ALC-Litigation Reports Oversight Subcommittee

Of. Chair sees a quorum as you can see we're about thirty minutes late starting today. so we're gonna move along quickly as we can. We'll start off with the. Adam city location review. Larned Gilson chief counsel. Hello of the Arkansas public employees retirement system. Committee on Laura Gilson chiefly would you turn the Markham please okay. Thank you. Can you hear me now yes I'm Laura Gilson chief legal counsel of Arkansas Public public employees retirement system. Join me to proceed with yes all right the matter for review today's rocky young adults versus board of trustees of acres Law judge and chief commissioner staff for the Arkansas Public Service Commission we have three items today for review the first is entered you Arkansas over and the Arkansas Attorney General versus the Arkansas Public Service Commission this is an appeal of a commission decision and docket nineteen oh fifty five U. which dealt with some changes to the net metering terrace that were necessitated by the passage of act for sixty four twenty nineteen by the legislature these were some non discretionary items that were changed in advance of the rulemaking on net metering which has it is on going in this. The third item the second the status of that is it has before the court of appeals it has been fully briefed and we are waiting on a court of appeals decision. The second item is energy Arkansas verses of. Ted Thomas cannot win and Justin Tate in their official capacity as commissioners of the public service commission a this is in the U. S. District Court in Little Rock it arose out of a decision by the commission and docket nineteen oh twenty TF in which energy requested that the commission pass along certain cost from the federal energy regulatory commission to Arkansas right pairs of the Commission declined to do that and and in lieu of appeal inter G. file the original suit in the U. S. District Court there is currently a motion to dismiss by the commission and we are awaiting a decision from the judge on that are the third item is a Case in the Arkansas court of appeals at started as for different companies appeal of the commission's order on the right design and other issues and that majoring of Page electric coop Arkansas electric cooperative corporation energy Arkansas and scenic hill solar all filed appeals they were just consolidated into one case as I said they concern the commission's decision that June thirtieth on the net metering rules which were up promulgated as a result of Act for sixty four twenty nineteen which make changes to the net metering statute that case as I said is that the Arkansas court of appeals it is currently scheduled for the record to be filed in January and then after that point the case will be briefed. Okay thank you. Three questions. Seeing none we would without objection will consider this review thank you. Adam three Marcus devised associate general counsel apartment labor and lasting. Marcus would you identify yourself for the record and proceed. And again do a B. and C.. Good morning Mr chairman my name's Marcus divine associate counsel at the department of labor. Yes proceed please. We are as you know the Department labor is charged under statute to collect wage claims for employees around the state we do have a certain limit those claims that we can take a but we do take claims from that limit two thousand dollars all the way down to the dollar and so we will take any claim that any. Employee's state of Arkansas Receipts with us that can include and does include claims all around the state these three claims that we have two of them have settled and in light of the fact that you all are tight on time those two that have closed our the heights nutrition T. J. Bonner enterprises and the other that is close is Mimi's little angels the just so you know that claim was for fortune eighteen dollars for a resident of pine bluff Caleb Allen we didn't collect those monies and then the other all four heights nutrition and PJ Bonner that was a claim for five hundred thirty seven dollars fifty one cents and we did collect that claim the one that is outstanding is the other that you have and as we mentioned we do take these claims for this one is against the state of Arkansas verses Robert talon at all on it is currently in money damages service so we are now proceeding on to collect we have tried to file this against the party and the shares I think in that case confinement nationally and so we're still proceeding at that case moves forward. Okay. Are you through I am done questions board okay any questions we have I apologize to the city. Senator Stubblefield you're recognized for a question thank you Mister chairman Mister one how much is the case for the talent case. The monetary value that can. Salin case is one. One thousand. Six dollars and ninety seven cents. I thank you Mr so only. I see no other questions will consider this review thank you thank you. The item the settlement review miss Jackson assistant Attorney General's office. Please identify yourself for the record and you may proceed after that thank my name is Melanie Jackson I'm turning Michael would you please thank you. Thank you my name is marina Jackson and I'm an assistant Attorney General in here along with me is amber Shepherd she's in house counsel for the Arkansas department of community corrections we hear seeking approval of the settlement in the case style carry nearly versus Arkansas department of community corrections missed nearly sued the department and claim that she was discriminated based on her disability she was employed with department for over less than a year and when she was hired by the department one of the conditions of her employment was that she was required to pass physical fitness test she was employed for over a year tried to pass it several times brought the doctor notes saying that she's not able to participate in any physical training and the Department terminated her employment based and that this case was litigated for over a year and we believe this settlement in the amount of twenty five hundred dollars M. is the good decision to sell this case this was approved by the Department by the Department Larry where there's department now finance administration and the case is dismissed right now we're just waiting for approval by this committee. Okay Senator Rice you're recognized for a question thank you and and I I well understand. the amount of money and the cost to litigate and all that. But are you saying that she signed something that employment. That said she knew she had to pass a physical test yes Sir and she was never able to do that that is correct she was then what we're going to pay her pay for the salaries that she got per year. In twenty five hundred dollars no Sir it is only twenty five hundred dollars and it includes her attorney's fees and you costs did she draw salary for a year. She was employed to lower insurer shall re during the time that she couldn't. I think I can respond to that five sure what I'm asking I do my name's amber Schubert and I'm actually general counsel at the division of community correction so that missing delete worked in one of our community correction facilities and she was not a security staff she was administrative staff so in that situation we do go ahead and hire them pending them being able to get into our academy she had been hired from the Division the department of correction she transferred from the department of correction to us so during the time she drew a salary and work for us she did actually work she was working as an administrator but when it was her turn to go to the training academy she said she could not participate in our defensive tactics that she didn't realize how heavily involved are defensive tactics course was and she showed up with a doctor's note saying that she simply couldn't participate in any form of defensive tactics and at that point she was no longer meeting the requirements for her job so the whole time she drew a salary from us she was working for us. When she transferred which she just administration yes okay the Ventura question thank you. Okay let's see no other questions. We consider this review thank thank you. Under DD two Larned Ballard. Attorney super supervisor Revenue Division DFJ. If you would go ahead and and go through a and B. also and please identify yourself for the record my name is Charlie Collins and that commissioner revenue DFA. Thank you I'm Lauren Ballard Attorney supervisor at the FAA. And as noted on the agenda we have two cases add to present to you today for approval hopefully the settlements both of those matters the first being Firestone building products company LLC the second industrial iron works incorporated I both of these cases actually are appeals from an administrative decision and they both involve a claims under the manufacturing exemption S. so they both have relatively similar subject matter but I'm the first to Firestone building products at that was one where we were approached prior to the trial date about a possibility of settlement and and. Came up with the possibility of a settlement of interest on this account at first and did pay the entire amount assessed prior to litigation so this would be a refund of money to them in the amount of the interest and so on industrial iron works that is one another again as I mentioned to manufacturing machinery equipment exemption case D. if I was approached by the new owner of the company regarding possible settlement of that matter and similarly we drew up a settlement agreements for a waiver of the interest subtitles the approval. Okay thank you. Is there any questions. Seeing none we will consider it review by beaches thank you. Thank you very much Mr. Seeing no other business this meeting is adjourned.