Agriculture, Forestry & Economic Development - Senate
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (13)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1681
Act 812
· 7 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…NDS; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING NOTICE OF TERMINATION. HB1681 Vaught TO ESTABLISH THE WATER AND SEWER TREATMENT FACILITIE…”
|
TO ESTABLISH THE WATER AND SEWER TREATMENT FACILITIES GRANT PROGRAM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. | Vaught | Notification that HB1681 is now Act 812 |
|
HB1889
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…THE STATE ACTION POULTRY FLOCK DEPOPULATION GRANT PROGRAM. HB1889 Pilkington TO AMEND THE LIMITATIONS ON ACCESS TO A DISPENSA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LIMITATIONS ON ACCESS TO A DISPENSARY OR CULTIVATION FACILITY; AND TO AUTHORIZE … | Pilkington | Delivered to the Secretary of State |
|
SB563
Act 741
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “SB563 Irvin TO AUTHORIZE THE ARKANSAS LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY COMMI…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE THE ARKANSAS LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY COMMISSION TO IMPOSE A CIVIL PENALTY FOR CERTAIN … | Irvin | Notification that SB563 is now Act 741 |
|
HB1562
Act 941
· 3 mentions in agenda, transcript
Matched: “…ONSERVATION. SB400 Irvin TO AMEND THE FAIR-FUNDING PROGRAM. HB1562 Gazaway CONCERNING THE TERMINATION OF AN ORAL LEASE OF FARM…”
|
CONCERNING THE TERMINATION OF AN ORAL LEASE OF FARMLANDS; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | Gazaway | Notification that HB1562 is now Act 941 |
|
SB582
· 3 mentions in agenda, transcript
Matched: “…USED FOR AN EQUINE UNDER THE OFFENSE OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. SB582 B. King TO ESTABLISH THE STATE ACTION POULTRY FLOCK DEPOPUL…”
|
TO ESTABLISH THE STATE ACTION POULTRY FLOCK DEPOPULATION GRANT PROGRAM. | B. King | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1656
Act 1024
· 2 mentions in transcript, agenda
Matched: “…your bill? pardon? OK. Yeah Senor Bryant Anyone here to run House Bill 1656.”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION. | Beck | Notification that HB1656 is now Act 1024 |
|
SB400
Act 933
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE LAW REGARDING OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION. SB400 Irvin TO AMEND THE FAIR-FUNDING PROGRAM. HB1562 Gazaway CON…”
|
TO AMEND THE FAIR-FUNDING PROGRAM. | Irvin | Notification that SB400 is now Act 933 |
|
SB466
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…RDERS VIA A DELIVERY VEHICLE OR VIA A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW. SB466 J. Dismang TO PLACE A MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN HEIGHTS OF WIND…”
|
TO PLACE A MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN HEIGHTS OF WIND POWER DEVICES; TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS … | J. Dismang | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1149
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…; AND TO PRESERVE TIMBER AT THE PINE TREE RESEARCH STATION. HB1149 Vaught CONCERNING VEGETABLE GARDEN PROTECTION. Notice: Sile…”
|
CONCERNING VEGETABLE GARDEN PROTECTION. | Vaught | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB281
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…estrictions designating areas as 'Members and Staff Only'. SB281 Gilmore TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING AGRICULTURE; TO ESTABLIS…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING AGRICULTURE; TO ESTABLISH THE PRODUCER BILL OF RIGHTS FOR COMMODITY … | Gilmore | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB455
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…Jr Sen. Jamie Scott REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle SB455 J. Bryant TO ALLOW REGULATION OF HEMP PRODUCTS BY ARKANSAS…”
|
TO ALLOW REGULATION OF HEMP PRODUCTS BY ARKANSAS TOBACCO CONTROL; AND TO AMEND THE UNIFORM … | J. Bryant | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB84
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ECLARE AN EMERGENCY. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB84 B. Johnson TO PROHIBIT A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF PERM…”
|
TO PROHIBIT A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS IN WATERSHEDS AND OTHER BODIES OF … | B. Johnson | Sine Die adjournment |
|
SB85
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…SSUANCE OF PERMITS IN WATERSHEDS AND OTHER BODIES OF WATER. SB85 Caldwell TO PRESERVE PUBLIC PROPERTY; AND TO PRESERVE TIMBE…”
|
TO PRESERVE PUBLIC PROPERTY; AND TO PRESERVE TIMBER AT THE PINE TREE RESEARCH STATION. | Caldwell | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
0:21
We're going to hear Senate. Bill, we're gonna try to get through everything. We will stay as long as possible. Uh, I will try to hear the bills that haven't been heard first to get them out of the way and then come back to the other ones. Uh I tell you, I'll tell you what, we got an agreed to, Bill. I'm gonna back up on that, since Irving, you've got 2 bills and you've got another committee to go to. Please come to the end of the table. For many of you here for the, uh, fair, uh, bill, uh, Senator
Urban has an amendment to the bill, if you would present, uh, please introduce yourself for
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
0:58
the record, Senator Missy Irvin, District 24. OK. You're recognized for your amendment. Thank you. I appreciate Miss Barbie Washburn, um, who reached out to me, uh, to make this change. And so we're at, we're adding, uh, apologize that got left off, um, but there's a tri-county fair, Lee County, Monroe County, and Phillips County make up that tri-county fair, they do receive funding as well. So I just want
to make sure that we had, we needed to include them and then, but they're also part of Northeast District as well, whether they choose to be a part of it or not, but we know to make sure that listed and then independence County. We needed to move them from North
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:40
Central to Northeast. So that's what the amendment to adopt to have a second segment Senator Stone, all in favor of the amendment, say aye, all opposed. Congratulations. You're welcome to, uh, present your bill 400. And and let me state
to the audience that, that, uh, your big concerns have been met in and clarified, but again, Senator Irvin's going to make a statement
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:02
on that. You recognize. So I listened to all of the concerns from the members of the committee and the members of the public and try to make, uh, all the changes reflective of those concerns. So just, and those are engrossed into the bill. So I believe White County Fair came in and wanted to change the review and approval just to review only, so that change was made, um, there was concern that
there was a value to the continuing education, um, peace, uh, I know many people attend. Managers Association convention. It's very, um, and so we want to make sure that that is remaining, and that does remain in the bill that you provide proof of yearly continuing education requirements, um, that remains always with the department, and I'll give you assurances like that's, that's, we want to continue that. We appreciate the people that put on the continuing education, no
intention of ever changing that, uh, and what the fair boards to be able to continue to participate in that. So that's there as well as, um, the additions that you just saw, um, in the and and another thing was like, we wanted to make sure that they can participate in the district fair that they choose, depending on where they live, if they're an exhibitor, um, and so that's, I think Senator Caldwell, we had discussed that one too. So that change has been made and then with this final amendment that I explained, making sure that those people
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
3:29
are included. So I hope we have covered all the concerns. Commit won't have a question. Seeing none, I have many people who've signed up to speak for or against. Do you want to pass on that since we've reached a, uh, an agreement, or do y'all want to speak? I will not deny you your right to speak. Seeing none, uh. Irwin, you like clothes to
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:55
rebuilt? Yes, I really appreciate. Let me just say this.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
4:00
I did ask for those who signed up, is there anyone here who did not sign up that wished to speak for or against the bill.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
4:08
saying no, now you're thank you. Let me say this. I love the passion. That people have for our county fairs. I'm one of those people, and I, I love that people dig into this, and they spend all their time and they volunteer to do this. I love that. We really are trying to make this as simple as we possibly can for them to continue to do what they're doing.
So with that, I'm closed and I would appreciate a good that. OK.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
4:35
Move to pass, as amended, uh, second, Senator Gilmore, all in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations. Would you like to present your other bill? Yes.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
4:44
Senate Bill 563 is the next bill, uh, brought to me, uh, with the Department of Agriculture. I know that Secretary Ward would have been here, but I think he's on his way to tornado's information, uh, Lake City,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
4:58
Secretary of Ward's hometown got hit by a tornado, uh, 2 years ago and 5 days, uh, my hometown was
destroyed, so he is where he needs to be 100% agree with that. Uh
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
5:18
And I, I think Representative Milligan, 63 563. So, Uh And actually, Frank Kavanaugh is supposed to be the House member on this bill. Is anyone else from the ag department here? Wait Patrick, come
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
5:29
on up to the table if you will, in case someone has
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
5:37
a. Can I do it? Well, I don't know if you're gonna let me add Frank Kavanaugh as
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
5:46
the house, she's supposed to be the house sponsor on this bill.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
5:50
She here Yes Absolutely. Do you mind if we make a verbal amendment
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
5:54
and add her as the Oh, add, uh, just uh we normally
don't do that, but since it's minor, we, we did it before where it's non-substantive substantial
language change, uh, so I have a motion to suspend the rules, all in favor say aye. All right, uh, your motion to, uh, the rules are suspended. Your motion is to add Representative Kavanaugh as a sponsor. Uh, uh, uh, motion on that, Sen dismaying, uh, Senator Scott 2nd. All in favor of the motion, say aye. All opposed your amendment passes. Now you can present as amended. Thank
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
6:34
you. And the reason why I, it's important is because
Representative Kavanaugh has a lot of horses. And so I ran this language by her, and, um, as well as the department. So I'm
Speaker 29
6:50
gonna let you discuss. Thank you, Patrick, for being here. Fisk. Department of Agriculture, director of livestock and poultry. Uh, thank you for, uh, us allowing to present this bill. This is a pretty simple bill. We've had penalties on the books for years for Eine, um, but they were, um, statutes of
criminal penalties, and a lot of the opportunities we had to address issues have gone to the wayside, and we weren't able to address some of the very extreme cases that we've seen. Uh, what this bill does is it allows us to put civil penalties, um, and also adds further direction on how we're going to address the issue, i.e., those uh Have a veterinarian do a body body score. Uh, and that's
important because if we do get calls a lot and we have to vet those calls, and there may be a 30 year old horse that just doesn't have the ability to gain weight or to maintain weight. So this body score will show that the the animal is severely malnutrition and has been abused. So this just gives us an opportunity to act on it through civil law. There's no problem with that. I have horses
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
8:04
myself. Uh, I do have one question and, and that's, uh, 3 years ago, I had 2 horses struck and killed by lightning.
And my, uh, insurance adjuster wanted a vet to look at them, and the nearest bit large animal bed I had was 2 hours away. Now, I had a veterinary 900 yards away. He was small animal fit, and he would not come down here and tell the adjuster that the horses were dead. So That's fact of life. And, and, and, uh, so on the vet, is this gonna be a state veterinarian, you're gonna subcontract this or how we're gonna do. We have two veterinaries on staff.
Speaker 31
8:38
One is a state veterinarian and the other is our field veterinarian. So they're very capable of, of
issuing that or addressing that concern. Senator Scott. Thank
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
8:49
you. I'm in support of the bill, but I'm just asking the question from my own basic knowledge. Um, is this
bill like the fine, the $5000 is that kind of in line with what's done in other states for a penalty like this or Cause I don't know. I
Speaker 37
9:04
don't know anything about it more in line what the department penalties are, it's, it's up to $5000 fine. So it depends on the situation, and this would be, would go through the commission
and then they will assess that penalty. And again, it's up to $5000. Uh, I'm not aware of what other states are, are doing. They also have these criminal penalties as well, and they address it that way. So I'm not aware of any other state that's doing this, exactly. So it
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
9:29
can be different depending on case by case scenario and situations that arise
Speaker 41
9:33
that's the purpose of us vating it. Any other question
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
9:39
for me, I, of course, if it's true cruelty, I'm, I'm for the bill, and I
assume under 562103, which I don't know what's, what's in there. What do you have that or know what, what is actually defined as cruelty. I mean, because
Speaker 37
9:54
what we're looking at is cruelty is um malnutrition, not necessarily beating a horse or it's, it's mainly dressing, not the lack of care for the animal, right, so we went up on a farm. I mean,
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
10:07
I understand, you know, sometimes breaking horses or whatever, I don't want anything that's ever going to be construed to that because this does this thing
Are we, are cattle and stuff already included in the thing, or is this just, so we're just now doing horses, we don't have anything. It, it's just, it's gonna be the bill just that, so. I just, uh, I'm, I'm very leery of these type of things, of course, if it's true cruelty, then yes, then sign me up
on this stuff, but, uh, uh, definitely going to be some common sense used, uh, these people that work for you at the, uh, department. Uh
Speaker 37
10:53
sir. And, and to address that, yes, we are also very concerned about, uh, issues that could get out of hand, and we're gonna definitely bring a common sense approach to this, and it's just gonna be addressing some of those extreme cases that we've seen over the last few years.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
11:08
Are y'all promulgating any other rules on it or? OK. Thank you, sir. Any other questions from
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
11:13
the committee? Anyone in the audience wished to speak for this bill? In one in all wished to speak
against this bill. Seeing non Senator Irwin, would you like to close your
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
11:28
bill? Thank you, and I appreciate the input from you, uh, Mr. Chair. I know you have horses. We do, I do as well, and I had one struck by lightning too. Um, but we also had somebody that drove by our house and we had a horse that was like 30 years old, and you know, and but they called and complained because they just didn't know, but, um, so I think it's a a really good make sure that you have a veterinarian do
the body score for me was a big bonus to the. I appreciate
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
11:59
a good bit. Motion to pass her Scott 2 Senator Dismay, all in favor say aye,
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
12:06
all opposed. Congratulations Bill passed. Thank you so much. Thank you for your
Speaker 56
12:12
work. Oh, amended as amended here. It's As amended,
Speaker 64
12:22
as amended. Senator, this thing you want to run your bill? pardon? OK. Yeah Senor Bryant Anyone here to run House Bill 1656.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
12:53
House Bill 1562. Anyone here to run House Bill 1562. And when here run House Bill 1681.
Anyone here run Senate Bill 582. Anyone here to run House Bill 1889. And just bang your neck.
Yeah No good, so OK OK. I'll take a 5 minute recess.
And, uh We'll be back in 5 minutes and see if anyone's here. They're not, we'll move forward.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
20:18
OK, we'll come back into order. Our tardy
representatives. From the house, Ms. Volt is here. I'm I'm teasing everybody's busy we're in the in run, so, uh allowing Turn your mic on, please. I do greatly appreciate
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
20:43
you taking a moment to let me get here. I was running from transportation, education, and to be fair to everybody.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
20:50
Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. If you would recognize yourself and what
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
20:56
are we working on? Devi, District 87, and this is House Bill 1681 61. Yes,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
21:01
sir. And Joshua Bryant state Senate District 32.
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
21:04
OK. I'm sorry, Are you going to present or
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
21:10
yes sir I am. You're recognized to present. Thank you, sir. Um, I want to start by saying,
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
21:24
Water isn't a red issue, a blue issue, a north-south issue, a rich port issue. Everyone in Arkansas deserves to have clean water. I, I've been working on this issue for right at 6 years trying to tackle this massive issue that we have. I want to thank, um, my speaker and several of the reps and, and Senator Hester and Senator Josh Bryant, um, For meeting with us regularly
trying to figure out a way, um, and even, uh, Senator Dismay, uh, trying to figure out a way that we could begin to work on this issue in the state of Arkansas. Um, The speaker talked about every time he would go to a different town, a different. city in the state of Arkansas, everywhere he went, the water issue was brought up. It wasn't just in rural Arkansas, it was also in You know, our bigger metropolitan type areas also.
Um We have kicked this can down the road and kicked it down the road. We, I would agree, um, with Senator Hickey, this should have been dealt with with cities and counties, uh, years ago, but a couple of sessions ago, we ran a bill that made them do rate increases. That they should have already been doing to begin with, and I understand that. When we started looking at this, um, 4 years
ago, uh, this was a $5 billion. Tag, price tag. Uh, that was in 2021 and then the Department of Ag actually did that survey. That same Department of Ag. There's been no changes there. Did that same survey, and now we're right, we're at 9 billion plus in water, sewer, or water and wastewater needs in Arkansas. What happens if we just continue to kick the can down the road.
Uh, we have schools that may not be able to meet. We have hospitals that might have to shut their doors. We have nursing homes that need clean water. The longer we kick it down. The road, the bigger that price tag is gonna get. Uh If we stay on the same trajectory that we're on right now, crumpling water and sewer infrastructures in most of the state capacity challenges, stifling growth.
Because this is an economic development issue. I've, I've got a Tyson is in, not in my district, but right next to my district in Nashville, and they have been trying to expand their, uh, plant there and they can't because the water sewer will not, uh, hold up the capacity of what they need. Um Of course, the cost will continue to go out of reach for all of these towns and cities. I have pictures sent to me all the
time from some of my towns, uh, water that's like in puddles on top of the, on top of the ground from where they've tried to patch water lines and patch lines and patch lines, and they can't get them patched fast enough and the, and they're losing water. And then I get pictures from moms who's tried to fill a bathtub for their child to take a bath, and there's just dirt. Uh In in that entire bathtub, and it's so sad because the water's not even clear, it truly is dirt brown water.
You can't bathe a baby, wash clothes, and there's only so much water you can boil and drink. Until it's time for us to say as a state, let's do what we gotta do to help these
areas, uh, fix their water. Again, this is not a rule issue or a city issue. It truly is all over the state of Arkansas. Uh, what
we've looked at, um, is 50, no, we changed it. 25 million, I'm sorry, thank you,
Representative Dismay for helping me with an amendment that would, um, be more palatable. And I appreciate your help with that. We were looking at 50 million, but we have dropped it to 25 million, um, for three years, we were looking at 10 years, but we're going to do for 3 years and at this point, I'm just glad we can come to a consensus where maybe we can get something going on this type of project for our state. So, when you, we did two different Buckets for a lack of a better word to say, uh, buckets of
money. One would be for your, uh, multi, uh, high. Um Population areas, and one would be for rural small areas, in that 80% for the big communities, um, that would be 1200 plus, they would have to have matching and projects must be shovel ready. But for those very rural areas where they're not gonna have the money to get shovel ready, they can't afford to hire someone to do engineering work. Uh,
those, those would be only have 20% of the funds. So, um, but all projects must start within that first year. Um, Again, the way we had this structured was this would not go ahead of anything or anybody, OK, so how we had it structured was there was already 4 things that were taken out of there. Highways would be one, and then there was a couple of other ones that were small ones, and we would go up underneath them, so
it wouldn't be a guarantee of 25 million, it would be of what's left. To go towards that. So in some cases that might be a million dollars in some cases that might be 0. Just to be honest, um, So we decided to do this through uh AR A NRC, um, where the rules would be approved by ALC and the reason we chose ARNC is because, um, they already have this kind of set up and can go through these processes already without
creating a new wheel. This would take no general funds at all. Um, The finance department is projecting a general revenue surplus of around $278.6 million at the end of this fiscal year, uh, in 2025. Uh, this fiscal year of 2025. Um, separately from that, we do have other surplus funds that we're not wanting to touch, we're just wanting interest off
of some interest off of that securities fund. Last year, the interest earnings were $6368 million. We're 285 million was swept into a catastrophic reserve fund. Um, because it was left over and unspent. Um This fiscal year, we are at a pace for over $400 million in interest earnings, even with this bill passing, we would have $250 million for the prisons,
uh, at the end of this fiscal year. Again, we know that we don't need to get ahead of the prisons, and we understand that the, this is where the prison money would come from, uh, but we would like to get some if there's any leftover for that, for that fiscal year. Uh Again, this isn't a Red, blue, north, south, east-west, uh,
it's a, it's truly is and a state issue. right?
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
29:10
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you committee. I think Representative Bo described it very well. I think one of the reasons I was, I was glad to support the bill and support working towards getting some sort of funding mechanism towards it is because it's Act 605 came into play, these water authorities were doing everything they could to comply with the law, and they're doing great, and they're trying to balance the needs of the system and the maintenance of the system with, with what they thought the ratepayers could pay according to the law, but to get over that hump, just to get, you know, an additional couple
$100,000 to get over the hump to make some of those repairs were just insurmountable for some of our smaller communities, the larger communities that had money available. Also just needing that little bump, and I think the program like this fits that bump very well. As far as the the revenue source, we left it just any revenues allowed by law because there's still ongoing conversations on what is the best avenue to support those needs and the 3 years, um, $25 million a year or 75 million a lump request, uh, out of the surplus, those conversations are
still being had and that's why the window from 10 years went to 5 years to adjust, you know, a year on the front end or a year on the back end just to make sure we have time to capture, uh, in essence, what it would be a 3-year program. Um, but just to have a little flexibility of the window. So with that I'll be
Speaker 100
30:29
glad to take questions. Yeah, I, and I think you. Address some of it. I, I had heard 3 years
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
30:34
and it is 5. I forgot. I'm sorry. And this 25 million, I don't see this in here. Now, I see it says the funds shall consist of any
revenues authorized. So this looks more like a budget bill to me, but I understand it's already passed the house. So maybe this is appropriate. But yeah. So where, where are we, where we're within this bill does it say
Speaker 105
30:59
we're gonna put $25 million in it. It doesn't.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
31:03
I was to go off of old language. I'm sorry. OK my fault. All right. And we also made a comment about the catastrophic
reserve. On those monies being unspent. Those monies are unspent because back whenever we were struggling to make sure that we had a AAA bond rating and things to that to make sure that we were getting everything correctly. What we did is by statute, We made that interest flow back into that fund so that it would grow. And it's up to the 1.986 billion Senator dismay, if I'm wrong on that number, you correct me if you know it, but it's close to $2 billion.
Now, Have we already done legislation and I've missed it, so that we're
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
31:48
going to redirect that, that interest. OK, so I
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
31:51
was just given that somebody else here can tell me is, is that our intent before this session is over? No, to
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
31:57
my knowledge. I know you said Senator
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
32:00
Dismay helped you with the amendment here. I didn't know if that's, is that,
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
32:04
and I'm not trying to misspeak either. I was just trying to get confused
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
32:08
because we had the other, the other bill. bill also, and, uh, of course, this is hard on me because you
and I are friends, you're my rep. Some of these places you're talking about are in Jimmy Hickey's district. But from my standpoint, we sit here
and talk about this stuff, and somebody might dispute me without the surplus that we've had last year and this year, this, this
state is not cash flowing. That's the way I see it. I've been screaming that. I'm going to continue to scream that. I'll have that conversation with
whoever wants to. By saying that, I'm not saying that we're in any way, fashion, or whatever. Not physically solvent. We have money sitting in every hole in a savings account, and that's by design. But from a cash flow standpoint, if you take, if you take what I call recurring expenses. That should be an RSA that we're going to take out of the surplus, and again, we determine what's recurring, obviously. We
don't, we don't meet that right now. So Are we, are we for 100% going to try to fund this. Normally, if we have a, have something like this, and we do this appropriation bill. Then we all know that the funding, of course, is, if somebody wants to come before ALC and we've got some additional funds that are sitting in a restricted reserve, then at that point, ALC or whatever would, would have a vote, we'd have discussion and everything like that, kind of see where our fiscal years have ended. What, what all had happened, but
So I'm confused. Are we funding this with this bill? There, there's already a, we're gonna have a funding source set
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
33:57
up. The anticipation is we, we will fund it. As far as how and what funding that is still on the table because we wanted to make sure with as many co-sponsors that I had, but still some, some struggles to, which one was me. I still struggling. We, we wanted to make sure that this program could survive, so in the negotiations, we, you know, we,
they start 0 to 550, 50 million and where we landed on was something that a program that could succeed and we could monitor through ALC. See you can get reports annually on how these what are using and then and general assemblies in the future, they can see if the program is sustainable. But in the interim, we'll look to see how to best fund, um, up to $75 million for this program. OK? I'm fine with that. But I don't know who this we is
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
34:55
because in the, in the AOC I don't see anything here that requires a vote of ALC. It's just a report that's, and that's my problem. If we were just going to set this up as a regular, regular deal and it's gonna come before us to say, nope, we're, we're gonna be able to fund $10 members, you all know that we passed this, we've ever got everything in place. We've got the, uh, uh, commission, you know, set up on how we're going to do this, rule. was in place, how the grant program's going to work. Do you
want to do it, then I'd be fine with that. But just to Just to allow this out here without that, there's just something that personally, I still can't. It's better. I commend y'all for that. But as far as from the, and I'm, and I don't disagree with this water thing. I, it's, it's a problem that I do believe that, you know, sometimes that if we've got these, and a lot of them are in my district. So this is hard for me to say, but my world is for the. For the state as a whole. And our money.
Uh I do, I do believe those problems are in place. But I am very cautious of where we are with, with our cash flow. And I would prefer that I see that this comes before ALC and we have a vote of ALC. To actually say that we're going to take it out of what particular account and how we're going to do it. Thank you, thank you. this, you have questions I don't know if we're in discussion or
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
36:24
if we're on the bill. I mean, I think I could provide some
clarity about it. Number one, if this is a statutory bill. It's not an appropriation, uh, the setups of funds are not appropriation, they're funds, two separate things, 51% vote versus uh 75% vote. So this is properly done in the way that it should be done. So that's not in question, uh, funding bills
are 51% bills whether it be RSA or the utilization of GAD or surplus or interest earning. ning s or whatever it may be, those are funding bills are 51% vote bills. There's multiple ways to do funding bills.
Funding bills can directly fund something. We see that often. I would anticipate we'll see a direct funding for the school of the deaf and blind in the tune of about $35 million. Uh, and we will see other direct fundings. Uh, this could be a direct funding which when we're talking about votes would be voted by the legislators. Uh, one of the things that I was apprehensive of in the bill as it was originally written, it funded itself. Uh, immediately with the $50 million transfer and if you look at the list and just do the vote count, that's here. There was
more than enough support in just sponsors alone to pass a 51% threshold. Uh, fortunately, they were willing to have a conversation about that, uh, and reduce this back down to a funding bill so that then we can have one more conversation about what is the appropriate amount of surplus dollars or interest earnings, whatever it may be to, to go into that. I think everyone's aware that we are are currently where we need to be with the catastrophic reserve balance. We also have a billion dollars, uh, give or take, that's setting in the Arkansas
Reserve account. Those are both collecting interest, uh, and to your point, a significant amount of interest and it may even become more significant as time goes on, depending on what the feds do in relation to interest rates. Uh, so there has been a discussion about what to do with those interest earning dollars. This is obviously, they brought it as part of the conversation because the way the bill was originally written, they were tapping about 50 they were tapping $50 million out of interest earnings. So again, this is a funding bill with how those funds are to be utilized
and the, you know, the specifics of that with a little further in depth of allowing the rule promulgation by the agency, uh, where they need further details, which would also come to us, uh, in council for approval of those rules. But so that's. Wouldn't you agree? I would agree. OK. Thank you. Yeah I appreciate
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
38:51
the rules. The problem is, is I know the rules are supposed to align with the statute, and I would prefer to see that that that that vote
would come before ALC. I 100% agree with, uh, Senator Dima as far as capital projects. The School of Deaf, the blind, that's an appropriate use for for one time capital money. This bill here specifically says it's 5 years, 5 years on that is uh not a one-time capital capital outlay, that's a multiple recurring expense and uh so that's where That's where I get hung up with. Senator Dismay and I are 100% in agreement on these capital projects, uh, that are,
You know, one time funds, in my opinion, that's what I think those are supposed to be for. You know, we have RSA, we have our recurring expenses, be it whatever, education, DHS, uh, things to that nature, but whenever you get to, uh, uh, capital projects. I would just like to say, well, if we do have a surplus that those monies that are in surplus, we say that if we have a 75 or 100 or 150 million and we want to do the state crime lab, as we've done in the past,
we parked that money in a restricted reserve account, and then we have it. But to, but to just say this ongoing thing, you know, based upon, you know, Something that's not going to be brought before the body, I, I just, I personally can't get there on, on that, but I do appreciate the, uh, explanation by Senator Dismay on, uh, on the funding part or the way the accounts are set up. Senator Crow. Somebody helped me understand.
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
40:37
I unders, I think I understand what you're saying, but no matter what, they can't get money unless there's a 51% vote somewhere in With the legislators, that's. I'm just trying to, I understand it's not in here. I, I get where you're coming from, but no matter what, the money, if we're going to give them 10 million, 12 million, 13 million, 25 million. So, we have to have a 51% vote somewhere. So I guess my thing is, is
I agree with him on the the thing of, OK, where, where's that vote going to be? And I agree with you that it's got to be a 51% vote. Give me clarity. Where that vote's going to happen and that's all I
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
41:24
need. Uh, in, in order to utilize any of the surplus funds, so essentially JED those other accounts are locked down. No one can touch those without a vote of the legislature. And we determine how to utilize those funds and that vote is a 51% vote, so Again, if we want to direct it
specifically to a project or specifically to an account or specifically to a restricted reserve account, we can. Uh, there is the restricted reserve accounts are new. This is not been the policy of the state for a long period of time. In fact, they really came about whenever general improvement funds went away, uh, so it was a way for the, the legislature to have a say in what was happening with funds that were unallocated for any specific project or Or even potentially but not always because we do direct fund
many things that don't go through restricted reserve accounts first, uh, but it would allow us to have one more say if a project was not mature enough, or for instance, didn't have a bill that backed it with the potential for rural promulgation, uh, that we were waiting on. So that, that's what a, we have in the last several sessions used restricted reserve accounts for, but that is not something that's mandatory, and at the end of the day, to any of these monies to be released, we will have to vote on it on it before we leave this session.
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
42:46
And if we don't, yeah, that's correct. OK. Any other questions committee? I mean just, just one since I assume we know what we're already going to do here. Are, are we looking to just fund this. A year at a time? Are we looking to try, are we looking to go ahead and put a certain dollar amount in that's gonna, that's gonna cover the whole 5 years in this particular session out of surplus, out of these interest
funds that, again, I don't, I don't know if that's what's going to happen, because that's a, that's a new one to me. The only, now, I know I tried to run special language on the prison and appropriation because of conversations that I had, and I do agree. We don't really need that money going in there anymore. Personally, I thought that we, you know, need to be very careful that we have that as additional cash flow, uh, just for, for things that may, may happen in the beginning. But is it, is it it the intent that
we're gonna just fund a year here, or are we going to try to go ahead and and fund the whole 5 years at this time, before the session's over. Cause I can't tell. I can try. Yeah, that is not determined at this point.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
44:01
Do we go ahead and allocate $75 million on the front end? Do we do, I mean, because again, the general understanding and the reason it's 3 years is because you may not be able to expend 3 years' worth of monies in the period of projects aren't where they need to be. And so that's why it says
a 5-year project, uh, or period. But the reason, I mean, kind of the general conversation was not doing this 10 year 50 million, but somewhere in the $25 million range or a 3. year period is the goal where those dollars come from exactly. Ultimately that will be up to the legislative body as a whole by the majority of the legislative body. OK Any, any other question? We have some people signed up to
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
44:41
speak for the bill if y'all would step away from the end of the table, please.
Daniel Dawson. He let me are all three of you gonna speak on the same, I know you're from the same organization. He was Or, or, or y'all gonna speak the, the same subject matter. That that's fine. Should, should I bring all three at one time or one at a time is my question. Very good. If you would turn your
microphone on, please, and identify yourself, uh, uh, committee, let's go back. Again,
we've got a full crowd and, uh, all, session we've been doing 3 minutes per. Testimony, uh, that will be so moved is 2nd, all in favor say aye. uh, Mr. Dawson, you have 3 minutes to present, and then we'll
Speaker 133
45:40
ask questions. All right. Well, thank you all very much for allowing me
Speaker 134
45:45
to speak, and I appreciate uh Representative Watt, uh, presenting, uh, the information about the bill. She
did very comprehensive job getting me out. Oh, I'm sorry, uh, Daniel Dawson with uh Cersei Water Utilities. I'm general manager there. Um One of the first things she said in her comments was in 2021, the Department of Agriculture did a survey of all water systems and wastewater systems in the state and the needs at that time were 5 billion. But then just 3 years later in 2024, they did the same survey and it was 9 billion. And it, uh, it begs the question, why the difference? Why did it go up so much?
And uh perhaps there's 3 things. One thing could be inflation, and we all know there was some inflation during those three years, but that's not the whole story. Another thing is, uh, data capture. Uh, I know as a, as a manager of a water system, sometimes I get these emails for surveys from state agencies and you know, I had things to do before I got the survey and time goes by and suddenly the deadline's gone by and I don't, I don't have it filled out. But maybe by 2024 or more of us were able to fill out the survey. But I think another, probably
one of the biggest things is just what's happened to construction costs during that period of time. If you try to build a house or build anything, uh, using lumber or or steel or whatever during that period of time. We all know the costs have increased significantly. As an example, in 2021, we had a project at our wastewater plant that in concept was about a million dollars project. It was essentially just replacing a piece of equipment. Well, by the time we let our engineers scope it out, and of course they increased the scope added the pump station,
whatever, uh, that engineering estimate went from 1 million to $4 million. That's when we bid it, uh, when the bids came in, we had one bid, and it was for $5.6 million. We didn't have the option of not doing the projects, so we had to go ahead and just and and fund it. We accepted the bid and fortunately it was a good contractor and we went on. That's just an, just an indicative of what's happened to construction costs. In our industry, a lot of our equipment is very specialized. It's very expensive to purchase.
It's expensive to maintain, and it's expensive to to replace it. And uh it's just that's just the nature of the game and our people do a very good job of maintaining the equipment, kind of like firemen and their fire trucks and uh but you reached the end of the useful life and you go past the end of that useful life and it's time to replace it and, and suddenly you spend a lot of money. Well, uh, as a, as one of my board members said a long time ago, in our industry, we don't
have $100 repairs. We don't have $1000 repairs. We have $100,000 repairs. And, uh, this, this kind of funding would go a long way to help, especially smaller systems in our in our uh in our state, um, will Cersei benefit? I, I don't know, will certainly apply. Time's up, OK. I,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
48:47
I do want to add to your comment about construction costs, uh, part of this is. been uh caused by the uh ARPA program, uh, under the Biden administration, uh, the cost of laying water lines went from,
uh, $16 a foot to $68 a foot, uh, 2 years ago, last week, a tornado hit wind hit our sewer plant, uh, in December of that year, they had it appraised and reinsured and, uh, then the tornado hit and it went from 9 million to 32 million. So you're, you're concerned and are very on track just to let you know.it, do you have
a question? Mr. Dawson. Nunn, thank you for your testimony
Michael Clayton, like, your microphone is on if you would introduce yourself
for the record and you're recognized. No, you
Michael Clayton
Unverified
49:42
turned it off. Thank you. Thank you very much. My name is Michael Clayton. I'm the executive director for North Little Rock Wastewater. We serve the Mael Sherwood and North Little Rock and parts of North Plasky County, and we only do wastewater side of things. Now, a few years ago, there was a a batch of funds for American rescue plan that came to the state for infrastructure.
And at the time, it could be used for water or wastewater or broadband and uh I remember correctly, I don't remember the numbers, but the, uh, the broadband took a high priority at the time. And so wastewater industry, we had to take a back seat, I believe, on trying to move forward with our needs and our projects. At that time, shortly after that, another round of American rescue plane monies came out. Which flooded the state of Arkansas and among other states,
every state in the country was flooded with what I call the American Rescue Plan funds, which created the inflationary pressures with contractors, uh, you cannot find the contractors to do the size of the work that we need in Arkansas. So what we have in our system is a wastewater system there are aging facilities is a decaying system, and we tried to stay ahead of it with our rights to invest back into it in the form of rehabilitation, pipeline
replacement, pump stations and treatment plants. Now, the reason I'm bringing all this up, I really do appreciate the work, the legislation is you guys are doing to try to help us with a portion of fund our needs here even though the needs are quite much more. And what you're able to find at this point, but every little drop in the bucket actually helps. Some of these entities and will help us if we are eligible for some of these funds as rules come back through there. But I do want to tell you, I,
I'm, I'm very much in support of this bill, and I think it's fair and originally it was a 50 million, which you could leverage $90 million out of that now, uh, I guess it's about 45 million now if with the that's being leveraged using the 25 million approach. If I'm understand that correctly, and uh we support the bill and I don't want to ramble on beyond that, but I'll be glad to answer any questions, but I do thank you very much for the efforts you guys.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
52:11
are putting force. you want to have a question? Thank you very much, appreciate your testimony. He wore Got it. Thank you. You get to fight with it. I'm Heath Ward. I'm the
Speaker 142
52:28
executive director of Springdale Water Utilities. I'm also the legislative chair for the Arkansas Water and Wastewater Managers Association and just would like to tell the committee, the association fully supports this bill. Thank you. Questions for anyone on the committee.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
52:43
OK. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that wish to speak for or against
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
52:58
this bill? You're right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you committee. Again, I think, uh, back
to testimony of Representative Bot and myself, uh, Act 605 did great things. Uh, there's one being considered now in City County Local. To do that for wastewater just to have our make sure our ratepayers are paying for the
adequate needs of the system and looking on for the system. I think this is a great bill for a stopgap measure just to help the smaller communities out and other communities to get over those hurdles as those laws play
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
53:28
into a long term effect. So with that, I'm closed for the bill. Thank you. Will pass, Senator Gilmore discussion
Speaker 47
53:34
Senator Hickey. I'm, I'm gonna vote against this now. I may. Heavy on the May. I may vote for the
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
53:40
funding mechanism, because if I knew exactly what I would assume that I keep hearing this
$25 million number or whatever. Nothing's in the bill. It's my understanding of what Senator dismaying has already testified in here that that's, that's not been decided, you know, if I had the specifics of that, then, you know, I possibly could get on. So whenever we get into session and we look at all this and we see how much is coming out of our general allotment reserve account,
uh, What, what our intentions are with, uh, some of our other needs and how this is going to work in with our forecast for this, uh, fiscal year, and, you know, I may or may not vote for
the funding part. So, uh, I want to go on record and say that, that just because
that I'm going to vote no here if I agree with the way it's funding and I think that we could Could do it within this fiscal year. Maybe a year at a time, I possibly could be on, so,
uh, a lot of my apprehension right here is because I don't know what the specifics are of what we're, what we're going to plan on doing. And I just don't like going forward with things like that just based on the, based on a whim. Thank you.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
54:49
Any other discussion there dismay and I guess and it's to the committee members, I mean, there's only 2
of us that aren't sponsors of this bill. It was originally drafted for $50 million for 10 years, and uh with more than enough votes to pass both the bill and the funding. Um, and, and so again, we look forward to working with you, uh, as we figure out what the proper amount is based on everything else that we have going on. You want. If not,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
55:13
we have a motion in 2nd for due pass all in favor say
aye, all opposed. Bill passes. Congratulations. OK, Senator King, are you in a room?
No, in dismay. You wanna run your bill? that Yeah Yeah That Yeah OK So,
this thing, we're doing Senate Bill 466. What's that
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
56:04
Senate Bill 466. Our members, we heard a full discussion debate on this bill the other day, um, had some folks. In my district in neighboring districts that asked me to to give it one more shot. So I agreed to do that, uh, here today, I'd be happy to take any questions on the bill. This is the moratorium allowing
for a study to take place before additional windmills could be, uh, constructed, but it does allow for those that are in process, including full farms, uh, to continue being built. question from the committee. When, when you say in process,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
56:39
what stage would that be of beginning as soon as they turn dirt, it's
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
56:43
the way the bill reads dirt. OK. So they'd
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
56:45
signed leases and then turned dirt, that those would be stopped. That that's correct. Just for clarification.
No question from committee members. We have several people signed up. Simon Mayhan, Mayhan.
If you would turn your microphone on, introduce yourself.
Simon Mayhan
Unverified
57:15
Good morning, Chairman and committee. My name is Simon Mayhan. I'm the executive director of the Southern Renewable Energy Association. We're a trade association of
large scale renewable developers including wind farms, solar facilities, transmission facilities, batteries, uh, we're based here in Little Rock. My family and I live here in Little Rock. We work throughout the Southeast from Arkansas all the way over to Georgia, where we have a number of, of solar and wind projects that are currently underway. Y'all heard me a couple of days ago, uh, on wind energy. I'll do my best not to belabor it. A wind farm can bring somewhere
between 200 million to $300 million worth of investment into a local community, that'll include millions of dollars of local land lease payments to the private property owners who are voluntarily leasing their land to be used, how they, they so see fit, um, we mentioned previously Texas and North Dakota, they tend to get about 40% of their electricity from wind energy on an annual basis, and both of those states are are really well known as popular
duck hunting areas and so we, we firmly believe that waterfowl and wind energy can coexist between between the industries and the the recreational use, um, One of the things in this study I mentioned or in this bill that I mentioned beforehand, we're not afraid of a study. We think a study could be helpful. Uh, there, there is scant evidence showing that waterfowl populations are harmed from wind turbines I think most folks agree it's not about killing the ducks, it's about where the
ducks are relocating and from the studies I've read, we're talking about the ducks are are avoiding the wind turbines, maybe hundreds of feet, not miles, so they see the turbine. they, they move nearby to avoid them. Um, 11 final thought here is if we are going to study the impacts on of of waterfowl and, and raptors on wind turbines, we may want to consider opening up that study to all energy sources, uh, because similarly there are scant studies regarding all other energy
resources on the impacts of waterfowl and on raptors, and with that, I'll, I'm available for questions. Question for anyone. No, thank you very much.
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
59:37
Thank you. Good Uh, no one else has signed up to anyone else in the audience wish to speak for or against. Senator Dismay, would you like to close? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
59:52
Members again, I think this is just as important of a bill today as it
was earlier this week. Um, I think if we do not take action and wait for 2 years, we have the possibility of forever altering, uh. Essentially duck habitat in Arkansas and I think that would be to the detriment of the state. It's something that we're known for and in fact, if I would go see another legislator as far as out as California, they would ask about Stuttgart, Arkansas, because they knew about our duck hunting. And, and the risk that this poses, and I, and I would agree, I don't think it's scant evidence. I think the only evidence out there shows that it
does have an impact, um, with that,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:00:34
I would appreciate a good vote. Motion do pass 2nd all in favor say aye, all opposed my motion fails.
Speaker 161
1:00:48
Or Senator Disma. Senator Dismay, yes. Senator Hickey? Senator Hickey, no. Senator Leding, Senator Leding, no. Senator Gilmore, Senator Gilmore, yes, Senator Kroll.
Senator Kroll, not voting. Senator Scott. Senator Scott. Senator Stone. stone, yes. Motion fails. We'rejourn. Oh, no, we're not, no, we're not,
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:01:18
no, we're not. Time out. I, I messed up. Senator Bryant it's got someone else's name on the.
Agenda, and I did not see them. Senator Bryant, please tell me House Bill 1889, Mr. Chair.
Almost messed up. Yeah. And Bryant, if your mic is
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:01:46
on, introduce yourself again. Joshua Bryant,
Senate District 32. I, I'll be as brief as I can on 1889. This is a patient focused modernization bill for Arkansas medical marijuana program. It really does 3 things. It adds invitation-only tours of dispensaries for the
stakeholders. It authorizes the use of a drive-through window for dispensing pre-ordered marijuana similar to our pharmacy models. And it reduces the delivery driver requirements from 2 to 1, as long as the vehicle is equipped to GPS tracking and security protocols. So to unpack those just a little bit. Currently, the legislature and other parties through invitation only can tour cultivators, and that is a program that's been wildly successful as we try to see further what these industries are are doing and how to, how to make them. Um
part of the policy-making process. This would just open that up into dispensaries, um, it increases transparency for our stakeholders, allowing local leaders to and regulators and legislators to tour these controlled documented conditions. Second thing that it improves is patient access, uh, medical marijuana patients are typically elderly. Disabled mobility impaired and entering a dispensary can sometimes be challenging during the COVID era, we were able to
extend that to allow dispensaries to hand through a drive-through window as long as it was pre-ordered and, you know, prescription based, obviously, and what this would do is allow that model to be installed back into those facilities that can accommodate this. And lastly, it modernizes the delivery regulations without compromising safety. Currently, the law requires that two employees of the dispensary, be present and available as they go deliver, um, obviously that in and of itself may have just the um
Conflict of having accomplice, I would say, not say that that happens, it's very well regulated and monitored with ATC. Uh, or ABC with with this will allow as long as there's security protocols in place with the GPS, uh, that it could, you could have one. Uh, one employee make those deliveries to the address of record or the address of the physical, uh, where the cardholder is. So that is what the bill does, and I'll be glad to take any questions. I mean, excuse me, Senator Gilmore. I think it was chair.
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:04:16
The, the hairstyle got me well, you know. Not every day you get confused with a good looking guy like Cinder Crawley. um Moving right along with that uh so, so, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator. Um, you know, we've had a lot of
conversation down here about, um, delivery of, you know, Alcohol and other things. One of the things that I think we're,
we always try to do or have talked about at least with that is making sure we know who we're delivering to. So is that accounted for in the bill? I, I may have overlooked it, um, is it going, does the person receiving it have to be the person who ordered it with the card present, can't be a 12 year old or, you know, uh, another spouse, family member or whatever with
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:05:08
the chair's permission, I like ATC coming to address specifically, um, that question.
Speaker 173
1:05:18
Thank you, David Potter, turn your mic on. Sorry, sir. Thank you, David Potter enforcement
Speaker 174
1:05:23
division, uh, uh, yes, they have to, uh, I'm sorry, could you repeat the question?
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:05:29
Uh, it was my question, do they have to present it or deliver it to the person, the cardholder or the person that ordered the, the product. They have
Speaker 174
1:05:42
online, uh, it has to be delivered to the patient or the patient's caregiver, and
they have to verify identity for that. That is tracked through our system.
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:05:52
OK, and, and they being the person that ordered in that, the person that orders has to be the one that receives it. OK. So there's no chance at all that this will be dropped off on somebody's doorstep or hand it to somebody else. No, sir, no sir, there's there's no chance.
Speaker 174
1:06:04
I'm, I'm very confident of that as, as far as how we regulate this, we watch the purchases. I've got a whole staff that does that, uh, so yes, sir. And the same is true when they drive
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:06:14
through a window as would be allowable in this. So when they
Speaker 174
1:06:18
drive through the window correct, they would have to provide that product to The, uh, registered uh caregiver or to the patient directly. And that was when they brought us this bill originally, that was one of our concerns that we expressed. We did not want that to be delivered to, you know, the driver who was, who was not a patient or the caregiver for that product, and we've addressed those. OK. Thank you.
Speaker 182
1:06:40
I may have a follow up. So, so on the drive-throughs. Are
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
1:06:44
we making sure that they don't get confused because I mean, there's people like Senator Gilmore and I that look
Speaker 176
1:06:49
a lot alike. We got that taken care of. Yes, sir. They have to verify it and that's in
Speaker 174
1:06:59
our rules now that they have to actually physically verify that that is the patient. And when the patient makes the orders, the way that it works now is they're entering the RI card, the registry identification card, it hits their allotment to ensure that they have available allotment. And then that, uh, uh, employee, the dispensary verifies that that is the person through identification. That's how it's supposed to work now. Gilmore.
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:07:19
So when you say it's in your rules now, it, it I'm, I'm looking through it. I read the bill earlier, but I'm looking through it again. It's, I don't see
Speaker 174
1:07:30
it stated in the bill, but it is in rural. Yes,
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:07:33
so that they verify the identity of the person. Yes, sir, it is. Um, but we're adding, we're adding all of these. Sections via, uh, regarding delivery. That I don't, is that So,
Speaker 174
1:07:44
so, so dispensaries are currently delivering now. We've currently, I checked this morning, we've got 14
dispensaries that are actually delivering. And there's restrictions on where they can deliver as
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:07:56
well. And that uh but the difference in what we do now, what he wants to do is that we send 2 people today and you only want to send one. That's correct, sir. There, yes, it's just a minimization of one person, one with additional
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
1:08:08
security protocols like GPS tracking and and other measures. Very good. So when you say
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:08:15
they're delivering now, is that allowable by rule or is that they're just doing it because it
Speaker 174
1:08:21
doesn't explicitly state otherwise. No, it is allowed by rule and we do have, they cannot deliver to a hotel, a dorm, um, anything like that. It has to be an actual residence or residence is defined in there. And again, they have to provide it to the person who ordered it, the patient, and they have to verify the patient's identity upon delivering. And so, yes, we have 2 people delivering it now, both of which have to have a register identification card. for that facility as well. And then they also enter all of that information into our tracking system where we know what vehicle that they're delivering
with, uh, there's rules on the vehicles, how they can appear in those things. OK. Any, any
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:09:03
other questions saying none. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak for this bill? back. I just
Speaker 193
1:09:14
want to, I'm Bill Pascal. I'm here as the executive director of the Arkansas Cannabis Industry Association. I just want to add a little more color to your, your questions.
Um, the delivery right now, uh, it, Cost dispensaries somewhere between 50,000 and $70,000 to Keep it the, uh, driver, uh, on, um, you multiply that by 2. Obviously, it's over 1000. So it's a big expense for a small business and, uh, we think that, uh, by, um, reducing that to one, we can still, uh, efficiently deliver, but, uh, drive down the cost for that dispensary and as Senator Bryant said, uh, we're, uh, requiring
other safety measures, GPS or other electronic devices, so. But it's it's a, it's a hefty expense. So, and just, just make sure I'm clear.
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
1:10:02
So right now it's 2 and this would be going to 1. Yes sir, that's all. With with other. Yes sir, that's it. It's a simple bill. Yeah.
Speaker 195
1:10:10
Anyone else in the audience for Anyone else in
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:10:15
the audience. Big nun, right? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee, with that, I'll close for the bill. OK.
Motion to pass. second Uh, discussion. Seeing none, all in favor say aye, all opposed say no. Oh. Senator
Speaker 161
1:10:49
Dima. Senator Desma, yes. Senator Hickey, Senator Hickey, no. Senator Leding, Senator Leding,
yes. Senator Gilmore, Senator Gilmore, no. Senator Kroll. Senator Kroll. Senator Scott, Senator Scott, yes. Senator Stone, Senator Stone, no. Bill does not passed. Thank you. Is there anyone else here who wishes to run a bill before I get in
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
1:11:17
a hurry. I didn't mean to do that a while ago. Seeing none, we are adjourned.
Agenda
Call to Order
SB400 Irvin TO AMEND THE FAIR-FUNDING PROGRAM.
HB1681 Vaught TO ESTABLISH THE WATER AND SEWER TREATMENT FACILITIES GRANT PROGRAM; TO TRANSFER FUNDING FROM THE SECURITIES RESERVE FUND; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB563 Irvin TO AUTHORIZE THE ARKANSAS LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY COMMISSION TO IMPOSE A CIVIL PENALTY FOR CERTAIN ACTIONS AGAINST AN EQUINE; AND TO ALLOW A BODY CONDITION SCORE TO BE USED FOR AN EQUINE UNDER THE OFFENSE OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.
Recess
Reconvene
SB466 Dismang TO PLACE A MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN HEIGHTS OF WIND POWER DEVICES; TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME AND FISH COMMISSION TO STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF WIND POWER DEVICES; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1889 TO AMEND THE LIMITATIONS ON ACCESS TO A DISPENSARY OR CULTIVATION FACILITY; AND TO AUTHORIZE A DISPENSARY TO DELIVER ORDERS VIA A DELIVERY VEHICLE OR VIA A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW.
Adjourn
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - SENATE, Apr 3, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Senator Ronald Caldwell
Unverified
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 29
Speaker 31
Senator Jamie Scott
Unverified
Speaker 37
Speaker 41
Senator Jimmy Hickey, Jr
Unverified
Speaker 49
Speaker 56
Speaker 64
Speaker 81
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Senator Joshua Bryant
Unverified
Speaker 100
Speaker 105
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Senator Steve Crowell
Unverified
Speaker 133
Speaker 134
Michael Clayton
Unverified
Speaker 142
Speaker 47
Simon Mayhan
Unverified
Speaker 161
Senator Ben Gilmore
Unverified
Speaker 173
Speaker 174
Speaker 177
Speaker 182
Speaker 176
Speaker 193
Speaker 195