JBC-Special Language

Members at seven thirty if you'll take your seats we're going to get started. Members we are going to atom C. two we're gonna skip over today so if you're here for Adam C. two at the request of the member we're gonna skip over that. When we call this meeting to order. Kochhar Cavenaugh you have any comments. I guess we're gonna start with Adam C. one in members the the language that we had in the original bill department labor licensing is now agreeable to so the special language is not necessary I just need to vote to send this back to us. Back to budget. At work we got a motion and a second all in favor say aye. Posay NO motion carries C. one go back to budget Adam C. three. Good morning members I'd in C. three in your packages for Henderson state university we're gonna be discussing section six you'll see it's on page five of the packet this is regarding their loans the previous language authorized the president of the Henderson state university request from the chief fiscal officer to make a loan in the amount of six million dollars from the budget stabilization trust fund with three payments made from time to time for the outstanding loans. And for them to be made by June thirtieth twenty twenty eight as recommended by. Council with review my counsel and joint budget no later than June thirtieth of every fiscal year the new language you will see has struck through the authorization for the six million dollars. But language has been changed indicating that the loan repayments for the outstanding loan from budget stabilization trust fund will be made from time to time they see only change the sunset is still in effect. As. Your. that's conclusion other any questions represented Cavenaugh you're recognized. Thank you I would my question I don't really know who's going to answer it is just has any repayments been made on this long. If you each which is state your names and then if you heard the question please respond thanks for mentioning Broadway issue system. To the base station system. Please respond to questions. Represented Cavenaugh straight. No ma'am last fiscal year we did not make a payment we are going to turn our absolute best to make one this year okay so we have had no repayment norms and we still don't have a schedule it's just some time to time right they are working very hard to regain their. Cash. Back in the bank and so we will make a payment just as soon as we can and hopefully that will be this fiscal year thank you we did receive some good news last week moody's upgraded your bond rating from negative to stable now that their joint issue system and then I think we're also going to get some good news from an audit has been done on the financial aid system will be a report on later so things are looking up it's just going to take some time to get to that point obviously the pandemic has not helped because you have the loss of enrollment loss of students enrolled or living in the dorms as well so but I think. To Julian Rita or our CFO Henderson they're going to get there in the money to be paid back. Seeing no other questions from members I have a motion. I have a motion to pass second. In a second all those in favor say aye. Opposed say no motion carries. Moving on to Adam D. one. Please remember amendments that are in the packet the first item on D. one is for house bill eleven eighty seven for the Secretary of State. The sponsor of the amendment is here and it's Representative Wardlaw. represent Wardlaw you're recognized thank you Mr it is just like I explained in budget and members on day it's just to ensure to get shot stays within the capital walls there's been a rumor that sector stable mood the gift shop over cross street and. I just don't think that's right for constituents when they come the cap or not have access to the gift shop in the capital. Be happy take any questions. Many questions for members. Scene nine I have a motion represented Wardlaw to pass their second. There's a second all those in favor say aye opposed say no motion carries. Adam D. two. Members this is on page seven in your packet deals with the department of finance and administration disbursing officer this is an amendment Representative Dalby. Represent all of you are recognized wherever you're at two okay. You are recognized. Your green. needs to be read yes there we are thank you Mr chair members with this is is. Three hundred thirty seven thousand dollars currently being transferred out of the administration administration of justice fund to help pay for the district judges in this amendment would move the move the district judges that are getting that part of the plate to the constitutional officers fund keeping this three hundred thirty seven thousand dollars in back in the administration of justice the. And just for historical a little background. This fund the Administration of Justice Fund is funded by fines and fees the district judges set. So it is a really Hey. Trying to find the right word. It really is improper for them to be setting fines and fees that they're going to be received that they know is paying for their salaries. And I'll be happy to entertain any questions really very simple. The district judges belong in the constitutional officers fund and should not be paid out of the sun. K. Singh no questions I would like to ask Jaitley to how this affects the budget. Thank you Mr chair Jake we DFA office of budget the administration Vaught of Justice Fund is funded by a court costs fines and fees there are a lot of different justice related programs that are paid out of their I think the idea when it was originally set up was that the folks who used to judicial system should then pay for it. Over the last ten or fifteen years to fund money going into that fund is going down and down and down and we're now at a point where even though there is a fair amount of money appropriated out of that fund for things like district judges the amount of actual funding that's coming through is that I think nineteen percent of that appropriation the district judges when the independent citizens commission was set up the district judges came under that of the purview that commission so they're funded out of the constitutional officer respond the way we're reading this amendment is is really just recognizing that the primary source of their funding is coming out of that fund and pulling them out of the Administration of Justice Fund is not necessarily going to it might help the fund a little bit in that the other benefits trees might have that the available remaining money but it's really just recognizing that this is coming out of constitutional officers. So that sounds like you have no immediate concerns I'd say we are neutral on the bill. In a are there any questions from members. Seen and I have a motion or I have a motion to pass in the second. All those in favor say aye. Jose NO motion carries Adam D. three. Members next item is S. B. one thirty for administrative office of the courts there is another member amendment this is by Senator Breanne Davis. Senator Davis. Income up front office. Senator Davis you are recognized. Thank you members and I know many of you have been getting calls for the past week. Maybe from your judge maybe from judges across state that you don't know so one apologize now for putting you in attentional late and a hard situation but I think it's the right thing to do when I think it's a conversation worth having an. This certainly wasn't a plan a for me or plan B. I want you guys to know that this is absolutely a last resort this is an issue that I've been working on for months now. And but along the way and the rules of in changed and the goal has been moved and there hasn't been total honesty I think on behalf as and the judges Commission on exactly what's going on with the salary issue. So to me today this isn't about a constituent that I have that I think is being and paid unfairly this is about an injustice that's happening at first state employee that and is working to serve the citizens of Arkansas and and please understand that the irony is not lost on me that there judges here today to speak against this and and they are really the administers of justice in our state so. With that and we have in a District Court judge our fifth and judicial. District and he has an employee that he wanted to bring with him and as a trial court assistant she has been with the state of Arkansas and as a managing director for the public defender's office for twenty three years working with the stretch and she's been a great employee she understands the court system inside and out and was ready in the middle the pandemic when judges of not been hand handling cases as they usually do was ready to jump in and help with the backlog and and best serve the people in that district people of Arkansas. She was a GSX six AM on the pale on the pay grade she made about forty six thousand eight hundred dollars. Any other time that you would transfer to a different state position and you obviously would state your salary or if you're moving at that she did in this case TGS of seven you would get a ten percent raise I'm not asking for a ten percent raise I'm simply asking that her salary remains the same and even though she was promoted in is higher on the pay scale. So back in September my judge was told that they typically start out salaries of TCA's at around forty thousand dollars this would be a thirteen percent pay reduction for her. And but he was also told that you can make a request to the judicial council trial court employee committee and see if she can start at her salary at her current salary what it was with the state. So am I have a letter and actually that and Mister chair feel allowed to pass out to members of the committee the letter that judge Dan M. and wrote to the commission specifically to chairman at the time judge Carlton Jones and explaining the situation. He was instructed to write this letter and send it to judge James. On the back page of it you'll see that it he says it's been explained to me that all entry salaries for the TCA I A. S. C. practice or forty thousand dollars unless the proposed TCA is a former TCA and that your committee may approve a salary higher if it is justified. So she was not previously TCA but she had twenty three years experience as a manager at the public defender's office as I mentioned previously and she has a pretty lengthy and expect resume of experience and what we were told four months please understand I have called and had conversations with a C. and I was on a call with the judges in December we were told for months that look we don't know if we can do this right now and because we haven't been having court and our budget is down because as represented Dalby was saying that there Fund is filled with fines paid by people and and so they didn't have as much money so they said well look we've got a lot of people retiring and at the end of the year so we don't know exactly how much money's gonna be left there but and. You know we can't make any promises but maybe come July one new fiscal year and we can get her at her salary forty six thousand dollars. That was what we were talking about for months that's what Karen was under the impression and and why she held out so long before going ahead and taking the TCA position this is what we were told. So it was my understanding the judges understanding all of us that they do have they do you have M. a process in place and they are strict about the salaries that they have and how they start people out because of years of abuse in the past and I understand that and I appreciate that I think that's a good thing but they also within their process have the ability to take into account individual experience and if any of you got an email from your judges then you saw that in the email just last week that they were sending around they've worked hard to have a process in place and they also within their process allow for taking individual experience into account and that's what the situation is and they refused to do it so in December I sat on the call and they later said absolutely not we're not considering it this goes against our process what we've worked on we will not do it they moved the goal post they've been saying one thing for months and then all of a sudden settle we don't we're not allowed we can't do it this violates what we've put in place and that's not the truth and the reason we know it's not the truth is because I've had multiple conversations with a or C. about it and in the email that they sent you last week they said the same thing they have the ability to take individual experience into account. I want you also to understand that at a GSM seven the salary ranges in that paper eight between forty thousand and sixty thousand dollars approximately. So what I'm asking is for Karen to just stay at her current salary at forty six thousand eight hundred dollars which is well within the pay grade not asking for anything outside of that anything that's an appropriate this is not about a favor as some of them it said or someone who knows their legislator that can go make a request to get some advantage for their employee that's not what this is this is about taking care of state employees doing the right thing somebody that has twenty three years of experience the job our job is to represent the people of Arkansas and their job is to work well they're elected in our court system to work and serve the people of Arkansas. So what they're saying by denying this request and not even taking her experience into account is that they don't care if judge done and has to go higher a brand new person that has no experience in the court system has to train that person in the middle of a pandemic and start addressing the backlog of cases. That does not serve the people of Arkansas are the fifth judicial circuit and district well it does not and that's why I'm here because it's wrong by the people that judge done in service so I understand that it is a sticky issue and it's a little a little uncomfortable and it's small in the grand scheme of what we deal with we're talking about six thousand dollars but as I said when I started this is the last resort for me I've tried everything else I've been told different things along the way and gold has been moved and I feel like the only recourse I had left quite honestly was to address this issue there special language and through this committee I'll take any questions at this time. Thank you. Senator Rice you're recognized. Thank you for explosions Senator Davis this for clarification this employee they've been with this judge for some time what were the employee's options This only to go with the judge our our wall. M. I don't know specifically I'm sure she could have stated our job and she could have refused to take the job but she held out until January fourth to the very last minute because she was afraid that exactly this thing would happen that they would say sorry can't do it even though they've been saying for months just give us time we think we can make this right can July one do you know what options the employer would have that I'll stay within the state system I do not. Okay thank you thank you. Are there any other questions for senator Davis. If not I'm going to ask a judge Jones and judge black to come up. They would like to. Say a few words. If you would just turn turn your microphones on and state your name he represented then you are recognized to say what you have to say. Good morning I'm judge Jan I'm glad I'm from Sebastian County the twelfth judicial district and arm repor sending I guess my cell my property assistant and probably judicial council. Carlton Jones circuit court judge eighty different districts south of the first vision former chair of the trial court employees committee from two thousand seventeen to two thousand twenty so I'm here to speak and take any questions that the upper body may have. You are recognized to. All right may statements Mr chairman senator you know certainly enough I understand You know judge Donna's position. I cannot account for what everyone has or has not told ms Davis Senator Davis however I can tell you that I've been working on this problem for more than a few months I've been working on it for six years and we have worked tirelessly in an effort to establish a system by which we can manage and keep some consistency and the abuses that she spoke of from occurring again I certainly want to have everybody understand that what we are doing is following the statutes that were implemented by this legislature several years back that is what we are following I can cite you too I believe sixteen thirteen thirty three oh one thirty three oh two thirty three oh three that set forth the process by which this body put that responsibility to make the determinations as to salaries compensation and things of that nature over into the judiciary just as this body would not have The judiciary. Setting forth the policy by which. Employees are hired you would have to do this year doing that for this body. The thing is is to do this is now would be in contravention of the statutes that this body has set forth that's number one number two it's not merely a six thousand dollar question I understand judge dons position I respect his position I appreciate his position however it's not merely limited to judge down there are judges across the state jodee Raines Dennis. Judge going in from pine bluff. judge Richey from Jones borrowed there's about fifteen twenty others that we worked to where we could make some progress on getting the salaries level. What I explained to judge don personally was that where ever she landed on the pay scale based upon her experience her background that's where she would be. We I have done that so that we don't end up having. Situations where representatives senators come before the body and we start back into the process that we had many years ago if we wish to do that then it certainly does become more than a six thousand dollar question because I know those individuals that I just main plus easily fifteen to twenty more will be making the same request. Beyond that of the second and third level issues as a concern that's kinda like When Dallas last pay their quarterback more Philadelphia wants pay their quarterback more too because everybody thinks that their quarterback is the best quarterback. And that's the reality of things and that's the way it walls and we can go back there and certainly enough we do take into account a judge Donham CCA's prior work experience all of that is weighted based upon the personnel policies the employee's compensation policy that has been established over a six year period that the judicial council or in you put the responsibility of administrative office of the courts and the judicial council to create a process by which this is accomplished. It was voted on in October two thousand eighteen and passed. In Arkansas a leading conversation with members of the judicial council it is not that we wish to do any harm to any wrong to under compensate or whatever term we wish to use today to the C. CA I thank my TCA who at twenty years of experience running a state office at the time she took the job who took a pay cut. is probably the best TCA in the State of Arkansas and I would hope that every single circuit court judge with thank the site. However we have to have that degree of consistency that has been established that has been voted on and approved by the judicial council the administrative office of the courts and. The actual policy in and of itself is less the work of the administrative office and more a work of the combined circuit court judges with their input and I will yield the floor. Good morning thank you for allowing me to speak and I want to thank Senator Davis for trying to help out her friend and employee I. I really appreciate that and I think it would I really just want to thank you for reaching out and trying to do this I would like to respond to a couple of comments that senator Davis made about backlog dockets and I'm only speaking from my personal docket I do not have a backlog of cases we have utilized their telephone we are having my doc is look like pre pandemic docket I'm working and back and then some hearings remotely while I'm down here today. Sir I do not have a backlog docket we were I started on a pilot committee to work on the same person dependency neglect cases prior to the pandemic and thankfully we had done that so we could keep going forward and keep handling our cases that right now my doctors are full dockets in person dockets waves socially distance and if someone feels uncomfortable due to their age their family whatever their circumstances I do allow them to come remotely by saying or telephone or what other accommodations we can may but I think the M. one example I would like to give us we have a TCA and Sebastian County that has worked for eighteen and a half years since two thousand two she's making forty nine thousand five hundred dollars prior to taking the TCA position she worked for the prosecutor said she has more time in. As a state employee and she's making forty nine thousand five hundred dollars and to bring another employee in at this higher rate of pay for the same job would just be unfair to TCA's across the state who have similar experience I would like to say the right way to make a paying crew the right way to do this process would be to make a paying crease for all TCA's in court reporters in the next fiscal session if you raise the pay grade for TCA's and give more preparation for them we can continue to improve across the board and working a solution that's best for everyone as opposed to one individual I think is the most important. Goal. Thank you for your time and I'll be happy to take any questions. I have a couple questions ahead have you since we voted on this in two thousand eighteen have you started any TCA's above that forty thousand dollar mark that you're aware of. Maybe one because of prior to C. eight spear Ms that's part of what's built into the plan if you have prior to the experience that is weighted differently than some of the other factors that we have as a state employee or an eight another governmental entity that's weighted as well as this TCA would receive that same benefit from working in a governmental entity that would be weighted at a certain level and it would increase that individual salary I don't know and have it checked what the TCA's of judge dom salary is presently. My second question was do you have the latitude to give to start someone at a higher wage for any reason outside of former TCA experience. yes other governmental experience if you have certain certifications such as a paralegal certification or anything of that nature all of these are objective criteria that you're going to possess and not how I feel about it or anyone else in the future feels about it it's here it is it's one plus two equals three and here's your salary. So your position is this particular ticket yes they did not meet any of those criteria did meet as far as the prior work experience with another governmental entity and that will be created in so that's what I'm saying I don't know I'm not looking at that person's salary to see exactly what he or she is making what they would have received that benefit at look at the very least what what can that is a cabbie out that senator Daniel spoke about is funding so if we have more latitude with funding and is just judge black just stated that helps us be able to make these adjustments. Service I will come back to you to close here in a minute Senator flowers you are recognized. Thank you Mr chairman. center Dismang it's okay. So I guess what is the is the judge here that's made the request for the increase. Probably not okay because to me to me apartment this conversation is is what was the commitment I mean if if I'm gonna go take another job and I'm told that I'm going to make ex number of dollars but then I ask for more than a. If there was a commitment that this individual or TCA was going to make an additional you know I I have an increase that's one thing it if not then I mean you know what you're doing you know you're taking of a lesser paying job and you have the consequences of that I mean maybe because you find of work more rewarding or the work environment something more attractive to you and so it to me that's that's an important part of the conversation and also we win is it is it is subjective determination on how you account for the years the service for qualifications or is that more of a formula based. Thing that it is kind of cut and dry. Thank you senator and I guess those are directed to me I'll try to answer them No we never made me personally or the committee ever made any representation as to you will receive more than what the basic entry salary is unless you meet the specific criteria that's number one. that is evidenced by the letter that is written to the committee. Requesting a change from that okay so it would have been very difficult for there to be some commitment prior to that later being written and there's been no commitment by the committee at the time when I was two year that would have substantiated that that's one. as to the service credits those are given in five year increments based upon your five years of service with a number of other governmental entity so it is a it's formula based yes there wasn't and so this letter and I just wanna make sure I understand was asking for you all to deviate from the formula yes okay it so we're not because there was some discussion about not that there her prior your service one take work we're not taking accountability they work but she didn't hit it right inside the formula well and that's what I'm saying I know I try to stay out of people's back pockets and what one person is making versus another of an individual most of that I would have sent over to Sam Kaufman retail C. you know as far as you know here's here's what this person has here's what the score is whatever their salary is that's what their salaries. Can I don't know if that answers your question not senator. Yeah I mean it will again I mean to me it's just what what matters is amended we're we're for following a true formula and in the in the way that this works is you know you have a B. and C. and so that equates out to whatever on the pay level maximin I'm good with that yes Sir I mean if this individual didn't have a B. and C. and didn't achieve to be able to have a higher a level in New going into the job that she was being hired at or would go in the entry level which I agree this letter states that that that they were aware of that then the only other thing would be if there was a true commitment that this was going to occur and somehow we're going to deviate from the formula but with that thank you. Senator Rice you're recognized. Thank you. The two the two judge witnesses of only. In its public. Knowledge and I've seen it but can you give me a rough. Pay range for circuit judges. Such as in this case. I don't know the exact number but I think it's one seventy. Two five one seventy four to fifty or something in those lines and that's fine and and I understand it it. just looking for options here one is there any law or rule within the judicial system that a judge cannot do some compensation to an employer. Bear I think once the and I have to go back to the exact year but once this body rightfully so determined that they were going to make of the trial court administrators become state employees then at prior to that trying to recall I think it was twelve ninety two of ninety five somewhere in that area. maybe ninety nine but when the this legislature made them become state employees then they were prior to that paid by the county okay in some counties delete sharing with the state of Arkansas on some of their TCA's the legislative enactment precluded that four bit that continuing unless there was already some compensation being paid to do that now would be a violation of the statutes that pass being if the judge wanted to take money out of his pocket. Okay I want to give us staff again yes exactly and I do as a business owner yes Sir I paid out of business but because I've got a business partner I take money out of my pocket sometimes to reward employees that take a load off from the yes Sir because I'm down here yes right right so where the my brother and business partner that so you know that that would be one option the other option I'm looking for is does this employ have an option to return to another job. At the pay scale they were at our bitter. To another judge or through some other part of the system. I don't think they would this employee would be able to transfer to another judge at a different pay range because trial court assistants are paid based on the scale judge Jones spoke of their out the state and. I I would assume she could go back to another job in the state if there is an opening at the public defender's office or the prosecutor's office or other some other state agency I don't want to speak directly for her because I haven't asked her that question but I would assume if she's got that kind of experience and there's an opening somewhere someone would. But rather in a heart not necessarily at a better price than she was before she moved with the judge you know. I would suspect and I hate to speculate because work we're not good at speculating and judges but I would suspect Senator Rice that. If there was an opening somewhere even her old job she could go back to the old job and or if there was a better job somewhere within the state she can take that job you know it we determined it was a voluntary move even if it had expectation okay thank you Mr. You have got one final question I was looking at this letter that that the judge Dunham wrote September twenty eight twenty twenty this seems like you guys are working out of a defined box formula. So why wasn't this letter responded to on September twenty ninth St. Camino chain to work on a formula September twenty or October twenty ninth of November twenty ninth of December twenty ninth for this person made a change like why keep them in limbo with the such a defined response. There was this I know there was discussion with judge Donham regarding the potential that once every paying as far as the budget was concerned and worse he built on that budget you know we want certain or the we had the resources in the Hey J. five. to put any of these individuals that would be warranted meriting you know any increase any of three is amended an increase whether any of those would have been able to have been compensated accomplished because the A. O. J. funding and the funds there was so tied. So it was difficult for us to summarize and say no this could never happen. But but by that answer you're saying it's not a defined formula you're saying if there was fund you may have been willing to do it no Sir no Sir respectfully center what I'm saying is is that there is a pay grade but she would be in okay we didn't move other individuals who may well have been entitled to pay increases based upon their potential criteria we did not know how many of those were going to be coming in. And what where they were going to be on the pay scale so we did not know even if we were going to have sufficient funds to cover those individuals if we had attempted to appropriate or spend more than what is in that funding allocated to us we the and again would have been about least of the law so there was communication there was no quote letter written that say it no absolutely not because we did not know if we could or we could put this two three eight on the scale and afford an award that person that increase that she may be entitled to I don't know if it's forty six thousand or whatever the number is. So you see you see just never look at this per particular position and situation. At like because if you had looked at it you could responded on September twenty ninth and said she's not gonna get anything more than forty eight she should stay where she's at I guess that's one thing why did it take four months to respond when it's a cut and dry formula to this one position well you know that's what I'm saying I did not look at her particular experience and make a determination of whether or not she would have been entitled to a fifteen hundred dollar above what the minimum was a two thousand dollar three thousand dollars because I'm in discussion with A. L. C. on the funding aspect of it and can we even implement the overall plan based upon the finances you yes okay so you're needing to you didn't take any of these positions at the consideration until you have the budgets direct okay I'm seeing no other questions for members so with that judges thank you guys for coming in testifying and I'm going to give the four back to senator Davis for any closing remarks. Thank you Mr chair and a few things in closing. And it was mentioned that there was another employee that served in two thousand two. And that makes around forty nine thousand dollars and and it was said that I'm trying to bring this employee and at a higher rate and that that would be unfair I'm not trying to bring that employee and at a higher rate I'm talking about forty six thousand eight hundred dollars which is less than forty nine thousand also Karen this employee started with the state in nineteen ninety eight. And the second thing that I wanted to address is as judge and said said that whatever she landed based on experiences where she would be on the pay scale M. what's important to know is that she started at the very bottom of the pay scale. She entered in with twenty five other TCA's Act forty thousand dollars three hundred forty thousand three hundred thirty nine dollars that's where she started she had twenty three years experience with the state if they take into account experience based on five year increments than she should have for five year increments with the state that should have been factored in based on that formula into her pay and it is not there in this list of twenty five twenty six at TCA's that entered and. Recently that are at the bottom pay scale most of them started with the state in two thousand twenty or two thousand twenty one. She is at the level that they are. So. In and like what I know what I know to be true based on my conversations with the judge done in my conversations multiple conversations with AFC over the past five months is that judge Dan M. was having this conversation about seeing if he could have his employee continue her current rate of pay for months and that the general sentiment of the committee was that they were receptive to hiring her at that level but the staff needed to verify sufficient funds to do so. So I mean I I hear what judge James is saying and that's right I mean they they didn't know what they have the money and because they weren't getting the fines in all of last year like they typically date so they were saying hang on let's pause let's put this on hold until the December agenda. We can see if we have sufficient funds and and we don't think we will that we think come July one we can make this right. So I just wanna be clear that that was the sentiment that's why hearing held out for so long so I she did not take the job until January fourth because she was waiting and waiting for him to make it right like they said they were going to try to do and finally she did end up taking the job just hoping that in July one that come July one they would work it out and we know that that hasn't happened now they've moved the goal posts and said we absolutely will not take this into consideration and that's just not that's just not true it's not true based on what you heard today they have a formula to take into account individual experience they do it F. formula I have five year increments worked into that formula they did not take her twenty three years of previous state experience into account she is at the basic entry level I'm telling you that what I'm asking for today it's not an appropriate and it's not out of line with what they pay TCA's is within the range of the GS seven pay scale it ranges from approximately forty thousand to sixty thousand dollars she falls within that pay range and based on experience should be able to be paid her forty six thousand eight hundred dollars they did not take that into account and that has been the problem what you're hearing today what I've been hearing for the last five months what hearings heard in which what judge done has hurt it's wrong. Why are we treating state employees this late this is not right. We do have a process in place they have a process in place I respect it and I appreciate it but I would like it if they followed. Those are all my comments thank you members for taking the time to hear this out I know it's taken the majority of your committee and I just appreciate your willingness to and to hear this and wait through this issue with me. Thank you see no further questions from members do I have a motion. I have a motion. I have a motion to past I have a second. Motion fails for lack of a second thank you members in that sea no other business that wraps of our committee.