from the schedule billing goes so everyone needs to leave here in a few minutes so we're gonna go to House Bill seventeen sixty six. Seventeen sixty six representative Wardlaw people would recognize present your bill. A you Mr chair and appreciate you guys let us jump ahead secretary has another engagement in a few minutes And so want to make sure she was here to answer any questions. As you guys know over the last few months or six months actually of hard lease but not law we've been digging in DVD trying to figure out what we can do to fix the ever seeing bottomless hole and one of the ways we can fix it before the session ends is raising the state input and raisin out of amount to five fifty all the department asked for was five hundred but US raising it to five fifty here doesn't mean it gets raised to five fifty it gives the board the ability to go between four fifty and five fifty they raised it twice over the last year and both of those times was to keep those premium rates low for state employees so that's all this bill does the Senate has suggested some amendments we were gonna hold the bill but seeing that we're getting close the in the session rule and send it down there and they can amend it and we'll come back and concur or not on this end so all the bill does raise that state contribution pay and be happy to answer any questions. Representative makes you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr I do have a potential fiscal impact on this if it were to be implemented I know there's some. Lee where there but if it were to the Max what's the maximum impact I do not have that information representative makes but we can get it for you how may state employees do we have this for them and packed. You know roughly I think it's around twenty six thousand twenty six thousand times a hundred dollars so roughly. Per member for six million dollars a month would that be okay Sir. It further questions from committee members. Say none of. I don't have anyone signed up to speak for against the bill represents Wardlaw readies. Close to your bill I am close and I make a motion to pass committee member we we had a motion do pass any discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor say aye All opposed say no. Does having regulation bill is passed thank you Mr chairman. Going back to our agenda next that bush given over seventeen fifty eight to the Committee members it'll be rescheduled for a. Week from Wednesday. Going to Senate bill two ninety two Senator Rapert. Senate bill two ninety two Senator Rapert. Representative was sent to you we're are you here present Senate bill two ninety two. Okay. You're recognized. Thank you Mr chair colleagues. Senate bill two ninety two. Establishing the public safety equipment grant program and to declare emergency. Legislative findings the General Assembly finds it implement implementing the best policing practices improves trust between law enforcement officers and persons in the communities in which they serve in Arkansas the task force to advance a state of law enforcement in Arkansas specifically recommended that law enforcement agencies in the state of Arkansas seek and apply this is important for federal state and local funding opportunities to aid in the implementation of state of the art body cameras. As well as adequate service storage. Two eight and better surveillance for all agencies specifically the task force advocated for funding legislation that helps to ensure that all front line duty officers will be wearing state of the art body cameras by twenty twenty six and other non lethal forms of equipment that law enforcement all across the nation. Has been gravitating to including but not limited to conduct its electrical devices rubber bullets pepper spray and bullet proof vest. Are all essential to protecting the lives of police officers in those in the community that they serve. Public safety grant program this is created within the department public safety the public safety equipment grant program is to be administered by the secretary of the department of public safety the secretary may hire personnel necessary to carry out the duties of administering the program. The secretary also has exclusive authority to award grants under the program. Secretary shall award grants under the program to law enforcement agencies and correction agencies for equipment that aids in improving trust and relationships between law enforcement agencies in correction agencies and the communities that they serve this is so vital so vital. Of the first of many initiatives they get this needed funding we recognize amendment representative. Just call should what what what what the committees and. What they're not allowed to speak to legislators what or what they're at the table so just a reminder that so weird representative watching Sturch interruption. I appreciate it thank you Mr. Anyway that is that is the the core of a Senate bill two ninety two if there any questions. Be more than happy to answer any questions from committee members. The representative Ladyman. Representative Watson I like this bill but I question do you know I mean I thought all. Police departments to have body cams I mean how many in the state what percent did not have it as a lot of departments that don't have those yet there is I'm not gonna I'm not going to try to guesstimate how many do not of course as we know with nearly everything is the cost of. I would venture to guess how many do not in my agency down close to home I know it was probably just two or three that I'm aware of a year ago they had it and they were of critical entry teams at that time the regular everyday patrol officer did not handle occur only speak for for my home town thank you. Representative Payton. Thank you Mr. As we know the old moneys. Have to be. Budgeted and Going into this account there's probably never going to be enough money to go around but this bill seems to put the sole responsibility of determining what who gets the money and what for the all in the hands of one person the Secretary am I reading that correctly. The the administrator of it the in my words the brains behind it correct. So follows the thank you Mr. So long the Secretary has exclusive authority on that number one I wouldn't want to even be the person with the make that unilateral decision on who's gonna get the money when there's not enough to go around and and what about I mean is there not some sort of a. Advisory board or something that we can put this in the hands of rather than just in the. Exclusive with or to the Secretary. Mister chair if it would be possible could I S. US secretary of the PS Jamie cook to come aboard yes would be possible yes. Could you would just. Have stated table dented by yourself the committee please. Jamie cook secretary for the Arkansas department of public safety and thank you very much representative Payton I agree and we we administer some other grants at the state police and thirty PS they all have those advisory board so that's what I would want to do is set up a group because I don't want the cellar door either I want to make sure we have an inclusive group of representation across the state and that we make the rules of as a as a group team effort I don't want to do it all by myself because I sure you'd get messed up. So can I have a follow up you can so just be sure I mean I am reading the bill correctly that's what it does is put it one percent on your back is that right. That's the way I read it as well and that's why would create that of group to to help me get through that process okay thank you thank you Mr thank you representative Dotson you have a question. Okay. Gonzales you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr I have a couple questions if you'll allow yes go ahead One I have the same concerns of representative Payton had about all this power being a secretary is hands though while you're there and you know they trust you to make the right decisions and create this group and do the right thing there you know we're good we're setting this up for in the future as well this this won't change of so concerned with the. With departments becoming dependent on this money for their for their funding you know I just think we see that with cities and counties how they depend on a lot of grant money for for their operations so it. Worries me that I may become dependent on this and then with the D. fund the police movement out there than your. In a round about way you know taken some things away from from police department so if you could help me address that concern the second would be the funding source and the emergency clause with the. General revenues money obtained from other private grants and any other revenues authorized by law could you expand on what that might mean And is there already money setting out there to to fund this and if not then. Why the Emergency Clause. I am not able to answer that right now representative themselves. Senator Jane you're recognized for a question. Thank you thank you Mister chairman I've got got to questions but I'll ask for a follow up. You're recognized short enough to figure that out you're recognized. with this is that we will be wearing by twenty twenty six and we do not have a calls by me there's a lot of small cities they don't have this and my concern is is that. How can we are when are we going to establish what this call D. is so we'll know what our liability is goals it doesn't say shall but it says we will be wearing so I guess it's not a shall is not mandatory but is not a may either it'll will explain the difference between that well that's a good one I would venture to say that they were so that that there are some smaller departments down our way that ultimately. Will be a while before they get on The way we no cost as time goes on a probably gonna increase I hate that I hate to say that That is something I'm sure it'll be worked on I am pretty certain though the bigger departments naturally with the what the higher crime rates or going to be the ones that a. That will begin the first issue. First training. Unfortunately that's how it goes on many things. Follow up recognized. So this fall or the smaller apartment to say this is a will be wearing there will be no penalty for them if they are not able to get a grant or able to purchases out of their budget. President I have not heard of a of a penalty at all for anything like that I have not heard of anything like that occurred one more follow up you're recognized. Is this bill would have any impact. Owner of funding under the bill that you have down the road the. The schedule data seventeen thirteen dollar make license reader plate could funds from that. For be happy to pay that also absolutely okay thank you. Representative back you're recognized. Thank you Mr. And I'm not sure of this question is for you guys can tag team if you like. The budget intrusion lighted to represent pagans question. Is there a reason that we don't have the task force. To make these grants actually included in the this legislation I mean I I trust that you will do exactly what you say but you know they always do this thing well that yeah you're good secretary what happens with the bad sector gets here and it just says all the money goes to hear. Thank you representative back The other task force officially ended on publication of the final report so that of groups not in existence any longer the I don't know that I answered your question but thank you for calling me a good secretary. I think that the the group that I'm look I'm thinking of the bill says of for us to set up the criteria and procedures the group that I would be thinking of it is representatives from the cheese and the sheriffs and the law enforcement around the state because you know it's easy enough for me to think I know what law enforcement the state needs but it's quite another to sit around a table and actually hear those conversations I'll give you a good for instance and this goes back to what representative Jane was talking about. Law enforcement in the state of Arkansas overwhelmingly want body cameras because you know it's it's good for law enforcement because if we get accused of something that we didn't do those body cream or show that it also keeps us accountable for officers to do things that they shouldn't do that we can get him out of our profession but overwhelmingly they don't have them the cost of body cameras is not that significant the cost of operating body cameras is quite another thing And so. You know I think that this grant program would would be helpful for law enforcement to a to be able to get some of those things but we also need to to keep into consideration like a body camera maybe four hundred dollars but the annual average cost of operating a body camera is two thousand dollars because of the reduction issues and different things like that so so get a group together to have those good conversations I think that's a that's the only way to go forward on this follow up. Thank you thank you for that because of the House side sponsored a bill that does just that going to talk about the reduction cost in that so I appreciate that so they'll play right into my bill so that that I would ask to do to please when this is put forward to the bear in mind that. Your predecessor may not be as. Willing to work with everybody make sure that we put in place something that is actually binding that so that we can't just undo this and somehow divert funds only to one source or something of that nature I appreciate that. The representative Whitaker you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair represent Watson would you be agreeable to visit with Senator Rapert about perhaps amending this bill to include some framework for this advisory committee. The. I would would visit with him on this I think that's the recurring theme that everyone that seems that when I may be reading it wrong with seeing the will of committee is would like a little more fleshed out idea what where this money is going to run just into an office and that would be helpful thank you Mr thank you. Representative Watson are you entertaining the thought of pulling a bill that or you want to move forward or what we want to yes no problem a representative Whitaker I'll address the concern from you in the if there are some more committee members on this I'll be more than happy to. Okay representative jim agenda Katie wants to pull the bill that is that correct that is correct okay we'll look forward to seeing you back in here when you get to amendments thank you thank you the Committee. Next item on today's agenda is Senate bill three fifty two. Senator one. But senator Johnson you may represent a provision in that bill. Okay you're recognized president Senate bill thank you Mr chair committee members of the committee members this bill amends the appeal process for capital zoning issues if there or if there was a a complaint or concern agreements currently it has to go to the Secretary parks and tourism and then she makes a ruling and then it would go to the Pulaski County circuit court This simply removes rather that process and takes it and puts it straight to the circuit court and that's the straight for his fourth as we have to try to answer any questions about it or sectors here if you have any questions I can bring her to the table. Any questions from committee members. Saying no no one signed up to speak for or against the bill a room prepared to make sure you're recognized for a question thank you thank you Mr chairman I'm not necessarily opposed to that's my only question is. If a citizen had an issue with the decision of the the the zoning they could make that appeal to the Secretary of department of parks at no cost if they decide they want to make an appeal to the circuit court there's I I would assume there's going to be a cost involved in that what kind of cost. Would we be looking at and is the reason why the secretary wants out is because they can't. Change the decision so could you go out I just don't want to create a situation were forcing the citizens to pay money to assure decision or in the past a warrant you can see that here in the headlights clean scene towards the secretary will have her if it's okay with the chairs permission bring her to the table and recognize her that's okay. Okay recognized manifestation of the committee The New thank you knowledge to answer representative makes question. Thank you Mr chairman I'm Stacy her secretary of the Arkansas department of parks heritage and tourism and so when this law was passed I believe it was in twenty fifteen maybe and sixteen and that it was past to essentially give um stakeholders away to appeal a decision of capital zoning district commission the language in the law reads that in order for the secretary to essentially overturn a decision of the commission the legal bar is clearly erroneous which is a very high standard and because the capital zoning district commission is advised by Julie Chavis at the attorney general's office it is impossible for the capital's owning district commission to render a decision that would be viewed as clearly around the US from a legal point of view so in the three or four five years and I've seen appeals I have never overturned one it's just too high legal standard so once I respond that that standard has not been met then if they choose to they can appeal to circuit court there's only been one time that that's happened so um it's really an empty step and it needs to return back to the original state law which is appealing to circuit court thank you thank okay thank you saying no further questions from committee members. No one signed up to speak for against the bill representative Johnson you're recognized close with your bill I'll close my bill Mister chair to make a motion to pass okay representative Johnson's closed but a motion to do pass any discussion on the motion saying none all in favor say aye. All opposed say no. Does that we congratulates you bill is passed. Next item on today's agenda the Senate bill four two. Thank you will be presenting that bill as well yes Mister chair okay you're recognized thank you Mr chair colleagues so this bill creates at a fund in an institution mechanism to administer grants for Arkansas cultural institutions as defined in the bill these are non profits it specifically would administer grants for capital improvement projects if there's no money attached to this at this point it's just creating within the person who is in this is tasking them with the the process for making rules for this grant administration and then also creating the account so that if there are monies to the become available read through private funds rather means than we have this process in place for reviewing and and distributing these grants that we have to try to answer any questions okay any questions from committee members. Representative dodging you're recognized. A representative John Johnson you may not know the answer this question but parks and heritage or somebody might Do not already have some similar type grant like this that we use your chair with your permission again I'd like to recognize sectors thank you Hirscher recognized to petition set up and then answer the question please thank you Mr chairman Stacey her secretary Arkansas department of parks heritage and tourism and a representative Johnson we do not have a grant that. Can provide funding at a substantial level two capital improvement projects are grants are relatively small and we have a number of organizations across the state that as they are developing and they're doing big fundraising campaigns ten million dollars and above their scattered throughout the state of Arkansas they have tremendous economic development component attached to them but they are searching for funds they are you know statewide even even regional in nature and they're conducting large capital improvement projects so that's what this trust fund would allow us to do should money become available either at the state level the federal level or even through private sources it would give us a way to make larger grants follow up recognized just just to kind of get my idea when you said smaller. What kind of a range are we talking about as far smaller are we talking hundred thousand to a million or a million to two million or when you said larger ten million and above prior existing programs they are operational in nature someone and support programs and they are and not capital improvement sort of grants they are I would say fifty thousand dollars is a large grant. Okay under our existing billions yeah yes thank you representative gene you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman chair hers this also in the language says grants donations and transfers made by any person or government agency so thanks to reason could transfer money over to fund this. Yes Sir and and we have amended our appropriation to allow far transfer of conservation tax as it becomes available follow up recognized also and I'm assuming and it's something that I think we all support this is really kind of. Honing in on the the the three museums in Fort Smith central Arkansas in Eastern Arkansas is is is trying to find funding to help them yes Sir and there is also the Cold War Museum and bobble that is under discussion very worthy project there was a big project in fable and theater squared I believe is what it's called they just continue to pop up and they are tremendously important to the economic development of Arkansas and and have great value but there's just really not a way to fund them at that at the level that they're seeking right now okay thank you thank you Mr thank you representative makes you're recognized for a question. thank you Mr and I think you kind of already already hit on my question is I'm I'm obviously don't support of these institutions but I don't want to create an empty Fund they're just gonna sit out there that you know we've we've made a feel good and we've got something sent out there and nothing ever happens but you'd mention you'd if this sounds like you have in mind that you're going to take part of the conservation tax to help fund that so is that a. What your plan is as far as funding for this and if so if you're gonna take money out of the conservation tax. What is gonna lose because obviously there's only so much money and by doing that does that really. Fulfill the purpose of the conservation tax. I'm it is consistent with the purpose of conservation tax but I do not anticipate that we would have the ability through conservation tax alone to fund these entities at the level that they are hoping to be funded so there may be an ability far conservation tax to assist and right now we're trying to determine the surplus that we have in conservation tax it's a fluid funds so we have to look at it at the end of the year so it will potentially be able to provide some assistance that could go to this fun but will not cover and we have an eight million dollar appropriation for this task for this trust fund and it would not be able to cover all of that so again there is the potential that we could have federal money we have if the legislature so decided to provide some funds we could we could use it in that way we could use that state surplus funds and in this way are if the governor had funds in the future then we could also distribute the funds status Trust fund. The representative of the minaret can ask for a question. Thank you Mr chairman of. I guess I got a question maybe I'm reading this wrong but we just had a bill pulled down because there's discussion about who would decide the funding and what the committees the group is made up of so line thirty and thirty one thirty two there on the first page. Talks about a nonprofit organization so my question is who would decide which money was spent where which project I mean it talks about an organization being form but it doesn't talk about who's in the organization. What's the process has got the general statement that secretary would do that so are you making that decision or would there be a group. I'm so the definition of the nonprofit organization is and and what essentially what would qualify as part of a beneficiary of this fund but we have to promulgate rules so if this bill is passed ma'am we would immediately set about promulgating rules through the legislative process and all of the Those sorts of parameters would be established through that process. Okay thank you representative makes if you're recognized. Thank you Mr I'm a quick call based on something you said earlier you said that the conservation tax would not be enough to find the full needs and obviously. I think almost every agency we have has that that issue that we can never fun to whatever the full need is so can you give us an idea of what the full need is that we're we're looking at here obviously like anything else I'm sure they will take as much money as we can get on but. I'm at that well I can tell you that the the asks from cultural institutions for example the marshals museum I think they are still. They are still needing three million dollars but that's total on their their overall capital campaign I don't know that they're asking the state for that entire amount the really representative makes it varies by project and it it it depends on how large the project is the Arkansas museum of fine arts I believe there was a there's was a hundred twenty million dollar project huge fundraising effort clear majority of that is private money so it. We have asked for a total spending authority of eight million dollars annually that of course is reliant on the funding available and so I can't answer your question exactly I can tell you that typically the requests are in the million dollars and above range thank. Saying no further questions from committee members no one and of. Representative James sorry I didn't say you're recognized for a question. I thank the chairman of secretary hers. You've got to get some clarity the to this of we have a bill in the house for today senate bill four eighteen that of of would allow. Of the commission to increase or decrease KCM decrease in back to the immigration up to fifty percent. Would any of that funding help fund what we're doing here. additional funding no Sir no I'm it could. So so you can be transferred from the from the Department so the dynamic pricing that the revenues that we bring in three state parks at our cash revenues and we we range from twenty five million to twenty eight million annually and what we're looking for are in dynamic pricing is really the ability to be nimble within the market place and so those revenues are different from conservation tax I mean we we have tremendous Maintenance building needs with and state parks as you might imagine we own more structures than any other department of state government we have to maintain them at a very high level and the conservation tax that we receive for state parks goes to manage all of those projects follow up. In the. Your intent is not to use it but it has this bill as written it could be used the the conservation tax I believe that we have designated would be the conservation tax that goes to Arkansas heritage not the conservation tax that is set aside for state parks. Well that's the way this bill is written but thank you okay thank you representative. The representative Ladyman you're recognized. The representative Johnson not. I got same question that was asked what we do we just ask the representative put the bill down because we didn't know who was making the decision or the money was spent I feel like this is the same kind of bill it but if we don't know if we don't have representation from around the state. That has input as to what project is first how much money maybe I'm reading this wrong but it seems like. For police cameras we just said go back and come up with an organization and rules. And I ask that very same question and the. Secretary I think is a good idea to give your home but that is the secretary said what we'll do this and rules. Well I think we got the same issue here. Yeah we could have done the police cameras and rules well but we wanted documentation and I think we need that here I think it there needs to be a group form and guidelines so I don't know what the I would be willing to go back and work on that like the other group agreed to but I feel like we need that. So what do you think. I mean certainly I understand your point is well taken it in your will I know we as a body have the ability to review the rules you know I think is a legislative body through L. C. so any rules that are made whether it's through the parks and tourism or whether the public safety group I still think we have input on this to the rules making process it as as a L. C. itself if there were rules that were promulgated that we feel like we're unfair we felt like you created a you know some sort of biased within the intent of the bill so that one section state my benefit differently from another I do think we have that check and balance in place I mean again I I wasn't sitting at the table for the last conversation I am now I think for me in this particular building process I think we have that opportunity still would I be willing to put down absolute absolutely you know I want to you know I'm one that wants to work with people but I do think as it's written we still have that opportunities legislative body to where. Regular session. Well represented Johnson I agree we have oversight with counsel but again counsel is not the entire body that's here now to so it's only a percentage now we have the full state representative so I think we would have better decisions if the full body look at that versus twenty percent of the body do you agree or disagree. I agree would have better into it with the full body looking at the process than just LC. But you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr so I've been on and off Budget Committee quite a bit and. It seems that there must be a hundred different ways that the same projects in the same. People could could be funded with the I know we've been doing it in the past I know that we we see appropriation bills all the time with capital improvement funds that goes to the things like this. you tell me what what what's the need here why do we need enabling legislation rather than going through the. The process is already set up. I can tell you what I think I think these are trying to find nonprofit organizations opposed to government agencies I'm not sure we can do that I mean again I'm I'm new to the budget process that may be wrong I don't think we can find non profits in the communities directly to the state budget I think it has to be done through a grant follows Mr you're recognized so here's the problem with nonprofits I'm take any corporation make a nonprofit by raising the rent and paying my salary high enough that it's nonprofit. When we take public funds and fund private entities we lose our controls. On those budgets that come through the budget committee and we get to talk about the salaries we get to talk about the number of employees and and how efficiently As on a nonprofit just means at the end of the year the balance sheet zero because they paid enough rent they paid enough salaries to get it there. So yes I understand stand but I think if your question was why do we need this process in place I don't think there's a mechanism to the current budgetary process defined directly nonprofit should have to be done to some sort of grant making process and in this particular bill it's specifically for capital improvements as opposed to operational expenses or some sort of programs are running and you know hopefully to to represent leading this point the devil's in the details of how these grants are administered in this is done in a fair and equitable way so that we do have some oversight over the process it in again that I may be misunderstanding the budgetary process but that's the way I would or should I defer to secure her since she has any other comments. This is consistent with the I. R. funding for the Arkansas arts council where we give out grants to qualified five oh one see three organizations that have been recognized as a five oh one see three by the IRS so there is a high standard I mean it it's They have to operate within the IRS guidelines as a five oh one C. three nonprofit entity and this would allow us again the ability to get out of larger grants again it's not funded but it gives us the ability to find larger. Capital improvement projects far. Really a handful of organizations across the state of Arkansas so just. Make sure I heard you right you're you're. Certify under basically test to find that we currently do. Give money to nonprofits we date through the Arkansas arts council yes Sir we have we are funded through the national endowment for the arts a federal entity they provide about one point two million dollars to us annually we grant that out through a competitive grant process okay thanks for confirming that thank you Mr thank you representative John had a request from committee member representative Ladyman to. Are you still want to move forward with the bill for a voter you I believe please stand have a further discussion Iran thank you Mr chair committee okay I want to give you that opportunity before went to a vote so representative Johnson has asked people to bail them. Thank you have a job thank Schecter hers next item on today's agenda is house bill seventeen seventy seven committee members we have a. An amendment. Being handed out at this time. The plan you're recognized to You're recognized to present your amendment thank you Mr chair and committee this is just a moment adding to sponsors on the Senate side Senator Davison Hester and correcting a typo adding an apostrophe in the title. Okay committee members heard the Presentation on the amendment in the discussion any questions. A notification I have a motion from representative love of a do pass is that correct. the Amendment in discussion on the motion saying none all in favor say aye. All opposed say no graduate representative the you're recognized to present house bill seventeen seventy seven is amended thank you Mr chair with your permission can I bring the French to the table please yes. Is amended by user of the committee please. Thank you Mr chair Lindsay French association of Arkansas counties representing the county clerk's association okay represented to plan you're recognized present your bill as amended thank you committee as you all know when you register to vote in the state of Arkansas voters information certain information becomes a publicly searchable included in that list is the voter's address. The need for this bill became apparent to me this summer when I had a constituent who contacted me who was afraid about her voter registration information being public because she was trying to avoid her abuser so she was faced with a difficult decision of you know whether she's going exercised her right to vote or keep herself and her family say from this man who was stalking and harassing them I'm so she asked me if there was any way that we could keep her address private I called or clerks and we sort of you know tried to work through it but it became clear that there was a need for a simpler sort of more standardized process across the state so that is the bill that you've got before you right now as you can see and this bill doesn't impact voter registration it doesn't impact information that the voter has to provide in terms of identification at the polls when they show up to vote the only thing that it impacts is what the Clerk makes public and this would keep the clerks this would give the ability the clicks to keep domestic violence victims physical addresses secure so to to keep them private from the public and the way that I've got it written right now it would be up to the Secretary of State to promulgate some rules with respect to what kind of documentation would be needed to prove this status the idea would of course you know to be ideal if this was a a court order or some other court finding and then the process that the clerks would engage in to sort of carry this out and with respect represented Ladyman this question earlier and I had the same question when I saw representative Milligan's bill on the freedom of information act and so I called bill are actually and there are there are two different kind of streams by which we make this information public for yeah is one but that's not actually how are voter registration data is made public that's just done in statute and so something that took care of the fully aside of it still wouldn't protect victims I. Address from being public unless we made the change that I am proposing here so that's all I've got on the front end I'll keep my that short and I look forward to hearing questions from you and I don't know if this franchise anything she'd like to add before. Sure thank you representative Clowney thank you Mr chairman committee representative Connie brought this bill to to us of the county clerk's association it's a very narrow bill that does have a mechanism built in for the for the victim to petition the court to have their information secure of pulled the clerks and they all said that they can do this easily once that's done they have no problems and the clerks were unanimous in their support for this bill. Thank you any questions from committee members. Representative Dudgeon you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair just looking through this bill there's a couple things and and we've talked before about this but The the bill seems to be broad enough that it doesn't actually say the physical address it just says address so That would be something that I would think need to be added that it says physical address so that you know mailing address or something like that could still be used for voter information purposes in the voter record would still be available to to anybody requesting just a voter record in general and secondarily I'm not completely sure in here that there's a judicial determination of what. The what is being defined at thinking the the the bill that we saw from representing million a little bit ago and actually reference to specific code what domestic abuse victim actually is and there's a court order that would need to be added to this I think in order to make it a stronger bill anyway. I don't know if you want to address those things thank you presented Dotson with respect to your first question physical address and mailing address actually just don't know enough about that but my my guess would be that I mean do you provide you just provide one address when you register to vote is that right. I'm here in the secretary of office of the secretary of state's office over here saying no so they may be able to to speak more to that I I would think that most victims though their physical address would be their mailing address and so they would want to keep that confidential. two to the second part of your question regarding who is able to a petition for this protection that is left with the secretary of state's office to promulgate rules about what to. What documentation is is required in order to get that protection so I'm sure they would require some kind of court order and some kind of restraining order something to that effect but in the bill as is that's left up to the secretary of state's office to put in their rules for administration and representative Dotson I have heard all the other bills that have been presented this morning so I know the answer to that is going to be and I can tell you that I would be more than happy to have Senator Davis and that over on the Senate side if that was something that would make you feel more comfortable. To put that in there have to be explicit that there would need to be some court finding. The team representative make sure recognized for a question. Thank you am I my questions got kind of follow up with the representative Dotson because the bill says registered voter who is a victim a may request the status and so because it says they may request if they make that request. Then it seems that the county Clerk or I would hope that wouldn't but the county Clerk could deny that request. And so having a court ordered issue like representative Dotson said would mean that the county Clerk would have to accept that status is secure voter versus the way the bills right now where you know I could say I'm of you know the victim go to my county Clerk of the county Clerk at say now you're you're not a victim and deny that request so I think for for safety on both sides of that coin that I think that the court order I think that does need to be addressed in the bill and not left up to to rules thank you. Okay thank you representative makes representative for letterman. Thank you Mr so. All the only information that would be read back to the is the address that's right so the still there was to be a record there of when they voted how they voted and or or not have the ability but. Yes bill would only be there address that would be redacted so what elections they voted and all of that would serve the public thank you the debate you're recognized mmhm. Thank you Mr so I'm totally missing it in here I'm sure it's here somewhere but the terms of your voters used several times and I don't see a definition for that is that part of what the secretary of state's supposed to promulgate or why do we not defined secure voter. Yeah I think that we let's have the Secretary of State answer that we can representative Payton is that alright Mr. Repeat your question that the secretary of state come to the end of the table and answer that please thank you. Register by yourself for the committee please thank you Mr chair Kurt now month secretary of state's office that's part of the process that we were gonna defined in the rules but I think the definition would be very specific to a class of persons who has been decree of the given the decree a court order for bill protection under whatever code we would want to cite for the purposes of having secured information with the specific items that would be their address for the voter registration system we don't have a definition in the following all right in the law but we could put it there if that's what you would prefer as opposed to the rules so as of now we don't have a definition of secure voter I mean this bill speaks of the domestic violence component but a narrow it down to that when he uses the term secure voter what other classes of of voters might need protection the identification protection right now this is really the only class that we see is as victims of domestic abuse. Well it seems like it be pretty easy to draft that language then and put it in the bill of right now that's the only thing intended to cover absolutely thank you thank you thank you representative back you're recognized. Thank you Mr. Thank you Mr chair and this may not be an issue. But you were saying that we would only redact the address but that the voter information is still not what. Who they voted for but but the rest of the information would be available still is is that is that I understand that correct it in and let me just get to the question into this. Is it possible that someone could identify where this person was not what precinct they voted in you know some these presents are very small and in the rural areas it is not this I believe I appreciate that only twenty people vote and so that is yeah I'm just saying that if that's the case that that information would also be provided then you would be able to identify kinda where this person is fine with the voted yeah that is certainly possible presented back and we tried to draft this. You know as narrowly as possible just to to keep as much information publicly available as you know because we know that that there are obviously really good public policy reasons to want that to be the case so you know we we had to strike that balance in your right it is a concern and it's something we could look at that. Well you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair. President Clinton are you are you amenable to amending this language in on the Senate in to alleviate these concerns to make sure that we're not relying on the rule making process and we define these things in the statute yeah I'd be happy to do that. So I think we your word on doing that I I'm happy with taking your word on it I can't speak for the committee but but fixing that an amendment seems to address most concerns. Thank you. Say no further questions from committee members no one signed up to speak for against the bill. Representative image my understanding that you're going to close with the bill with the understanding that the the concerns of this committee will be addressed with an amendment on the Senate committee and is that correct that's correct Mr okay then you're recognized close I'm closed. The. Yes yes so look out for a second I'm sorry representative Wardlaw you'd have a motion. I have a motion of do pass it is. As amended have a motion do pass as amended any discussion on the motion representative paid you're recognized for discussion on the motion. Thank you Mr and I wish I mean I have confidence that represented counties going to attempt to. Word the amendment in a way this satisfy this committee but but I wish it brought me to the point that I could vote for it I can't vote for it until I see that language and I know we'll have a chance to concur in the amendment but it's really hard to to get the language right on something that like this but anyway I do appreciate you doing that and I don't want to take it is an affront when I vote no but I the I it's really hard to get. Everybody's suggestion into that language without several attempts but anyway thank you thank you. Any further discussion on the motion is amended. Saying none representative Gonzalez you. Yes I think I'd like to make substitute motion if you allow. Okay let me here I move that we table this letter come back here with an amendment we hold this hold the same committee so that everybody has a chance to vote for looks like you have broad support in the committee And I think to address representative patients concerns and maybe some others that that be the best way of handling. I make a motion that is non debatable. Representative gladly but this point. Four take a vote. Reporter that it bring it back to this committee you want to go and move for the vote to pull it down and I'll bring it back as soon as I can amended language thank you thank you any representative that is the problem the bill down and we'll bring it back thank you very much. Bills. Bills. For. All right committee members. Next item on the agenda is house bill seventeen thirteen. Representative Watson. Representative was you're recognized to present your bill thank you Mr chair I'm going to ask if I have a witness come up but Senate disable with police or yes. What is now the price of the committee please representative Danny Watson district three. Are you happy to table I have Mister Greg scaly expert witness if it's if there's any questions on the presentation here J. you're recognized present your bill. Thank you Mr chairman thank you committee house bill seventeen thirteen license plate reader technology to preserve first amendment protections for admission people it hence enhance investigations of serious crimes house bill seventeen thirty will improve public safety in Arkansas it will enhance law enforcement's ability to find missing people investigate serious crimes and find and bring criminals to justice it has support of the Arkansas sheriff's association Arkansas association chiefs of Police as a part of public safety secretary Jenny cook under the current law il PR license plate reader technology could be used by law enforcement force but agencies in Arkansas but the law prohibits private citizens or entities from using the technology only two other states do this Maine and New Hampshire Arkansas isn't L. are the practical impact of Arkansas is that a lack of data meet means fewer law enforcement leads investigate get cases like amber alerts and missing or exploited children murder rape human trafficking drug trafficking or stolen vehicles in two thousand nineteen the DOT's Advisory Committee on human trafficking cited expanded use of L. P. R. as one of the technologies that can make a huge difference in law enforcement's ability to identify and find potential human traffickers but this tool is only as effective as the data available. There's a map that shows how little data is available to Arkansas law enforcement compared to our surrounding states of this technology has been cited in case after case and helping to save lives and to help find and bring about the criminals to justice in two thousand eighteen James carver Florida beat beat then shot his girlfriend in the chest at close range he then raped her and she bled to death she didn't die immediately though he held her captive for two days then he fled after a three day manhunt a license plate reader hit on carver's vehicle leading police to call for. There is case after case like this around the country were a hit from a license plate reader provides the lead police needing to find a valid criminal or to help a missing child. If this was a grand child or your child would you want to know police have every tool available out there to find that vehicle quickly in a situation where literally every minute counts the bill also provider but preserves Arkansas's first amendment rights LPR technology photographs images of license plates in public spaces which any person has a right to do now photographer photography is protected speech LPR simply automates that process a law that prohibits individuals to use an LPR technology infringes on their first amendment rights again our law enforcement officers law enforcement. Allows law enforcement to use this technology now but because we prohibit private use of LPR the data is limited this bill helps us make LPR the effective tool that our law enforcement need and then Arkansas deserve. Question isn't this an invasion of privacy. We're not talking about Big Brother type surveillance technology here this is in GPS top technology that tracks an individual that's not what this is This Is technology that captures a picture of the vehicle a license plate that happens to pass a license plate reader at a single point in time there's no personal information and a license plate read no name or personal information the data does not identify the vehicle the owner of the vehicle just the date and time of the location there are federal and state protections in the law four hello driver data can be used similar to FMCSA logs. Date. Time and exact location is what is is what is read for the LPR. At this time entertained you should be any questions. Okay thank you representative was and and well I understand it this at all you'll do is just be reading those license plates and the only time that information would be released in the event that is there's been a Some type of criminal act that has occurred in law enforcement would have access to that information is that is that correct absolutely correct yes Sir. Okay representative Gonzalez you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr I heard what you said about you know tracking people that that have committed crimes and all that across the state and if that's what the goal here is then why are we excluding the the state of Arkansas and its agencies and political subdivisions from you's been able to use the system. It looks like so they they were already. I'm not able to use it but also it had individual partnership corporation association we struck all of those so they'll be able to use it now but still the state of Arkansas and its agencies can't so what why is that why would we allow the individual or partnership or corporation to do it and not the state of Arkansas great question representative Gonzalez if you don't mind I'm going to yield to my expert witness if you will again give your name Sir device of yes it's Greg scaling with Motorola solutions twelve years is an el PR specialist intended thank you representative I believe you're referring to the map picture that we had shared No Sir I'm I'm referring to the bill on page one lines twenty nine through thirty two. Isn't. It and I believe what the bill is offering that we would like to take away that you know we're it is prohibited from the private entities in the neighborhoods and all of those to to be able to deploy the technology and make that available to them so that you know as they do deploy this technology that too can be. Share it over to law enforcement as a few see fit if they see fit in be able to make that part of an investigation you know of and an amber alert or some type of a criminal activity investigation. The representative would occur you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr Follow in in in a way it's a follow up on representatives Gonzales concerns I'm looking at this bill and and frankly it's incomplete it really it is a home so much it doesn't say that we were you know I feel more comfortable knowing for example in line twenty nine we begin with except as provided in subsection B. of this section and then subsection B. is not shown to us so the Mr is missing subsection B. could do all kinds of pain as things that we don't know about. I mean it may be a drafting error but if if this bill does all the wonderful things to do and I believe that the your cause is just then let's say that in the bill. Follows Mr. You're recognized. And also I'm I'm just a little curious and there isn't the comment that. This data will only be released if it were there are a legitimate law enforcement needs but isn't aren't we wouldn't be empowering allsorts private actors to collect all this data in them we're what what we do to control what they do with it. A you know that's just some parts. Thank you Mr thank you representative gene you're recognized for a question. This. Thank you Mr chairman. Is it Mr Skelly. Yes Sir you work for Motorola yes Sir okay my question is. A. How how many points do you all have in Arkansas right now. Just to scan technology use of license plates going through intersections it three or four law enforcement agencies that actually deploy our technology well I'm not asking that I mentioned how many points do you all have scattered throughout the state. We how ya can collect data. Will it be you know if let let's refer to hot springs they have one mobile system which allows for hot springs police department to be able to scan tags. they have to quick deploy cameras if they use a lot for under cover in in in you know Task Force type deployments to be able to watch a particular house that they were used for drug trafficking or some type of nefarious means so the the they put that camera out there to watch the comings and goings you know for the investigation beyond that inside the state of Arkansas we have a very limited number of deployments or. Collection points cameras to be able to watch this just because the as a bill was previously written you know it allowed for law enforcement to use this technology but it prohibited the use by you know non law enforcement entities to be able to use the technology follow up recognized is our charge a Motorola charges for this. Technology this used to cities counties state of the of course if you know there's the the purchase of hardware there's any of the storage of data there's you know and implementation and integration fees and will you know that similar to any other camera technology that is being deployed into the public spaces. One more follow up you're recognized if we implemented this statewide who else is in this business said Motorola. There's you know that probably twelve pretty near promenade players in that technology as we move forward as technology advances you're saying that all of our smartphones pretty much have that capability also I mean as it stands now we can use our smartphones to take a picture of a vehicle and you know timestamp geo locate where I took a picture of that particular tag is just you know we're we're talking about deploying those cameras that can do what is already legally available here in Arkansas but allowing it to be done on an automated basis. One more follow up you're recognized. I'm trying to get supplemental thinking we'll get there of any other companies of the Motorola I guess. Verizon OR any is is any other companies have cameras out that you're aware of the state no just just Motorola. Correct a deal again I don't I don't I don't know what my competitors do again from our standpoint yeah we know that you know it has been of eight made available here in law in the state of Arkansas for law enforcement last question. Follow up. Okay thank you Sir appreciate your indulgence so that this would be potentially. Of a revenue stream for for private enterprise to have a need. Police in and the sheriff and state police in the grand scheme of things that would be a very small component of it again our focus is on law enforcement and that you know the safer communities aspect so you would be very small as far as what we would see is a huge revenue drive it would be more two again eight greatly enhance the that the capabilities of law enforcement for their investigative methods thank you thank you chairman thank you representative makes you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman I I went ahead and pulled up the whole code section here so I could understand what was in section section be in section B. is where that allows the state county municipal law forward Forsman agency to capture the data into compared to the crime information center national crime information center the FBI and and so forth and so it looks like our law enforcement agencies have the authority to install these plate readers and to do it and it seems like the intent of the bill and correct me if I'm wrong here is it will now allow an individual so if I wanted to go out I can go out of style plate readers start getting getting this information partnerships or corporations and. And Hey that that's that's concerning to me that were allowing individuals and corporations to go out and gather this information essentially without the public's notice because they're not going to be a sign there that says you know smile we're about to take a license plate for and and Motorola is going to have the authority to do whatever and and correct me if I'm wrong here that the corporation the this case moral occurs in the at the end of the table would now have all this data from our citizens when they pass that certain places that certain time and I don't know if there is a way to commercialize that other than law enforcement by so I guess my concern is or my question is ultimately forty allowing our law enforcement to to do this. Why do we need to open this up for corporations to be able to also start collecting this data why not just let our law enforcement agencies be able to continue to do what they've already had the ability to do. Thank you representative I don't want you to think this is Motorola asking it wants to deploy cameras we're trying to open this technology to other entities such as the H. away community you know I live in an H. away we have cameras that watch the comings and goings of all of the the neighbors you know they live in my neighborhood it's for that you know one night when you know it individuals choose to do a smash and grab operation and be able to steal or somehow burglar you know a and number of homes that we have that you know record of those vehicles coming and going from the neighborhood in again that date is and available should law enforcement asked to see it or if there is an animal land place to be able to share a similar other checked out I mean other entities casinos car washes where the the they see a lot of you know returning clientele the use of technology because it helps them to identify a vehicle that you maybe spends an ex exuberant of money at a casino or it comes to the the car wash on a frequent basis it can alert their employees it is you know the vehicle is part of a club or some type of membership hospitals use the technology to make the the campus itself much more secure and safe specially around the E. R. areas the pharmaceutical areas. And then even you know around where the you know the babies are here are born in release so that you know. It's a it's kind of been removed from our society now but it used to be the worry that you know someone who would grab a baby and run out so this is doing nothing more than somebody standing out with the yellow pad writing down all the tags and the time that they went by it it's making this information available post you know incident you know as of forensic data. All. Recognized so how how does this differ from having a security camera so that the H. away example that you gave obviously if I'm H. away I can have security cameras around the property to capture anything that might be suspicious and obviously as part of that you would. Directly to get the license plate off of somebody how is that type of security system different than these license plate readers without getting too deep into the technology you know the CCTV or these cameras that you're referring to this just a constant viewing of all of the vehicles in the in the comings and goings of the entrances and exits A. L. P. R. allows for the camera to be trained on that area but through the technology you're recognized a tag or something reflective one through and it does interpretation on the taken rather than storing all of that video it just took a snapshot and it took a point in time that said. Here's a tag what that we read here's a picture of the car with that tag on it here's the geo location and as I said the time stamp in so it's it's much quicker as far as when you have to go post event to be able to search that data to see you know what vehicles went through that entrance which ones left thirty minutes later should there be a band that of it. Thank you okay thank you representatives spoke she recognized for a question. Okay representative Payton you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr and most of my questions have been answered also I'm a for me this is a privacy issue. But how is. The existence of this map possible if if it's illegal in Arkansas. To have that data I mean what. Law enforcement. Agency. Did you go through to get this. This map is representing commercially acquired data which was taken outside of law enforcement law enforcement data is very secure behind C. just compliant standards so that it cannot be accessed unless there's permissible purposes staff which by the department if I have a follow up you can so I've got a letter that was emailed to me by so I think it is Howard handy or something like that national insurance crime bureau the very I'm it's in support of this bill but very clearly states that insurance companies are willing to pay for this information. And one of the reasons it gives is somebody claims that their vehicle is in storage most of the time and not being driven and the license plate readers can discover that the vehicle is being driven nearly on a day to day basis I'm in the. That to me that that goes way deeper than trying to find a vandal that tore of a. of a home or even a kid that kidnapper the kidnap a child I mean if we had illegal search and seizure that certainly help law enforcement to catch criminals too but we don't have that you know we we have warrants in which we require that they they go through a judge. So I mean how is this not an invasion of privacy we'll. First of all the the the tag itself has no personally identifying information on the tag itself is longer yes you contract to the ownership no you cannot. You can't. The. How would that be be able to have it be obtained. It was alright for Smith yes you have to leave the LPR system because in in an investigation of identified a vehicle I would have to then take that number in leave the LPR system by design. Because it cannot have any personally identifying information to your tag so that is what it is nationwide. Indeed as it tag goes into the other systems you're able to say all right now run tag one two three ABC and it'll come back and say that belongs to Greg scalene here's is a dress in all of the other information which is readily obtainable through the NICET. I'm sorry the NC I write on my insurance company has my tag number state certainly does okay thank you thank you Mr. Okay we'll let me make sure I understand the only people that access to those wants to reader and then applies a license plate number but last played number is it is secure and last there's been some type of criminal activity involved and then only law enforcement could get it and only then could they checked the Registered owner of that vehicle it might close or what were we missing here no correct and and at present that's what it is noted to your question about the insurance company again the LPR system can identify the tag but it does not have any ability to again read the tag in and quickly tell somebody operating LPR system that that tag belongs to representative Payton. Now your is the an ICBM what you're referring to is yes they do have the insurance companies referring business back to them saying this car is out. Of service in this individual reported stolen. So they're able to then do their research to the insurance company in be able to then say okay one of the other non addresses who you know what is the other information we can obtain but again the LPR system has no ability whatsoever to read that tech in bring up any type of personally identifying information. Sensi was address that to me to get a response. You have a question yes either thank you. Question are you will discuss something I have a question okay with. So if you have two databases. Or ten. On this computer. How separate those databases I mean I can say this database only has the license plate number and that database has the ownership information they're both on the same computer both accessible through the internet I mean it's it's not that big of a leap is it to thank you can't cross reference that well it's presuming that you know everybody has access to both of those databases. The LPR database is only going to be accessible by the individuals that deploy that technology. In in it you know the you know again jumping into whether I can access I myself can access the insurance databases even though that's my insurance company they do not give me that availability and then you know an HLA would not have any accessibility to insurance databases or any other type of databases thank you. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized. Thank you Mr with this bill anyway allow up. Traffic citations to be issued from the scammers. Contracting with with local governments to be able to do that. The. It again the way that we are asking the bill to be you know presented its opening up to again not a law enforcement entities. In it that would not allow for anybody outside of law enforcement to issue some type of citation and are you referring to like red light enforcement or some type of speed enforcement result in to that effect yes that's that's exactly what I'm what I'm referring to what it would allow these. Companies corporations individuals partnerships associations to contract with you know. Municipal or or county governments for state governments to issue those funds and. From my standpoint It release from your the position they were taking we are not in in in in that business we are total separate technology from what they do so the easy answer would be no if I may step in Mr. Mr chairman place of your school with a representative Gonzalez to the design of the seventeen thirteen is absolutely and of like a license plate red light enforcement stuff like that that is not the intent at all of this bill. We've got to make a bigger fish to fry this follows okay you're recognized for a follow. So I have to believe you when you say that that's not the intent of the bill but with the way the bill is written I believe that's exactly what it would allow unless there is something in code somewhere else that specifically prevents that from happening Because right now this is the only exception that I. see to that. The impossible and you're you're when you're striking out the individual partnership corporation it absolutely allows for that and then also by. Redefining what this the definition of a a capture plate data is and adding it that is operated by a governmental entity than if it's not operated by a governmental entity that it doesn't even fall within this definition so they're free to do whatever they want to with it. Correct. I'm I'm read along with you correct the. Correct what you're saying I would not mind at all to make these necessary amendments so Two three concerns on here for sure. It's time representative Watson are you making the are you a question to pull your bill down yes Sir I am yes Sir Mr okay that objections them from the Committee will of your you're allowed to pull your bill down we'll see you back in here when you get those members may. Richey appreciate about thank you thank you. Committee members moving right along we got to Senate bill thirty I'm a representative dodgy go to present that for refuge Senator English. Representative dodging. You're recognized. Thank you Mr chair. I'm sorry did says recognized. You're recognized Senate bill thirty is very quick simple bill as far as easy to read it does two simple things one is it changes the after transformation happened the. At Division of information services moved over under the new department of transformation and shared services and the authorization for approval of of certain types of services professional services that sort of thing previously was approved by the chief fiscal officer of the state it didn't get changed under transformation and it needs to move over to the secretary that's the first thing that it does and secondarily it increases the oversight of those types of decisions by requiring the secretary to obtain approval from Legislative Council or Joint Budget commission committee if we're in session before Making those determinations before approving transfers Right now they just have to get advice from Legislative Council so if you have any questions I do have the department here available to help answer anything more than that. Representative love you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair president of Dotson are you sure you don't want to pull this bill so that we can come. Well. I'll try a vote on this one. Thank you Mr okay further questions from committee members say none no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative dodgy ready clothes and clothes make a motion to pass calendar to close has motion of did patchy discussion on the motion. Saying none all in favor say aye All opposed say no regulations representative does your bill is Pat and patiently waiting for the last time in the back of the room the whole time representative Beatty. We appreciate your patience and the thank you for hanging in there. As of a yeah I guess your rep you're running is for a center back home is that correct. Yes Mr okay representative Beatty you're recognized to present senate bill four fifteen. Much enlighten today I respect Mr chairman representative power Beatty District nine to present Senate bill four one five two U. and the members of the committee this is a very simple bill it basically adds language to to the law to amend the law concerning relocation assistance payments and for other purposes and it just basically adds the site in the section of the US can do. And with that I'm closed. Our own entertain any questions. It makes you have a question. Yes thank you Mr chairman so I understand reading that U. S. Code but practically what is it do. Basically it just identifies that code where the the the language title of that could do. Actually the language is forty two U. S. Code chapter sixty one uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition policies and for federal and federally assisted programs and it just it where is in the actual. Bill it's it is titled the uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition policies act of nineteen seventy so the title is changed and also just directed to that exact section of U. S. Code specifically forty six one is just the definition section of that code so just properly identifies the proper section by code instead of by name okay so softball does Josh I think I understand the you gave a long explanation but I think the shortened version of right wing and currently in Arkansas law we give the name you're adding the actual real physical code section yes corrected to prevent any confusion correct okay I'm with you now thank you Mr a representative love you're recognized. Thank you Mr chairman I I guess that the kind of clarified it for me his this is what I was I was thinking we do operate programs on the state level in which the wi may pay assistance for relocation and we may nine in so I was just trying to make sure that we weren't guarantee and that we were going to be paying the systems for every every instance so I'm not I think that it cleared up for me so I'm fine. Yes Sir you corrected it only changes to add that specific site to the federal code okay none else thank you. Representative Dotson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair so generally when you're adding a reference to a code you add a date of when that code is there so that the federal code if that ever changes doesn't change Arkansas statute would you be willing to put a date into this representative Dotson that was also brought up at the Senate presentation this bill by Senator back on and if if it were up to me yes I would I would add that as far as the date but if I was asked to present the bill as this. All right thank you. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized. Thank you Mr I'm confused. There's a reason for adding this code section can you tell us what that actually changes in practice of what we doing today. Represent Wardlaw I think it actually changes nothing from what we're doing today other than identifying this low this Arkansas directly to the proper section of U. S. Code. We're we're making thank you Mr I'd ask that you not it's on so but. Any time we make an act of Congress that's what we're doing here we we pass a bill to a committee in the floors there's a reason so if we're putting this code section in here and I didn't find it instead of the name that was already in the law because I'm sitting here looking at the bill it's very short senate bill other than those underlying changes. There's gotta be something referenced in that code. They either wasn't being practiced are was being practiced against it and. I just like to know what that change was or why the reason for adding this code section. Russian Wardlaw I don't have the answer to that question other than the information I was provided was it was changing the code our our current law represent the U. S. Code and And the language contained therein. Okay. G. Gonzalez you're recognized. I thank Mr just going back to the representative of Dotson's questions at. Think that might be addressed in the and the line just before that work references uniform relocation assistance real property acquisition policies act of nineteen seventy I don't know if that address is your concern and I would you think that would be appropriate representative of a year. That I think that would probably appropriate. Have your questions answered thank you. Further questions from committee members. No one signed up to speak for against the bill. A representative body are you ready to close with your bill. Yes Mister chairman I'm closed okay represented beige clothes with the bill. what's the what's pleasure of the Committee. I have a motion do pass any discussion on the motion. Eternal love you're recognized for discussion on the motion thank you Mr in the representative Beatty I'm going back to to what I said before. There are some there are certain state programs that we run in which if a person opt into the program they do get relocation fees and didn't get relocation expenses. My couldn't not concerned with and in this piece is that we open it up in here and we might be possibly guaranteeing that people receive relocation re and relocation expenses. In I may be wrong. I'm I'm wrong maybe once or twice a year but I'm not sure if the I'm wrong on this yes Sir I'm just need more clarity on on the fact of are we really guaranteeing and relocation expenses not I'll give an example and federal funds different housing programs and this is what this this code because I read this last night this is what this code is done with in one survey certain persons are consistent I've been to programs they are relocated at their expense. Because they opt into the program. This part of the code almost guarantees a people's relocation expenses are getting paid. I'm not sure that we that we as a state we want to do that. and so with that being said I'm just I'm not comfortable with this deal I could I could be missing the point on it but I'm almost certain that I may not be missing the point so. With that being said you know I'll be a no vote and in this somebody can can clarify that for me thank you. Representative to make sure recognized for a question professional discussion thank you I'm basically gonna follow up on what representative what we just said it kind of looking at it I mean it seems like it may be harmless and superfluous but the whatever we do things like this as representative Dotson said it is customary to included date that way Congress can't change the laws here in Arkansas with without our approval and I would also you know when I look at this I see the you know both you and senator Beckham or both freshman not that that's necessarily a bad thing but the little things like we just talked about by not including and date you know those are things that you know you you pick up over time and I would also be more comfortable hearing from the Secretary or department head or whoever the apartment is to give us clarification on is is simply just a. Date to the code or are we actually doing anything substantive here and you know I and I would be. Me personally I would like to know that before we vote on it like so I I it seems on the surface but it's just perfect superfluous and we're not really affecting any change maybe just clarifying which is not enough that's all we're doing I'm I'm I'm on board with you but I think to get that comfort level that that's all we're doing is clarifying and include those date changes that this point I don't know that I'm or I can support this presented by you have a comment to make sure that I should start this was a bill provided by our not for us to present to change this language is supported by that agency and I don't know if that would change any of the positions of of the committee Right well that's what I thought last. That may be why held those comments but I'm I'm. It. But I am willing to to pull this down and address the concerns that were identified and say it's been a learning experience and an enlightening after our morning and a good way to start the the Monday before spring break the bay you did a good job of doing the bill and you answer questions well without objections were going on recognize your request to pull the bill and we hope to see you back to it back in here once so as a manager might say no objections ability been pulled. Committee members said chip put it down for you that we will not be meeting next Monday or next meeting will be We. From Wednesday Wednesday of next