Aging, Children and Youth, & Legislative Affairs- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (5)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1921
Act 824
· 6 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 4/1/25 @ 11:03 AM) Added HB1921 & SB371 to the Regular Agenda House Committee on Aging, Chi…”
|
TO AMEND THE CHILD WELFARE AGENCY LICENSING ACT; TO AMEND THE TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROCESS … | Torres | Notification that HB1921 is now Act 824 |
|
HB1887
Act 658
· 4 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “will start without objection on House Bill 1887. So Representative Pierce,”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATEWIDE CHILD ABDUCTION RESPONSE TEAMS. | Pearce | Notification that HB1887 is now Act 658 |
|
HCR1010
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HCR1010 T. Shephard REQUESTING A STUDY OF WAYS TO IMPROVE THE STATE…”
|
REQUESTING A STUDY OF WAYS TO IMPROVE THE STATE'S JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM FOR YOUTH. | T. Shephard | Approved by the Governor |
|
SB340
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB340 A. Clark TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CERTAIN FEES, EXP…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CERTAIN FEES, EXPENSES, AND COSTS IMPOSED ON A JUVENILE OR … | A. Clark | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB371
Act 653
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 4/1/25 @ 11:03 AM) Added HB1921 & SB371 to the Regular Agenda House Committee on Aging, Children an…”
|
TO ESTABLISH A STANDARDIZED SYSTEM TO AID IN THE SEARCH OF MISSING CHILDREN WHO DO … | J. Scott | Notification that SB371 is now Act 653 |
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
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
0:10
Affairs Committee this morning, members, we are going to take things out of order a bit, and we
will start without objection on House Bill 1887. So Representative Pierce,
Speaker 4
0:23
if you will introduce yourself, you will be recognized to present your bill.
Representative Shad Pearce
Unverified
0:41
Representative Chad Pierce, District 40, and thank you, Madam Chair and thank you committee. Mike
Mike Hager
Unverified
0:52
Hager, I'm Secretary of the Department of Public Safety and Director
Representative Shad Pearce
Unverified
0:57
of State Police. What 1887 does and and thank y'all again. Uh, all we're really wanting to do, let me first just read the heading to amend the law concerning statewide, statewide, uh, statewide child abduction response team.
And when you hear me later on talk about cart. That's what I'm referring to and what we're wanting to do is to move it into the state police, the state police has been gracious enough to do this. I was on this team before and after the certification, that's what's holding a lot of our law enforcement up, I feel, is because we're understaffed across the state on our local side and if we move it to the state police, we can monitor it as as it goes down stream to
make sure that we have the team that we want in place and with that I'll let Uh, Colonel Hager, say a few words about it. Um, it's not even
Mike Hager
Unverified
1:57
8 o'clock yet and I've broken something, um. In a nutshell, this is one of those things that we have to get right. Um, we, we can't. Obviously the, the consequences are too significant to not get right, so.
Um, we're very blessed, uh, specifically with the Criminal Justice Institute. They started this process, um, it went into law a number of years ago. And it's really opened our eyes and it's opened to the awareness that we need to, um, make sure that we have the resources in place, but unfortunately um it's what started out um great in theory sometimes doesn't translate to reality. So, uh, we became more Um, bogged down with the process
and failed to realize the product and the participation of local law enforcement agencies has gone down significantly um because of kind of a bureaucratic process that's uh put into place to maintain. A standard and a certification that is required through the, the model that we had through CJI, um, what it's. With their involvement, what it's forced us to do and which is a wonderful thing is to identify resources and to identify um the things that we
need at a minute's notice. But it's ultimately will change the certification process which we have an entity already within the state of Arkansas that certifies a law enforcement operations and that's the commission on law enforcement standards, and it's going to take this process, um, create a certification through Quest that allows us to be more in tune with our local partners. Um, this is a conversation that we've had now for the better part of two years, it's actually gone before that for the last
two years we realized. there was a problem and the problem became with our stakeholders. The only way that this works is we have to have a joint. Uh, participation with our local sheriff's departments and police departments and we saw that number getting lower and lower and lower as Representative Pierce alluded to, he was actually part of this, uh, team in our local area. We have someone here from Jackson County Sheriff's Department. They can testify from his experience. We also have representation, I believe, from the chiefs of police that could testify from their experience, but we have a
lot of agencies that are not participating because of uh once again the process that it requires. And the training that requires and by us streamlining that um and I've met with just about every sheriff in the state on this. Every time I talk to the sheriff's association, it comes up when I talked to the Chiefs Association that comes up. And we're basically just streamlining the process to more of a product that is operationally sound and it takes a lot of the, the red tape away.
So, um, that's in a nutshell, uh, and I'd be happy to explain that. I also feel like it's important to note, um, I didn't ask, uh. Colleen, Nick to come and testify today because obviously she's a good ways away, um, we've been in constant contact with her. I met with her and uh before we did anything or made any changes, um, I wanted to make sure that we had her buy in and uh she is 100% on board with what we are doing and with the
changes that are being made and we feel like it's a good bill and we'd
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
5:28
appreciate a good vote. Are there questions
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
5:35
by the committee? Representative Torres, you're recognized. Thank you. I was looking
here online. 7 Uh, it states that the abduction response teams and
adhere to the executed memorandum of understanding, but in the paragraph above that's
memorandum of understanding is crossed out. Is that going to create any conflicts since, yeah, just. No, basically, there will be
Mike Hager
Unverified
5:58
a new uh memorandum of understanding, and I don't want to get in the weeds too
much on this and unless y'all would like for us to, but the way it's set up right now in order to be a CARP member, each individual member of the court, which could be a police officer, sheriff's deputy trooper, ACC officer game and fish officer, whatever the case may be, they all have to uh
be a participant and they all have to require certain training that is through a third party vendor and just to give you an example, um, what we want to do is identify resources that we're going to utilize in the case of an abduction and to use representative Pierce as an example. Gaming fish, uh, do a wonderful job. The discipline and what they bring to the table for us is to be able to do like uhAAF searches and grid searches in rural areas, you know, utilize their, their four-wheelers. And things like that to search.
But the way it's set up right now for uh Gaming fish to participate in the members, the individual members to participate, they'll have to log online and do 4 hours of training and things like how to dump a cell phone forensically, how to care for a, you know, a witness through the adjudication process, things that they will never do in real life, in our aircraft pilots have to do the exact same thing even though that's not the way we're going to use them. So what the memorandum of understanding is gonna look like is it's gonna be with stakeholders, which are
going to be our local police department sheriff's departments, but it's going to be with decision makers. It's going to be people that we go to them and say this is what we're going to do. This is the process that we're gonna follow, and if you have an abduction in your area and you call state police, number one, we're an assisting agency. We're not going to come in and take over that investigation unless you ask for us to, and there's some agencies that do. We're just gonna bring resources to the table. We're going to send somebody there that they're going to have a basically a book of resources available where if you need a cell phone dump,
we've got a guy for that. If you need a group of detectives to come in. We've got a guy for that, or we've got a team for that. So in other words, like North FRo Police Department or Little Rock Police Department is a better example. Um, they're not involved in this right now, um, sure we've got a lot of, you know, large agencies that have a lot to offer in the way of resources like with their detective division and things like that. They're not involved with it because the process that's in place. I've already spoken to those chiefs and a lot of the sheriffs and they said that they'll sign a mem uh an MOU and
basically say, we'll make our assets available to you if needed. And we're gonna have people of representation there from the state police. It's going to be just a clearing house of resources. You tell us what we need, we'll get those resources started to you, but the MOU is gonna be different now. certification process will be different now, but it's going to be the MOU is gonna be with um Basically stakeholders that have decision making authority to where, and it's going to be made clear to them that if you say that you're going to participate in this, we need that
authorization upfront, and they've assured us that they'll give us that authorization that when we call this is what we need and they've got the authority to send that, um, representative Pierce can. Also testify this what we saw, no one wants to say that they're against CAT. I mean, who in their right mind would say that. So people would sign up and but when we would have the mandatory car meetings that were required, we were getting 123 year officers that had no decision-making authority. They were asked to complete training
that was outside of their discipline, the things that they bring to the table and it was in as a result we were not being utilized. I can't tell you how many cases that we have each year whereAT should be activated and we should have uh that those resources in place, but they don't, because honestly they view it like, well, the circus is coming to town and we're going to mobilize 50, 60, 70 people, they're going to show up at my agency and now I'm gonna have to feed them. I'm gonna have to give them water. I'm gonna have to house them. I'm gonna have to locate them
somewhere and so they're hesitant to get involved in the system because the way it's structured right now. So, uh. Director Chapman at Kle and Lieutenant Colonel Jason Aaron, who's the deputy director at state police or one of, um, they're already working together to come up with this certification process to frame the MOU of what it's going to be with the local agencies and you know, once we get this in place, we'll sign those agencies and move through that certification process. Thank you Any other questions about Representative Barnett, you're recognized.
Speaker 27
10:29
Oh And it won't go off. OK um, Representative Eaton,
Representative James Eaton
Unverified
10:42
you are recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Any opposition to this
Representative Shad Pearce
Unverified
10:46
bill? None of which that I know of, uh. They, I did call. Um The Criminal
Justice Institute and let them know when I filed the bill out of respect that that's what we wanted to do, that we've tried it, you know,
both ways and it seemed to work better the first time. I believe that they had the best intent and heart in their intent when they implemented this, but we have found over time that it's just not work, but that would be the only opposition. And I feel like I should
Mike Hager
Unverified
11:16
say again, it can't be stressed enough, uh, we owe a lot of debt to the criminal justice Institute for getting this program started. To uh make people take the time to sit down and put these resources together, that would not have happened had it not
been for the leadership of Criminal Justice Institute. It's just kind of morphed into something that um it's become more of a detriment to again the product um then. Then we can afford because again we've got to get this right, but now all the credit in the world to the criminal Justice Institute for getting us where we are today, but it's just time that, you know, we know now some sometimes things, you know, they, they sound really good in theory. But the practical application suffers, and we know now, you
know, what we've done right and what we need to do differently, and it's just a move to do that, but it's, it's absolutely no indictment on the CGI at all. Any other questions by
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
12:13
committee? Seeing none, um, we do have a couple signed up to speak. Um Chief Deputy Jacob. Something I can't read
Speaker 34
12:24
your last name and I don't want to butcher it. Here, I'll get it.
Speaker 36
12:32
Oh yeah. I If you will introduce yourself,
Speaker 4
12:41
please, you'll be recognized. Thank you for having me.
Speaker 40
12:48
I'm, uh, Jason Tubs. I currently serve in the role of chief deputy for the Jackson County Sheriff's Office. Um Previously I spent 19 years as the chief communications officer for Troop B with the state police. That's where I, uh. came to
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
13:08
No cart when it was found. Are there any questions for this witness? Seeing none,
Speaker 33
13:19
thank you for your testimony. We also have Gary Sykes. Signed up to speak on the bill. you introduce yourself,
Speaker 46
13:31
please. You're recognized. Good morning. I'm Gary Sipes, director of the Arkansas Association of Chiefs of Police and Being the director of the the
association I have uh polled the chiefs across the state over 300 and they are all in support of this, uh, and can't like colonel said we, we owe a great debt of gratitude to CJI for what they've done, so that, that's basically all I have and I mean, I can answer the questions if you like. Are there any questions for this witness? Jing Nan, thank you for your testimony. I
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
14:02
believe that's all we have signed up. Is there anyone else
here that would like to speak for or against this bill? Would you like
Speaker 40
14:18
a quick rundown of cart as it is on the ground if you just uh if. We started this in around 2015, um. My commander then Jeff Drew, he, uh, tasked me with organizing this. As you know, in law enforcement, uh, in the fire profession you've got a lot of type A personalities. It's hard to, uh,
get everybody on the same page, but when you talk talk about children, it changes. And we, we gathered a team together, uh, and Troop B and uh Representative Pierce, he was a sergeant with game of fish at the time. That's, that's how I developed a relationship with him and many others we developed uh a relationship with not only our state officials but local officials and federal officials. I was on a first name basis with the FBI agents, uh, US Marshals,
and everybody was like, like minded. They had children first. And when we came together we trained we came together and we would have 25 or 30 people show up at these meetings. But uh as we went on. Oh, we started getting more structured and we were looking the certification process which we all love the fact of being state certified that's, that's, uh, something that we can take great pride in, but we also have to look at uh.
In my role now in a different role with the local smaller agency a lot of times I don't have somebody to send to sit for 4 hours and take training that's not pertinent to. What they need to, what they need, what they'll be doing on the team, so it became a We just, uh, got distracted. Uh, by this certification process and again I like the other gentleman, I appreciate CJI and we couldn't make it without them. I. we take CJI training and I have a deputy gone to training today. Uh
And they're a great asset, but uh this bill will help, I believe, bring us back to center and get us a list of resources together and everybody can get like-minded without the burden of a certain certification process and a waste of time for local agencies as as the colonel said, we're, we're low on manpower a lot of times and uh. This is a very cart is very important. It's always been, uh, dear to me and. I just this this bill will help
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
16:51
help uh get us back centered and get us back where we need to be. Thank you for your testimony. Seeing no one else here to speak for or against the bill, Representative Pierce, would you like
Representative Shad Pearce
Unverified
17:10
to close for your bill? One Well, I just want you each to know that how passionate I am about this cart team, and I would, I don't, uh, I want us to be the best that we can be for our children, because to me that's the most important thing we have in the state of Arkansas as our children.
There our future and so with that I'll close and ask for a due pass, please. We have a motion
Speaker 51
17:30
due pass. Well, that's, that's true. You did
Speaker 58
17:32
ask for. Are you making one or asking for? OK, I'm sorry, I think I put words in your mouth. So now we have
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
17:43
a do pass, uh, on the table there any discussion on the motion. OK, all in favor say aye. Opposed no. Congratulations, you've passed
your bill. Thank you. That's OK. Uh, next, we are going to move to House Bill 1921 by Representative Torres and we do have an amendment that will be coming
Speaker 58
18:13
around. You might go ahead and introduce yourself, and you will be recognized to present your amendment when everybody has
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
18:18
it. Thank you, Madam Chair, members, Randy Torres District 17.
And while the amendment is being passed out, I wanted to ask if, uh, Miss Tiffany Wright could join me. Thank you. Thank you. You can go ahead and recognize yourself
Chair
Unverified
18:54
as well. Introduce yourself. Good morning. I'm Tiffany Wright and I'm the
Speaker 69
18:57
director for the division of Children and Family Services. OK.
Chair
Unverified
19:04
Representative Torres, you are recognized to present your amendment. You bet. So this amendment
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
19:11
basically just deletes um. Uh, page 2 lines 3 through 9, working with uh the division of Children and Family Services, we just uh surmised that this paragraph is unnecessary, so it's just being struck out of the bill.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
19:28
Are there any questions on the amendment? Representative Nazarenko, you're recognized. Is
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
19:38
it also just substituting in that that paragraph right following so it's. I guess that's my confusion there is kind of like striking it, but then putting it back in. It, it's taking it out
as a whole, OK, because then it says substitute in the following. Unless I'm reading it wrong. Um, page 2 lines, and this is on the amendment page 2 lines 3
through 9 and substitute the following. The vision chairman Family Services, so I'm not
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
20:06
required, yeah, uh, then section 2 is left in there. I'm sorry. Right. OK, yeah, section 2 is left in,
yeah. Any other questions on the amendment? Oh, Representative Duke,
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
20:20
you recognize. Well, I'm Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
20:24
I'm trying to decide if I'm understanding what we're doing
on this one. So can you explain a little bit more detail on what you're doing because
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
20:36
I'm having a little bit of a struggle on. OK, so page 2. Line 3, line 3 through 5. is being deleted. From the
Speaker 85
20:51
bills up like you're deleting those lines in my right, I
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
20:55
guess I'm just wanted to say, are we saying they, there won't be training or there
Speaker 69
21:01
will be training. Yeah, would you let me help. Um, so, um, my understanding of this of the well, the request of
Speaker 88
21:11
the amendment was to remove, um, Section 2 on the 2nd page that we cannot close a provisional foster home or remove a child from a placement with a provisional foster home due to the provisional foster home not receiving the same amount of hourly training as a foster home. And so the division requested that that be removed in the amendment.
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
21:32
OK. OK. So lines 3 through 9 basically. Sorry for the
Chair
Unverified
21:55
confusion. Any other questions on the amendment? Representative Henley, you're recognized. Thank
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
21:58
you, chair. Uh, isn't this practice already in uh in the works, I mean.
This reduced training hours isn't that already in the works by some
Speaker 88
22:11
agencies. Uh, yes, ma'am. So the division um in 2023, um started working to change both kinship training and traditional foster home training. Um, we have successfully implemented that, um, for both, um. Types of uh providers and our private agency providers are also have implemented the training as well.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
22:38
Ball up. So what is this bill going to do? Make it legal
Speaker 100
22:42
Well, what we're doing is trying to get
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
22:45
the approved. Yeah, let's, let's start with the amendment, which I know we still had some confusion on until we got in a little deeper than normal. So are there any more questions
Speaker 58
22:52
on the amendment? Itself. OK, would you like to close for your amendment? Yes, I would. close for
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
22:59
the amendment. And I would like approve would appreciate a motion to pass. We are all having wording problems
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
23:09
today. OK, we have a motion to adopt the amendment, all in favor say aye, opposed no. Thank you. You have
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
23:18
adopted your amendment and now you may present your bill. OK, great. Thank you. So House Bill 1921, this bill aims to make it easier for people, especially relatives to become foster parents in Arkansas by reducing the training requirements. Here's a simple breakdown of what it does. Number one, it limits training hours for foster parents. The bill caps the number of training hours required for our foster parents
to 15 hours of initial training to get approved and then 6 hours of training each year to stay approved. OK, the division of Child and Family Services can lower these requirements if needed. Uh, this simplifies the process for relatives. If a relative wants to become a foster parent called a provisional foster home, they won't have to complete the same amount of training as other foster parents. Uh, this gives uh DCFS flexibility. The division will set rules to further streamline the process for provisional
foster homes, making it easier and quicker for family members to step in and care for children. And with that I'll take any questions. Are there questions by committee? Representative Duke, you're
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
24:24
recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I, I think
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
24:27
I understand it all completely, but I just want to make sure because I did have some constituents just ask, so you're not saying You
are not saying the provisional won't receive training, it's just kind of discretionary to the department on like how much it's not going to be the amount that Others who are not family
members receive, but they might, if you
think they need it, they might still receive training. So
Speaker 69
24:53
yes, provisional families will still receive training right
Speaker 88
24:55
now they're getting 6 hours of training with 4 components around trauma and how you care for your relatives. Thank you. Any other questions about committee? Representative
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
25:06
Nazarenko, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. This provisional, is it
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
25:09
just family member or somebody that would be, you know, could someone be a
provisional, um, foster parent if they're not family, is that possible? Yes, we call that fictive kin. OK, so it's two different things. So this is just strictly provisional. And the training having to do with
Speaker 88
25:32
just provisional, is that correct? Uh, provisional could be a relative or a fictive kin, um, and so anything that falls underneath that, that we've identified as a relative or a fictive kin we open provisionally while they work to
meet the requirements to be an open home to um get services, support and care for those children that are in their home. OK. Thank you. Thank
Speaker 99
25:51
you, Madam Chair. Any other questions by committee? OK, um, do you have anyone signed up? No
Chair
Unverified
26:04
one signed up to speak for or against. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this bill? OK. Representative Torres, would you like to close
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
26:14
for your bill? Sure, thank you, Madam Chair. Overall, this bill's meant to
remove barriers for relatives and other foster parents helping children get placed in homes faster while still ensuring some level of training for caregivers and with that I'll close. And I'll make a motion to pass. Thank you. We have a motion to pass
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
26:34
as amended as amended. Thank you. Uh, is there any discussion on
Speaker 58
26:37
the motion? OK. All in favor say aye. Oppose no. Congratulations, you've passed your bill. OK, members, we're gonna move to
Speaker 34
26:48
House concurrent resolution 1010 by Representative Shepherd. If you will
Speaker 58
27:00
introduce yourself, you are recognized to present your concurrent resolution. Thank you, Madam
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
27:11
Chair. State Representative Terry Shepherd, District 79. Uh, colleagues
This is more about a conversation that I wanted to have amongst us. If you notice, I don't think you have had yet a resolution that has came to this committee in most instances, the resolutions go where they go to the house management and that's who he is resolutions. So this is kind of unique in a strategy approach that I'm taking, um, We have several things that we all are passionate about and
that we work hard for and for me one of those things is chevenile justice in Arkansas and what's happening with our kids that are being confined. Um, for most of you on this committee, you came in with me and we're serving in our second term for some of you others, this is your first time. But if you noticed it, there has not been a lot of conversation around juvenile justice in Arkansas. We've had a lot of conversations around other things but not what's happening
as it relates to locking up our children in Arkansas. So the reason why I filed this the way that I did, it's not a bill, it's asking for a study to look at ways we can more effectively reform juvenile justice in Arkansas and the only way that I can make that happen was to file this as a resolution so that I could get before you and I could hopefully get this out of committee to get it on the House floor and talk to our
other colleagues in regards to Jewel. Justice in Arkansas. It's cross that I'm willing to bear, but I'm gonna stick through it, um. If you look at what's before you, the resolution states that basically if you look at the subtitle requesting a study a ways to improve the state's juvenile justice system for you most instances this is done during the intern, and that's when it's taken care of, not
doing a session like this, but I'll go back again to this gave me the opportunity to be before all of my colleagues and give a better understanding of what's happening with juvenile justice. this in Arkansas. It moves on to state um that I'm requesting for an independent study to be done of the system to look at the comprehensive needs and the assessments of children that are being um locked away um in our programs, with two focuses, one
is to reduce the reliance on incarceration and 2 to promote community-based programs. On the second page of the resolution, um, it talks about looking at Environments that are least restrictive to housing kids. It asks for a plan to be developed within one year of the resolution passing to include DYS and other stakeholders and it goes on to also address the
fact where there are needs that need to be addressed in regards to how we are housing kids that those things are done. Um That's it as far as the resolution. I'm gonna go back to what I stated earlier, this is about me addressing my colleagues and getting a conversation going about juvenile justice in Arkansas because you don't know what you don't know, um, I am an ally for DYS. I am an ally for the kids
that are incarcerated and I am an ally for our judges that are making hard decisions because they are making hard decisions. And the reason why I say that I'll go to a report. I want, I want to read something.
to you all. Based on a report. That was submitted by DYS. One
key point that was made. And analysis of Arkansas's juvenile crime problems and juvenile justice needs reveals too many youths are being locked up and potentially damaging correctional facilities and other secure residential placement at a very high cost. To the social to and human cause for minor nonviolent offenses. Meaning the majority of kids
that are being incarcerated in Arkansas are there for nonviolent offenses. OK. It goes on to say, The existing services. are stretched to the limit. Another key point that was made in the report. Is that this trend is costly. With expenses running up. To around 100.
$2,700,070,050 per child. So we're spending $127,000 for one kid to be incarcerated annually in Arkansas. And I believe we spend roughly maybe $9000 to educate a child in Arkansas annually, so what we spend, colleagues, to keep one kid in the system for one year, we could educate roughly 13 children in Arkansas. Think
about that. I not only sit before you as one of your colleagues asking you to give me the opportunity to get this to the house floor so that I can educate other legislators on what's happening. I also sit before you as someone who's considered as an expert in the field, and what I mean by that is as an auditor. I've traveled to the Pentagon to the unit and audited the United States Army Correctional Command. I've traveled to New York.
And audited their probation and parole services. I've traveled to Ohio and audited their division of youth services, all in regards to conditions of confinement. I'm simply asking for the opportunity to speak to the other colleagues and give them an understanding of what's going on because at the end of the day I didn't have to subject myself to this, but I know many of you all do not understand the system.
And therefore I'm trying to help and so with that, Madam Chair, I'm closed. We have questions back
Chair
Unverified
34:13
committee. Representative Carr, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
34:17
Representative Shepherd said this bill passes, the test is conducted where will the findings of that test be reported to. Would that be, because I know it's a year out, so we're gonna say maybe July next year. Will that come through like AOC or so I'm, I'm just trying to, trying to figure out who, who, who will be
reported to on the findings of, of, of the study if
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
34:41
it passes. It will come back to the legislature, and I'm glad that you brought that up as well. answer your questions, yes, and I definitely will be following up to give I if I've got to do this again to come back and give you all a report. I'm more than willing to do that. This was done maybe uh in 2012 with Governor BB requested a study to be done in 2012, so the findings will also go to the governor's
office. We are reaching a point to where we are bursting out of the seams with. in juvenile justice and being locked away, so yes, representative Carr, it will come back to the legislature, and I will do my best to make sure you all have an understanding of what's going on with you for no justice. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Duke, you're recognized for a question. Um, thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Representative Shepherd, um, for bringing this
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
35:41
bill and I reiterate what I said yesterday, um,
I know how hard you work on your bills and the due diligence you take. I do have some questions and I have. I'm, I love the idea of having conversations, you and I have many of them, um, but on page two. Lines 18 through 29. And I, I made these notes late, so it may take me a minute to make sure that I've got It all, um, That stayed stayed it all the way I want to. It concerns me. It looks like there's some
shells included in this when you get the study. So you get the study and then you shall.
Incorporate best practices and was in line 25. I think line 21. The implement and then line 22 you'll implement the reform plan proposed by this resolution and to replace the facilities where conditions or confinement support ceasing operation and so on. So that's the
piece um that causes me some concern because it, it, the way I'm reading it,
and I may be reading it wrong, is that the plan comes through, they get their results, and then. There's not really discussion on it, or it's just that once they make their recommendations, this is what happens. Am I reading that
correctly or incorrectly reading it correctly. Um, first I want to address
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
37:00
that it's not a bill, it's a resolution, so I want to address that. The second thing that I want to say, I think you
all will agree with me. If we look at the system and we find that the conditions are poor.
Will we, will that not be an expectation that there will be some change, something will happen and so in those lines that you are referencing, yes, if this plan comes back and there's a finding for need for change that that change will occur. Thank you. Follow up if I may, um, so I, and I understand that
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
37:38
and I understand the frustration where you don't feel like we moved the needle on things, but
I, I have concern with the way this is worded because I feel like I am passing the bill before I read the bill because I don't know what the study is going to find. I don't know how it's going to cost. I don't know what it's going to look like and I'm not saying there's not a need. I agree with you, we've got to look at some things differently. But to say a shall now for something I don't know what that's gonna be that. Do you, do you see that could be a concern.
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
38:18
Possibly for you, but representative Dukes, with all due respect, we have children in the system as young as 10 years old, if there is an environment that is unsafe for a kid and something needs to happen, it will be my my expectation as a legislator that something happened and and I will go on further to say that those that have the responsibility for oversight shall be responsible for getting it fixed. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
38:50
And, and I would agree that we have responsibility, but we have a lot of responsibilities down here as legislators, as you know, and sometimes those have with hard conversations and hard decisions. We can't all get what we want or exactly when we want it. And I'm not saying this to say that I don't think there needs to be things done here. But at the same time, we have to take into all the pieces of the puzzle. I can't just take in one and that's what concerns me is, again, I don't know what any of this is
going to say or what it's gonna look like and but I'm being required if I agree to this, that whatever it says. I'm going to do and that. I don't think that's good practice in any area of life, so I think, would you agree that we may not agree on This piece, but it doesn't mean that those who don't agree on this piece. Don't still care about kids and the issues I'm not agree with
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
39:51
that, right? No, I absolutely agree, you know, I'm, I'm not sitting here saying Representative Dukes that you don't care about children, you know, there are some things that definitely when it comes to education, you're absolutely passionate about. I will say that and when it comes to juvenile justice, I'm passionate about it as well and so we may agree with other parts of this resolution again not a bill, but not this part and and and you're entitled to how you feel, but I I feel like if there are kids locked away and programs, those
that have um the responsibility of ensuring their safety,
they shall be responsible for ensuring their safety. Get back in the in a Barnes you recognize. Thank
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
40:37
you, chair. Um, colleague Shepherd, thank you so much for, uh, wanting to see change and To implement some study. Uh, but contrary, I have been involved with it. Of 4 years. DYS I've seen all of that. I've been in court.
Our March children up to the judge and back to the cell. So I've probably seen everything you've seen. But I have a question because you said a lot of children locked up because of think it, I can't quote you. But I'll say this. Children go to DYS. After they have committed. An offense. That would be a felony if they weren't adult. They don't go to DYS for fans. Family need the services. They
go to DYS when they commit an offense that normally if they were 18, It would be a felony. So I think, I think your approach is what you're trying to do is good, but that back information is not true. You can't go to the DYS on petty stuff. Sure and see, skipping class, cussing your mama out. Can't go to DYS on that. You go to DYS. When there was a gun or something.
You committed a crime as a juvenile. That would be classified as a felony. If you are an adult, so. I think what you're trying to do is great. That's the only thing I, you know, I want, I want
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
42:13
you to correct if you would if you would look at that and you stand corrected,
this is DYS's report. This is what they put out, again, I'm going to reiterate what the state agency said. Too many youth are being locked up in potentially damaging
correctional facilities and other secure residential placements at a very high cost for nonviolent offenses. There's no gun, there's no any of those things. Follow OK, I said felony, it would be a felony if they were an adult.
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
42:45
So it could be a nonviolent, but it, it's a felony. It will come under felony. That's, that's all I'm saying and then my question to you representative would be, do you
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
43:00
think that we need a child locked up in maximum level of security for truancy. I don't know if anybody get
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
43:10
locked up in maximum security for insurance. What do you
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
43:14
think Arkansas juvenile assessment and treatment center is, that's maximum level of security for juveniles in Arkansas and as of today there are 180 of them out there for Chauncey OK, for choice.
I can't say that all of them are out there. You, we're going back and forth because in one instance you're saying violent and non-violent, and I'm trying to give you examples of that. There are kids in Arkansas's juvenile justice system, the majority of them are in it for nonviolent offenses, those things that as you're mentioning with some of them, if they were adults, they would not be in jail. OK. All
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
43:55
right. I, I don't know every case.
You may have some validity on that, but I, I really think the
Speaker 157
44:07
investigation would be good though. I really think that
Chair
Unverified
44:11
would be good. I represented. Well, hopefully you
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
44:16
will make a do pass. Representative Springer, you're recognized for a question. Thank, thank you, Madam Chair, and, uh, good morning and thank you, Representative for uh the gesture that you're making here, as I understand your request, you're not trying to Um
You're, your request is not to do away with all the processes that are already in place with respect to the bill making process, appropriations and that sort of thing, it has to go before certain committees before definite action is taken in order for legislation to be passed, so you're not suggesting that this process be skipped over. Those parts of these be skipped over. That's not what you're suggesting. Am I correct? So you want to make sure that you know that this happens. happens. However, it's not to
circumvent things that are already in place in order for
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
45:07
this to take place. Alright, thank you, um, and I'll start off by, I'll say what I said earlier. Again,
my cross to bear. I did not have to come this route, but I wanted to start with my colleagues so that people understand
Speaker 91
45:24
what's going on. Representative Barnes, do you have another question or it's OK. We just have, we
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
45:29
have light mics that are lit up for no
reason, so I just wanted to check. Um,
Representative Henley, who recognized for her question. Thank you, madam. Um I, you know, I'm not, but I think that we just passed a new revised juvenile code. And, um, And I know that Justice Rhonda Wood chairs a group that works on juvenile justice systems and processes all the time, um, so
this seems like a duplication of services like something that I mean, can can we just not get the justice to um work with you or are you on that committee? No, I'm not
Speaker 168
46:14
on the committee, but absolutely I want to work with the justices.
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
46:19
I want to work with the justices, DYS, the judges. I want to work with everyone. This route I'm taking was so that I can begin to spark the conversation with my colleagues. Oh yes, so,
so I think the best approach is to get with the
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
46:37
justice and and get on that team, and it seems like they're um uh powerful and and I believe that they can do what's best in the juvenile process, but we just, we just voted to pass that. that law, that new, that new revision of the law, juvenile code. No problem. I want to work with the judges. I wanna
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
46:57
work with DYS. I want to work with everyone. It's about me getting the legislators more involved in what's happening with juvenile justice in Arkansas. That's what all of this is about.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
47:09
I agree with you, Representative. Thank you. Representative
Chair
Unverified
47:19
McClure, you recognize for a question? The
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
47:24
question would be for you, Chair. Then you're not reg. I'm just kidding. Just kidding. Since we have many first-time legislators in here,
could you uh explain the extent of uh binding actions,
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
47:35
a resolution has. I might defer to Blake, uh, on
that, but, well, Yes, and yet Yes, if so, if we pass this as a resolution, it is binding. Well, if we pass it,
it goes to the floor. The actions within it are binding. I know we keep saying it's a resolution. But it, it has action within it. It's not just merely a recognition. It's calling for action. Is that what you're asking about? Um, there are other options.
Available to our bill sponsor. Should she not want to get this to a vote and have it fail in committee. Or she may take that opportunity
Speaker 45
48:21
if she so desires. There is, is it clear as mud now? Absolutely, and she's she's right,
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
48:28
there are other options or avenues, um, which I'll take if it doesn't get out of committee, but I'm asking you colleagues, the same conversation I've had with you today, I'm asking you to allow me to have that conversation
with the rest of the colleagues in the chamber, that's it. I knew this was going to be challenging coming in here. But hopefully I've planted some seeds or I've, I've made you all more aware. Of what's
Speaker 174
48:58
going on. Are there other questions by committee? That are not for the chair. I'm just kidding. OK I They Are we?
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
49:17
does that answer your question, Representative McClure, or do we need, OK. Representative Torres, you recognize I'm reading the bill
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
49:23
here and one of the things because you're, you're saying this resolution has teeth. I mean, if, if we agree to it, we're going to have to follow through with it. And under, you know, blinds 18 through 23, it talks about, you know, where there exists an urgent need for construction, renovation, acquisition, and all these different things, it says, uh, the centers overseen by the division of Youth Services of
the Department of Human Services to implement the reform plan proposed by this resolution to replace the facilities where conditions of confinement support ceasing operations with facilities that do not meet contemporary juvenile justice national best practices. That, that's a pretty dramatic promise,
uh, and that, that, I mean you can't just shut something down because they don't meet certain standards yet, I think the whole point of this study is to make the
improvements, but I just that that kind of alarms me, to be honest, and if I can
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
50:23
give you further clarification, it's based on the study, you know, that what you just read
if you read further up, it's based on the outcomes of the study, so no one is going. and trying to just shut anything down, that's unrealistic. Representative McGruder, you recognized for a question, or
Chair
Unverified
50:39
is that Pierce? I can't tell who's my it. OK. Madam Chair, uh, thank you. Uh, mine
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
50:45
is more of a statement. Do I wait or?
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
50:51
Well, um, let's check for questions and then yes, you can make your your statement at the end, how's that maybe if there's discussion on emotion or. Representative Duke, you mentioned getting back in the queue. I'm just coming back to that circle. OK, are there any other questions by committee? OK. What, let's see, we
Speaker 45
51:11
don't have anyone signed up? OK. We have no one signed up
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
51:17
to speak on this concurrent resolution. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to
Chair
Unverified
51:22
speak for or against this resolution, OK? Representative Shepherd, you're recognized to close for
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
51:29
your resolution. Again, colleagues, um, I'm just asking for the opportunity to go before uh. The chamber And expressed the same sentiment, um, that I have with you all. I knew this would be a heavy lift, but again my cross to bear, I would appreciate the opportunity and with
that I'm closed. Thank you. What's the will of the committee? Have a motion do pass on the
Chair
Unverified
51:53
table? Is there discussion on the motion? Representative McGruder, you recognized? And thank you for waiting. Yes, ma'am.
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
52:03
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Representative Shepherd for the legislation. I, I also I was looking at those same lines that are representative. Uh, I hope Duke was looking at and uh My experience is a bit different from everyone else's, uh. I can still tell you today it happened with me February the 8th of 2022.
I'm a father of 6 children, and my son was arrested at the high school. He's 15 years old and uh representative Pierce shared with me when I was being sworn in. You are not uh nothing you've done. Makes you worthy to hold this position. And I'm aware of that, but the day my child was arrested, uh, changed my entire life. Uh, he had never been to the principal's office, never been in any trouble, but he was accused of terroristic threatening of the school.
Uh, we did everything possible to get a better understanding, and we were not able to get any understanding about the situation. Uh, the officer takes him to the Police department, they questioned them and they place them in jail. Me being a former law enforcement officer, I called and I said, Well, I want to bond him out immediately. And the probation officer says, we don't care what you want to do, the charges are so severe, till you can bond him out of jail.
My son, who had never spent the night away from home was uh incarcerated, put in jail. We visit him the next morning and he says, Daddy, I don't know what I'm going to do. I haven't done anything wrong. But there are rats running around here where I'm locked up at. As a father, Uh, tears began to come down my face, and I Reach out to every attorney that I know. To see what we can do to get him
out, uh, do much prayer, much faith. I had a, my father's been involved, uh, we were able to get an attorney to represent us some did pro bono work, and he was released from The situation we we investigated and he did nothing. He was accused of. It was a way of other people showing me that they were. Empower and control. Thank God for uh honorable Judge Chester Moody once he got the case before him. He released it and they, they, he made my
school district admit him back in the school. Today I'm blessed that my son is at Arkansas State University. I'm proud of my children. I bring them around you all when we're eating and we're having meetings because I know I put my best foot forward with them. Uh, I know we have some issues. We can adjusts justice system. I, I, I know we need to rework things, and I also know uh financially I, I stay is may not be in the best situation, but I think we need to take a long look.
At what's going on, uh, uh, I'm one of those parents who was able to fight legally and get things resolved, but there are many parents who don't have a means to fight. And uh the main purpose of the juvenile justice system is to To help the children. They don't plan on incarcerating them, but if a charge is so severe. Which in my son's case, it was, they hold them. Now If you're holding a child,
especially think about if it was one of your children who comes from a good home where their two parents. For no apparent reason, and he's there with the rats and the mice and kids who are actually committing crimes, that can be a problem. So, I don't know if this is the approach we want to take, but I know we need to take something, and we need to look at this system and we need to rework it, uh, I'm supporting this legislation 100% because I know. The problems I experienced as a
father, as a man, and as a parent, uh, we, we've got to figure out something that works best for everyone or for our community. So I thank you, Representative Shepherd, and I will support you on this legislation. Representative Duffield, he
Chair
Unverified
56:15
recognized for discussion. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Shepherd,
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
56:19
I believe your goal stayed in this is to bring awareness to the issue. And
get colleagues on board of this problem, and you know with our discussions, I'm fully aware of this and I see that it's a tremendous problem and
And myself as a legislator putting our kids There's a top priority or if not the top priority is that My concern from the comments I've heard today is there seems to be There's some people that are uncomfortable with some things in your resolution. That is going to bring the awareness, so I guess my comment would be I would ask you to consider to potentially make some amendments to it or perhaps bring a different resolution to
bring this awareness and, and I'll do anything. I mean, my personal commitment to you as a colleague. I'll do anything I can to help bring awareness to this and ultimately help fix the problem if that is to bring some small groups together, small group discussions or whatever because I agree with you this is should be a top priority to fix. I just have some concerns with I want the colleagues to feel comfortable with this, and I feel like in the conversations we're going to have to fix this problem. If everyone is not comfortable
going in, that could provide some challenges because I think everybody, their heart's in the right place, but ultimately I just want to help fix the problem. And so I would ask that perhaps you either amend this or perhaps bring a different resolution, and again I'll do anything I can to help solve this problem. Representative Duke he recognized
Chair
Unverified
57:53
for discussion. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I guess. Because technically I'm supposed to, I'm, I'm gonna take
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
58:00
some leniency if that's OK or ask for some leniency and and address
you more than normal, but um, I think Representative Duffield summarized, at least
where I am on this is I'm not. I think when you have the conversation. I'm high enough in seniority this time, I could have chosen a different committee. I, I didn't choose a different committee. I want to be here because I want to have conversations about our aging, our children, our youth, and those matters. That's, that's why I stayed on this committee and so having those conversations are not something that I'm opposed to, but I, and
that's why I'm disappointed that this is worded in a way that I can't support it because we're binding people. This is an action. This is saying we are going to do something and if your desired result is to have the conversation, then let's have the conversation and not put it in a format in which People can't support it and are already coming to the table. In a way that they In the mindset they really don't want to be in with it, because they know there's an action here
on it, therefore they can't support it, so you can't. Have that, you can still have a conversation, but I don't think it's achieving what you want by having it on a on a larger scale. And so I, I don't know that there's what the options are since there's a motion in a second on it, but I do wish that you wouldn't change the wording on this so that we could move it forward in a way that people can engage in it more because it does need to be highlighted, and I do believe members are on here for a lot of different reasons, but the kids All the kids, not some of the kids, and I bet we all have.
Different motivating factors of why we're here. You know, and, and just I, I hope that you will consider that and I hope my fellow members that, I mean, I don't think this needs to move forward because I don't think it's going to get the desired result if it moves forward out of this committee the way it is right now, and for that reason, I won't be voting for it.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:00:00
Vice Chair Bentley, you recognized? Thank you, Chairman. Representative
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:00:03
Shepherd, I admire you greatly and I thank you for bringing this before us today is a very needy topic. I would ask that you would pull
this and bring it in interim study because this committee really wants to study this, and I would be more than happy to work with you on interim study because that's what I'm going to do with a couple of things that I'm not going to be able to get finished this session as well. I know you're passionate about it. I would, I would ask that you would let me help you word interim study and bring that interim study to this committee so this committee can do the study that you want. in the interim because we're happy to do that, so I would just make that suggestion that you would let us have an interim study and let this committee in between now and next session make some real studies and do
what we need to do that the results you're wanting, I think we're going to do with the interim study, and I would ask that you would let me help
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:00:53
you with that. OK, we have a motion, but I can defer to you as the bill sponsor for what your actions are. OK. Yes, I would like to. Yes, thank
Speaker 197
1:01:05
you, thank you, Madam Chair. I think just in um first of all,
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:01:12
Absolutely needed. To see where we are with the juvenile justice system and utilizing the research that you have already, uh, that's placed within the resolution from a previous study. That's what you, that's what you are going, uh, based on, right? Uh, yes, OK. Um, I think, however, that the issue comes from you, you're wanting to provide awareness and you want to do the study and we would expect some action.
But the action is here, the steps here that would be recommended, it's already written, so maybe it's, it's almost like do a study and then yes, we're gonna have outcomes, but we're going to do these things as well without looking at the results of the study, the outcomes, and now let's move in and make and and address this plan because we need this plan to take place. That's kind of how I'm seeing
it, um, and so, um, in lines 18 where the where the questions are that that that have come up several times, um. Where there exists an urgent need for construction, renovation. We know all of that that's needed. We know there are rats in the, in the cells where the students, the, the students are, um, and that this is overseen by the division of Youth Services and to implement the reform plan proposed by this resolution. Period
Because then, if you do it like that, just then. To replace the facilities, all of that information is. In other words, the study hasn't happened. We do the study, we see the outcomes. Now here's the plan, and now let's move this plan forward. I think. That's what I wanted to share. It just seems like it's the cart before the horse, so to speak, um, the study is absolutely necessary. The the other study
that you uh cited prior to it was a while back and there's definitely a need to have another study, um, but it would really be great to see what the outcomes of that of the of your study that you're wanting to do and then the, the recommendations and then follow those. recommendations. The I just
wanted to share that. Thank you. Representative Shepherd. We
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:03:43
have a motion to pass on the table. You have the option to proceed with that motion or pull your concurrent
resolution down for further action. I'm going to pull it
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
1:03:55
down for further action and then bring it back. I'll make the changes, um, I appreciate
you all what my mission today here was, I think has been accomplished in regards to getting bipartisan support and people will begin to look at what's happening with Juvenile justice in Arkansas, which is what I wanted, so yes, Madam Chair, I'll gladly pull it down and bring it back. Thank you for
Speaker 45
1:04:22
bringing it and thank you for pulling it down to work on it. Thank
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:04:28
you so much. OK, committee, um, we are going to move to Senate Bill 371. By Senator Scott to be presented by Representative Brooks and we do have an amendment that will be coming around. You might go ahead and introduce yourself and you'll be recognized to present the amendment once the members have it.
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:05:16
Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee, Keith Brooks uh representative District 78. The amendment that uh Blake is passing out is simply adding uh Representative Jay Richardson and Representative Barnes as co-sponsor on this bill. Are there any questions on the amendment? I'd like to close for your amendment. I'm closed for amendment. Make a
Speaker 209
1:05:39
motion to adopt. We have a motion to
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:05:42
adopt the amendment. All in favor say aye. Post no.
Speaker 58
1:05:48
Congratulations, you're recognized to present your bill as amended. Thank you,
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:05:52
Madam Chair. So Senate Bill 371 as amended, uh my friend uh Senator Jamie Scott does an outstanding job of providing providing me with great notes. And so I'm gonna rely very heavily on those this morning, uh, so this, the language for um 371 was drafted by our partners at the state police. Senator Scott had reached out to them last summer where there was a situation from a principal from one of our school districts, but an elementary student who had a disability that went missing.
Um, however, the, the student did not meet the criteria for an Amber Alert. There's a very stringent criteria for what an Amber Alert is, uh, we're all familiar with those. We get those on our phones. Uh, so BLR did research to look at what the alert system was, what statue did, and also what other states did relative to um child alerts, looked at um 18 states had different types of approaches and they came up with this approach to basically expand the opportunity for an alert for a juvenile uh in, in
certain situations, uh, several states have something similar, Texas, Florida, uh, have, have a very similar setup for them. Uh, this did pass out of the Senate 340 yesterday. Uh, so basically what this does is it establishes a standardized standardized missing child alert system for cases that don't meet the strict criteria for Amber Alerts, so the problem is that the Amber Alert system requires evidence of abduction and proof that the child is in immediate danger. However, many missing children situations don't fit those very stringent
requirements, um, and so there is no alert in that and so again, you know, her specific situation with a um uh a principal who contacted her was a very concerning situation. So what this does, uh, we've got hundreds of children who go missing annually without that don't trigger any type of alert. What this bill does is this creates a new alert system for for kids who don't qualify. It's a statewide notification process, the alerts are issued through the existing system, which is law enforcement, media, digital highway signage, similar kind of what you see with like a silver alert that that a lot of times we'll see on the news, um, the
criteria for the Lord is a child must be under the age of 18. Law enforcement must determine that the child is missing and that their whereabouts are unknown, uh, and the child is believed to be in potential danger as assessed by law enforcement even if an abduction is not suspected. Collaborate with agencies to partner with the Arkansas State Police who again did write the, the legislation Office of Emergency Management and coordinate with schools and child welfare agencies to improve the response. So bottom line goal of this is this is to improve our our notification
system for children who may be in danger but don't meet that those strict criteria, and with that I'd be happy to answer any questions. Are
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:08:34
there questions by committee? Seeing none, um, we do have one signed up to speak for the bill. Michael Lindsay, if you will introduce yourself, you will be recognized. Thank you. Thank you,
Michael Lindsay
Unverified
1:08:50
Madam Chair, members of the committee. My name is Michael Lindsay and I'm here representing myself as an individual, my beautiful
wonderful wife, Tony, who is I'm sure watching on the live stream and are very rambunctious six year old son Thomas. Uh, Thomas, um, As I said, it is a very rambunctious and smart young man, but he also has developmental disabilities, and while he is much more than his diagnosis, it is the it is a diagnosis that causes us as parents to be more mindful and thoughtful about his future and how he's seen and interacted with by others, even those in
authority. We are here to urge support for Senate Bill 371. I want to thank Senator Scott and Representative Brooks and all the co-sponsors for bringing this bill to you today. Our child has a very limited vocabulary. And does not communicate exceptionally well, um, his mother and I often struggle, um, he often struggles to communicate his name, his address, and other important pieces of information that a neurotypical child might be able to provide, which would be helpful in reuniting them with their parents. This piece of legislation fills a critical
need fills a need to fill a gap in our current Amber Alert system and equip the public, the public and safety officers with the tools needed to better ensure a swift and safe recovery. provide necessary safety measures and awareness that our community requires to help law enforcement to be alerted quicker and bring these very special children home in a more efficient manner and, and more successfully in many instances these children with intellectual and developmental disabilities cannot communicate their personal information. Often they don't recognize their surroundings, are scared and not able to communicate.
And may not even be able to understand or follow the most basic of instructions. Send Bill 371 would establish a standardized system to help bring home these endangered children who may have physical, mental or cognitive impairments in a swift manner. We would encourage a good vote on this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions for this witness?
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:10:48
Thank you for your testimony. Uh, seeing no one else signed
up. Do we have anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this bill.
Speaker 45
1:11:00
OK, seeing none. Would you like to close for your
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:11:04
bill? I would like to close it. I would like to thank Michael and Tony for there for sharing their story, uh, as a dad who many years ago experienced some of the same challenges relative to a child who may not have the best ability to communicate and some some of the challenges they face, certainly resonates very well with me, which is 11 purpose behind this bill. So with that I am closed and I'd like a motion to pass. Du pass as amended, right, as amended. Thank you. Thanks for helping me out. We have a Du
Speaker 58
1:11:31
pass as amended, um, is there any discussion on the motion? Representative Gonzalezor
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:11:39
than you recognize. Thank you for bringing this bill. I will be supporting it and I have seen um instances being an educator for 30/35 years, where this has, this has happened where a child has gotten away on the playground very quick and then, you know, looking for them, but it doesn't meet the Amber alert.
So this will also be very helpful in the in the schools, in the school system as well, so I appreciate. Thank you. Representative
Representative James Eaton
Unverified
1:12:12
Eaton, he recognized. Thank you. I do have a Down syndrome. I'd certainly appreciate the thought behind this, but we passed earlier this session HB 1523, which was the purple alert system. That's for people with delays of some type that was an adult system. Was there any thought of just combining this instead of making another alert.
Speaker 51
1:12:34
It's that discussion on the motion or was actually meant that
Representative James Eaton
Unverified
1:12:37
to be phrased as did you consider that? I don't know that we can have this have question
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:12:43
answer longer since we're onto a motion, maybe you can talk with him about that. Yeah, I'll be happy to discuss it offline, yes. Representative Nazar. Thank you, Madam
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
1:12:57
Chair, and uh thank you, uh, Representative Brooks for bringing this and please pass on my thanks to Senator Scott as well. So I'm a
pilot for Baxter County Sheriff's Office, uh, and reserve deputy and my one of my last calls that I've flown on was for, uh, uh, a child that would fit in this category, and it's very important, uh, and this can kind of go on to the discussion that Representative Eaton brought up, uh, one of the most important things is that scene, you know, when we bring all those, those. uh, different agencies in, you know, and it's not an, it's not an Amber Alert, uh, because it doesn't qualify, but I still need dog teams. I still need,
you know, these other folks in there and so this is very important because then it's going to be a system that gets in place and that's what we need to do is like anything that's gonna help find that child quickly, uh, and, and get
them back to safety. So thank you very much for bringing this a great bill. Any more discussion on the motion? OK, we have a due pass
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:13:51
as amended. All in favor say aye. Pose no. Congratulations, you've passed your bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. OK, last on our agenda today is Senate Bill 340.
And we have an amendment on that as well as two handouts, so you have some papers coming your way. Vice Chair Bentley, if you'll go ahead and introduce yourself, then once everyone has the amendment, you are recognized to present Senate Bill 340. Recognized to present your amendment. Thank you, Chairman. State
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:14:36
Representative Mary Bentley, District 54, happy to bring Senate Bill 340 to you guys today and
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:14:40
while she's passed up the, I'll let you guys know this amendment is really just technical stuff that needs to be changed and the dates and different things that need to be changed in the bill is nothing substantive in this amendment, just strictly doing some technical changes that need to be made in this bill, and I'll let you guys look at it and we'll go from there.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:15:37
OK, as far as the amendment goes, not the handouts, but the amendment goes. As you're reading it, I'll go ahead and open up in case there
Speaker 225
1:15:44
are questions on the amendment. Seeing how you'd like to close for your amendment? Yeah, just really
Speaker 34
1:15:59
some technical language that needed to be added to the bill, and with that I'd make a motion to pass on the amendment. OK, we have a motion to adopt the amendment. All in favor say aye.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:16:08
Poss no. Congratulations, you've adopted your amended amendment and may present Senate Bill 340 as amended. Thank you, Chairman, with your permission, I'd like
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:16:17
to bring Casa Smith up here, the executive director of Arkansas Advocates for Women and Children. Happy to work with her on a
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:16:22
bill today. We'll bring her up to the table to help. That quick. Get yourself Thank you, Madam Chair. My name
Speaker 229
1:16:38
is Kissa Smith, and I am the executive director of Arkansas Advocates. I just want to quickly say that um
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:16:43
I've lived in Perry County for 50 years where I live now, and we have some serious issues with our juvenile court system there, um, we're part of Plasky County, but I'm very disappointed in our juvenile system there. I just hear complaints all the time. What's going on there? So I'm very open to changes. This is something new, something different. I'm a great fan of Senator Alan Clark. I'll just say it up front that he's done some great things and really wanting to look outside the box.
I'm also a member of Alec. you guys have a lot of there of support of this from Alec that we just treat children differently than we treat adults that this really gets rid of punishment and we want to do correction. We want kids to do better. I think the juvenile court system should be something that we're looking for changes in children and treat them totally different than we would with adults. So I'm always open a new and fresh ideas, and I think this is really to me a great way for us to maybe look at things totally different. I know it's totally new. I know that you guys are maybe. Though this might go to the judiciary instead of you guys, but we're all about children in this committee. I think it's,
I'm really excited that we can have some fresh eyes look at it, people that really aren't looking at the court system all
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:17:44
the time. I think it's great for us to look at that you guys are more than, more than adequate to
Speaker 232
1:17:51
hear this bill and with that I'm going to leave it to Kisa. So thank you committee um I will start by saying on top of being the executive director of this organization, um, I am an attorney and I think most relevant to the discussion we're going to have here today, um, prior to this role, I served as deputy director for the Department of Human Services for
9.5 years, um, and in that capacity I had several divisions, but one of them was the division of Youth Services, um, until, um, we hired director Michael. Pro, I think, has stepped out of the the room. Um, we had a series of, of, of directors and I actually had to serve um as the director of DYS several times, and I will say that I would not be here if I felt that this would, this bill would harm the juvenile justice system. I am truly invested in our
children and making the system rehabilitative for our, our children, which is the purpose of it, um, to describe what the bill does, um, it is straightforward. But the impact of it is complex, and you will hear about that today, um, what it does, and you'll see when you go through it, including the technical corrections on the amendment is goes through the juvenile code and takes out the ability to assess fines and fees um on juveniles in every place that you see that and so what that in
essence means is that um a court cannot assess fees associated with probation or diversion services that children are receiving, um, it also means things like. Um, they will not um be required to pay fees tied to receiving counseling or receiving psychiatric evaluations. Separate and apart um from this bill is SB 341 they go together though, um, one of the main things and this bill has come before you, you all, um, this, the legislative body before, but one of the main changes that we
made this time around was that we did not want to harm the courts. We did not want courts to look and say we cannot provide the services that we need, we cannot provide the diversion that we need, we utilize critical services and so what we did was we had a separate and a appropriation SB 341 that serves to replace the fines um that are being assessed on the families, um, the purpose of that is again to make this system whole you've already heard testimony today about it being under resourced
and we again do not want to harm it, um, on top of the many things that are the things that this bill does, it does not touch restitution if a child in the commission of a crime has harmed individuals, has harmed property, that child and their families should repay and make that victim whole, so we are not advocating um that there is not responsibility, um, that needs to be um had by the children that have committed the crime, but. Again, as we said, this is a
focus on rehabilitation, um. Senator Clark filed this bill in 2021, um, and then Representative Hodges filed this bill in 2023, and now Senator Clark is filing it again, um, in 2025. Um, I have not been with my organization um all that long. I've been here for 2 years, um, when I looked at the bill, I was skeptical at first, um, I know many of the individuals in the judiciary and I was concerned um about what this may potentially be what impact this may have and so we
started a conversation. almost 2 years ago about what the judiciary would need to be held whole, um, we have had multiple conversations we've had um some through uh Freedom of Information Act requests, some through BLR surveys trying to get to an accurate number and the reality of trying to get to an accurate number is the fact that courts are different across the state. Um, what happens in Pulaski County is not what happens in Union County and it's not what happens in Benton County, um, so I.
understand the complexity of trying to get to a number to hold the judiciary whole, but the reality is that when we look at a child who is entering the system. The goal of the juvenile justice system is for that child's behavior to change. For us to provide services so that that child is not doing the same thing at 22 that they were doing at 14. The question is, and the question that we will discuss
today is, is making a child and in essence they're family pay fines, the correction that is going to be the the tool that is needed for a child's behavior to change. And what we have found is that there is plenty of evidence that shows things like community service, diversion programs, etc. are the keys to changing a child's behavior. Holding a fine over that child and the family is not necessarily um what will lead to changed behavior and if we are
serious about recidivism and if we are serious about children not ultimately becoming, excuse me, the juvenile system not becoming a pipeline for these children to ultimately go into the adult correction system. Then we have the opportunity to change how we are treating these cases and so we were truly asking um that you will consider, um, give this a yes vote, as I said, I recognize um that the system is under resourced and we are not trying
to harm it, but we have to make changes because you will hear directly from families that were impacted by this, and I would, you know, I know that some of our fines and fees are limited and but the reality is for families that are struggling. They are not able to um make these payments and it is exacerbating a situation and so we need to look at the situation differently because again the goal is change behavior for our children so that we can ensure that they change the the pathway
of their life. So with that said, Well, we have to take
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:23:56
questions if anybody has any on the committee before
Chair
Unverified
1:23:58
we get started. Are there questions from the committee, Representative Barnes you
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:24:04
recognize. I have a question. Um, how are you all going to recoup the funds that are lost by not taking up these fees and are they guarantee that these courts would get those filed an
appropriate that's what SB 341 is an appropriation in budget, so there is a money over there in the appropriation to recoup the fees that they would be
getting if they did fees and fines. So we don't want, again, we're not trying to harm the court, not trying to harm Costa or anybody that's getting funding which we're funding it differently. We want to do it through an appropriation, uh, in general revenue. Because sometimes gathering funds is more costly than the fine itself. So I think it's sometimes, um, especially with a small amount that by the time you recoup the funds, you spent more money getting the funds than you would have if you just did an appropriation so there's an appropriation that's been filed to recoup the funds. So again, you are saying those
funds are guaranteed to those judges for their courts, um. are taking it up. They will get those ones That's what
Chair
Unverified
1:25:00
Senator Clark has done. Yes, thank you so much. Representative Duke, you recognized? Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:25:11
Um, so my first question is, who sets the fines on these, in these different courts for these different individuals, who sets the fines? Judges do. OK, follow up. And, um, so the judges in those
areas, are they elected or appointed? They would be elected. So they're elected in each of those areas in those counties or whatever on that issue, so. I can
get back in the queue or do one more. OK, um, sorry, um, so. The people of the county, if they're not happy
with how the system's working there. They could vote out the judges that are not. You know, reflecting their values or how they think that should be working. They, they can, they can locally vote them
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:25:56
out. Unfortunately, yeah, and so, but in Perry County, we cannot, we don't elect the juvenile judges. It's all through Pulaski County. So most counties I would say yes, but in my county where I live, no, we're the judges that are representing the youth in my county,
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:26:08
they're not elected by the people in my county. Is that the norm that's not the norm, but I'm the abnormal. OK,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:26:14
do you know how many, do you know how many have no boat. Do you know how many other counties are in that other counties. but in our county,
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:26:21
the juvenile judges are not voted in by Perry County. OK, that is fascinating. It's
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:26:26
something, learn something new every day, um, I'll step out. Representative Springer, you're
Chair
Unverified
1:26:32
recognized for a question. Thank you,
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:26:36
thank you, Madam Chair and thank you, uh. Madam Director, for being here. Um, I do have a question about the appropriation, uh, you said Senate Bill 340, how much? I just Senate Bill 340 or 34. What is the amount that's been
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:26:56
the amount right now is 141, but again, we can, um, add to that,
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:27:00
we're just trying to get, when, uh, Senator Clark has been working diligently trying to find out what that amount needed to be, um, and we can, is willing to change that and increase
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:27:08
it, but right now it's at 140,000 follow up. What is
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:27:12
that amount based upon? What, what are the line items within that budget amount. So the, the amount that
Speaker 232
1:27:18
it currently has is based on the the 5 year, the 5, like I said in 2021 was the first time this
bill was filed and so since then there's been a series of information requests that have been requested of the judiciary in order to get to a total, um, at the time that this was filed, um, from doing analysis of the data that was collected, it looked as though there was only 140,000. We've had multiple conversations since. Then, um, we've talked about figures, you know, significantly higher than that. And so um we are open, we being our coalition, Senator Clark and
Representative Bentley are open to raising the number we just have to have justification for where the number comes from appropriation
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:28:03
doesn't have a figure then, is that what
Speaker 232
1:28:06
you did 140,000. Alright, so that appropriation include
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:28:09
the court appointed advocates, the Casa persons that are utilized by these judges. It's not lined out where it's specifically addresses Casa, but it
Speaker 232
1:28:18
is trying to address the fines and fees that this bill takes away, and one of the things, one of the, the programs
that juvenile judges have the discretion to pay for in the statute is through Casa, excuse me, is Casa, and so again when we were looking to make the judiciary whole. It was in consideration of the fact that this could potentially impact programs like that. And again, I, as I said, you know, I previously worked at DHS. I know the importance of casa and and their impact on child welfare, we would not want to harm that and so that's why we're asking, you know, what is the amount that judges are collecting so we can make sure
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:29:00
to replace that. I thought last question, I'll get back in the queue. So we, we don't know the amount that uh that uh will be affected by deleting these persons, so is that basically what you're saying that they're going to be deleted or you don't know what that
Speaker 232
1:29:18
that that is tied. To the data that was submitted to us um through multiple requests, um, we are still been in conversations as of yesterday, um, talking to the administrative Office of the courts about um whether or not
there was a final figure, and I am still very open. I know our
Speaker 243
1:29:34
sponsors are to getting to an accurate number um so that we avoid harm then that I think that we have
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:29:40
some judges here, maybe they can tell us more about what those persons do and I'll just get back into the queue and how many they are. Thank you. Representative Duke you recognize. Um,
Chair
Unverified
1:29:49
thank you, Madam Chair. I'll just ask one of one that I had on this. Do you know? When we're
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:29:55
talking about these fees and you, I think mentioned in the testimony or whatever that that.
The hardship that it can be on families that are struggling to meet their friends. Do you know if systems and judges will waive those fees or have a history of waiving those fees if they are made aware and know that there is a family who is struggling financially.
Speaker 232
1:30:17
So that's already happening, this is not a bill to villainize the judiciary, um, there are many, many judges who will look at the capacity for families to pay and if in fact they do not have the ability, we'll, you know, have, well either not assessee.
Or if a child is compliant with, you know, all of the things they have to do in a case, they will waive them at the end. The problem is that that is not universal across all courts and so it is hard to address the the members of the judiciary who don't consider uh someone's ability to pay and don't look to waive those fees at the end of the case, um, like I said, I, I respect highly the individuals that are in this room, um, I know that they treat those cases and look at those cases. and wave and they consider the families, but I wouldn't be here
if every single juvenile judge in the state did that.
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
1:31:14
Representative Torres, you recognized. So just to Clarify, would would it be an accurate statement to say that this would basically transition the fines and court costs to the Arkansas taxpayers rather than the parents of these. Children. This this would this would move the
Speaker 232
1:31:30
cost to the state of Arkansas. But again, we have a system that is under resource and
respectfully I don't believe that judges who are trying to run
Speaker 230
1:31:41
their court systems should have to try to figure out how to make up shortfalls through fines on a family that's going through the court system. OK,
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
1:31:49
so help me understand what, how can
the parents be held responsible for the things that are going on I mean what deterrence is there if the parents aren't going to be held accountable for fines and court costs. So I think there's a number of
Speaker 232
1:32:01
things that the judiciary can think of as it relates to the child's behavior and what accountability they're
requiring of the parent, you know, if a child is 13 and having to go to, you know, meet a probation officer or having to go to some diversion program where they're providing community service. That parent is right alongside with them if they're going to be compliant, um, so I don't necessarily believe that the only way that parents are held responsible is to say they have to pay $500 and I think we also have to consider if we have a 15 year old who's getting in repeat trouble is the fact that my parent has to pay that $500
going to make my behavior change, um, and as someone who has a child, um, who thankfully is is grown now. Um, I think when she was 14 or 15. uh, she may not have been all that considerate of what was going on in my bank account, um, in terms of her behavior and so I think that we need to think about different solutions, um, and I again I think that there is obviously a role for parents and they need to be engaged in, in helping their child again, change their behavior, um, but is saying that they have to pay
$500 at the end of the day of a case, what's going to make sure that we ensure that that behavior changes. Yeah, I, I,
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
1:33:19
I just think that if I were hit with a $500 fine or court cost or whatever as a parent, I would be the change agent, uh, as it relates to that child's behavior real fast and and represented definitely
Speaker 230
1:33:30
respect that, but I will also say I think that um that the individuals in the justice system who see these cases will say that's not a guarantee
Speaker 232
1:33:41
either and the main goal is for the child's behavior to change and so if we know that that fine is not. 100% something that works in every case, then we should look at what actually does work. Representative Carr, he
Chair
Unverified
1:33:53
recognized for a question, OK? Represent a Barnes you recognize um What number of judges that are.
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:34:01
Against this, have you? Talk to the judge. I'd like to know. And I, I, I, I
Speaker 249
1:34:07
only laugh because again we are um I I'm,
Speaker 230
1:34:11
I'm glad to be able to count, um, members of the judiciary as friends, I will say that the individuals that are in the, the judges that are in the room are not for this bill, um, and likely many of their colleagues.
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:34:25
The reason that The reason I asked the question because I think the collecting of the money is, is, is not. Totally Um, to To make the parents, I guess, pay for the crime or whatever it comes across.
But you know, in my experience of dealing with juveniles, we have a pilot program in Jess from County that I've been running for about up until this year about 8, about 5 years, we pay juveniles $11 an hour for a community service on Saturdays. And there are some parents so lazy, uh, they won't even bring kids out for the $11. That's some that You know, say he don't want to work in the hot sun and all this kind of stuff. So
Um I heard um colleague, uh, yeah, and it, it's got to be some accountability. I'm, I'm a little worried that if, if we pay for it, the taxpayers pay for pay for it. That we are, we're excluding them from any Accountability in every case is not. A not guilty case, uh, many of these cases are repeated offended.
Offenses and we have to do something to get The
parent to understand the gravity of what their children are doing, so I just don't know if taxpayers paying for it. It's making a lot of sense to me. Thanks. Representative
Chair
Unverified
1:36:00
Carr, you recognized for a question. Thank you,
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
1:36:02
Madam Chair. I know you'd said something there not to be concerned about the funding the programs because there's another bill coming along. Any guarantee 341 will pass if this one passes. Well, I mean, I can't, I can't
Speaker 230
1:36:15
speak for the legislature. I would, I would hope that that would be the case and I will say, and I, and I will not
Speaker 232
1:36:22
attempt to um say that the governor has signed off on this bill, but the governor's office has, we've sat down with them, they have been advised of this, they have been advised of the fact that we had an appropriation bill, they did not say don't run it um we have not heard further from that, so again I can't, I can't guarantee what this body will decide to do, but I will say that, you know, we work closely. to to move that forward and I
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:36:45
would say this is past the Senate committee and the Senate floor, so I would tell you this didn't doesn't come here without some support from the other end of
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:36:52
the, of the chamber, so thank you, Madam Chair. Are there
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:36:58
any other questions about committee? Representative Eaton, you're recognized. Sorry, I didn't see your that's OK. I've
Representative James Eaton
Unverified
1:37:04
tried a couple times keeps going off. Uh, question, you do, you did say earlier that the judges use this as a tool, some judges, some judges, yes. So why would we take away tools from a judge that is trying to help the youth.
Speaker 232
1:37:21
not to hamper the judges. The goal is to provide services that we feel is tied to rehabilitation of a child and I know that you know in this discussion, we're having a lot of discussions about parents. I know there's a lot of frustration about parents' engagement when children get into trouble, but again, the question is the goal of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate the child, um, and the way that that happens is through evidence-based programs that
changed the behavior it's about holding them responsible and holding them accountable. It's about making the parent be engaged in that process as well. And so again, if I, if, if someone could show me that 100% of the time that a parent was fined, that that child's behavior was changed, I would not be before you today, but that is not what we've seen, um, and I do believe that judges need more opportunities they need more resources, that's why we've asked for this. creation so that they can have those tools and that they can
keep their discretion on what happens with a child, but not just um a placement of a fine with the hope that a parent um will make sure a behavior changes. I hope that a child is is influenced by that fine and eating, I could, um, if you look at the letter
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:38:35
that you received there from Alec. Alec is a very conservative organization that I've been part of for a long time and we're not
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:38:41
apt to hurt taxpayers, but at the end of the day, we want things that work and I, I think everybody in the would say and have heard the juvenile justice system is broken and what we're doing is
not working. We want to make some changes and I'd love Arkansas to be one of, one of the states that is looking at something in a new, whole new direction that can agree that what we're doing is not working. Uh, we're on a different day and age. I think we need to look at things differently for the youth, and I'm just again coming from my county where I've lived for a long time. I think we need to do something different. I think what we're doing is not working. I think the system is broken and we're bringing you away just to thinking to open up the box and can we look at something, can we change things that we're doing? bring a different approach to it and that's what the goal is for today. So thank you.
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
1:39:26
Representative Duffield, recognized for a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, thank you so much for bringing this.
I know our priority here again is, is always the children and, and seeing that they can get the care they need. I think one of the biggest concerns that that I've received from from judges and the colleagues here has to do with this appropriation representative Bentley, and I believe you said that right now it's $1,000,000 and the number that has communi communicated to me and again I haven't seen a breakdown of this is quite a bit
higher than that at about $1 million. What would be The process For that appropriation to move from the $100,000 number up. Up to where According to these judges, it would be enough to To fund what it is they're trying to accomplish. I would say there's going
to be some data that's been asked for to be released so
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
1:40:19
that can be an accurate and accounting officer of the courts would get but um because it's been some 4 years place again, Senator Clark's been at this for 5 years to get
an accurate number. So with some accurate data, I'm sure the appropriation go to where it needs to be would have to be accurate data to back it up. And Senator Clark's more than willing to adjust that, and I know again, I know this is an awkward place to put us, but we have to have accurate data. You and I would have to both have that to make, make the
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
1:40:47
increase. Follow up, please. So just to clarify that the effort has been made for the past 5 years to contact these judges to get this data on how much money they they are currently spending on these programs, and that has not been
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
1:41:00
provided. OK, thank you. Representative Springer, you're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. uh. Representative Bentley, I'm just looking at, we were in joint budget this morning and that bill is Senate Bill 341 is still on the agenda. Is that not correct? Yeah, that's, yes, Senator Clark is
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:41:24
working on that. I'm sorry. So he's doing that piece of it. Are there other questions by
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:41:31
committee? Oh, I'm sorry. Representative Gonzalez Worthing, you recognize.
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:41:35
Yes. um, Thank you for your, thank you for your bill, that definitely, um, needed, but I do have a question and um you mentioned that there's at least 20 other states that have done away with the juvenile, um, juvenile justice fines and fees, etc. and really relying more on
rehabilitation methods or um steps for the student or the child to follow. Can you elaborate on what what some of these other states are doing in lieu of fines, but how are they, how are they rehabbing? Students, the juveniles without, without the fine. structure and so it's, it's very similar to the bill that we're presenting to
Speaker 230
1:42:28
is, this is not magic. You do have to find
money from another source to make sure that the system is whole
Speaker 232
1:42:38
but it they do really lean into those diversion, um, and alternative uh processes and so you provide the funding for that, um, and definitely um make sure that you're doing things like community service, diversion program, there are many. Judges um that are truly invested in um electronic monitoring, making sure that the child is being compliant, um, those things, you know, we, we still see in other states
they're just funded through another source. OK. Thank
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:43:12
you. Thank you. Are there other questions by committee Representative Nazarenko, you recognized? Thank
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
1:43:15
you, Madam Chair. On that question, do we have the data that shows like what, what's been the outcome of that, so those other states that have actually enacted this,
do we have the data that shows they have been successful or are they still working that so mostly what we've been
Speaker 230
1:43:28
looking at is Louisiana and Texas because we felt like those are, those are states that are really most
comparable to our systems. I mean, so far they're
Speaker 232
1:43:37
still um in the process. I think they're still kinks. And working out the process, but we think from what we can see it's working, um, and it's still going on and they haven't um reverted and make changes to go back to the putting the fines back in place. How
Speaker 265
1:43:54
long has that been inactive over there? I, I believe. I'm probably
Speaker 232
1:43:58
gonna misspeak on that. I believe that Louisiana, I believe instituted maybe 5 years ago, um. But I would have to double
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
1:44:07
check, so there's no like that you've got just, just kind of like that they haven't pulled it. Right, yeah,
Speaker 265
1:44:13
I mean, there's no indication that they're they've pulled it or that there's intention to pull
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:44:20
it. OK. Thank you, Madam Chair. Any other questions
Speaker 33
1:44:25
by committee? OK, we have several signed up to speak on the bill today. I'm
Speaker 58
1:44:30
just gonna go down the list. First, Nanachka Phillips, and I hope I did not butcher your first name. right Well
If you will introduce yourself, then you're recognized to
Speaker 277
1:44:46
speak. My name is Ninajka Phillips, um, thank you for allowing me to speak. Um, almost teared up when you spoke because I too. Um Remember the day I got the phone call, um, for my 15 year old at the time then being arrested at school. Um, we had just moved into the area, new school for him.
New home for me. And when he got to the school, um. Someone said something inappropriate to him that I think even as adults, if that was said um to us there will be consequences, whether legal in that capacity or illegal. Um, he was arrested. Um, because he did retaliate. Um And he was sent to the juvenile justice department. Um
I probably cry for the next 24 hours because I didn't know what to do, um, single mom and at the time probably, I'm still working 3 jobs. I was working 3 jobs then. And I didn't know what to do. I had no resources. I didn't have no one to call and say hey can you help me in this situation. I did try to go and Get him out and they told me no, um, with that he end up spending 45 days, um.
For a fight And I just had no
Speaker 278
1:46:26
power in the situation. Um, I'm not sure. Um, what I could
Speaker 277
1:46:31
have done at the time, the only time that I had with him was 10 minutes a day. I remember in school and it was 100 years ago and we, you may have gotten a suspension.
But he was punished twice when he got out, he still had to sit out of school for 10 amount of days. As a single mom, there was no way I could have been able to afford anything that the judge or whomever would have imposed on him or myself as a parent. I don't know what the other side looks like. I just know what my side looks like and that's no, I did not have the resources to pay for anything, just trying to get him out was my main focus and all of the support that I
thought I had was not there. I had this 6 or 7 pages full of everything that I needed to do as a parent along with working with him, however, when I'm trying to do those things and follow up with everything that they required of him. There was a block. He could, the therapist could not get in, um, no one could get into the system. This is after the COVID, I imagine that could have been probably one of the reasons nobody could.
Help his situation because there was a block for juvenile. So the therapist can come in and see him. He couldn't go out to uh any type of service to utilize any services outside of that, so that also was a block for me. He just had to sit there for 45 days for a fight at school. I don't know what I could have done as a parent to prevent that because I want him to be able to stand up for himself but not in a physical capacity.
Um, and the only thing I really can say on that is that I feel like that 45 days impacted him because he ended up. Not having the support he needed, in my opinion, and then when he got out, The Services that were there for him were so poor. That we both gave up, there was a different therapist every other week. Nobody stayed in their positions long. His doctor's appointments was like 6
months out for what he needed for that specific thing and again just as a single parent I felt like I just had no support in the situation I feel still to this day terrible that he had to spend 45 days in school for a fight. None of the um I think I mentioned uh I've heard community service, none of that was um offered and again I'm like it was a fight. He didn't have a weapon. It was a fight.
The other kid did not receive the same. Um, punishment. And again I just 45 days was. I feel like I can't think of the word, but I just don't think it was right. Um, and that's, that's what I have. Thank you. Are there questions for this witness? Representative McGruder,
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:49:39
you recognize? During that, thank you so much for coming and sharing your story, uh,
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
1:49:50
during that incident that occurred, uh. Did you have to take off work. I did. Multiple times you had to
Speaker 277
1:50:00
take off work and I could speak to him while I was at work because they only gave me the time from whatever 6 to 6:30 was the small window that I had to be able to speak to him and then the call was only 10 minutes long.
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
1:50:15
OK, when you were Were there any hearings that you had to attend also. And uh when
fines were issued, uh, you had to take off work, so you were losing pay. Also, to go to these. Hearings So were there ever times when you had to make a choice of whether I have to pay bills at the house. or pay these fines. I
Speaker 277
1:50:43
did have that thought, um, unfortunately I didn't have to pay, um, I think maybe that was because of my situation, um. But I did take off. I took off
to go to court. Um, I took off to bring him things that I needed. I took off to even try to go through the list of um what the court asked me to do for him. Um, because I didn't know. What What I was supposed to do, so I had to literally take off, go to the juvenile department to speak to the social workers on staff to figure out how to be able to implement everything that they wanted me to do for him during
that time. So I definitely lost money. Over All of it, but if my if fines were in. It would have only been court calls or trying to get an attorney to get an attorney for him and everything, um, which was ended up being a public defender. So OK. Thank you. Yes. And no other questions.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:51:47
Thank you for your testimony. Oh, I'm sorry. I have one question.
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:51:53
Uh, you say your son was in a fight, OK. Did that fight, uh, once they determine the outcome in the individual they were fighting, he was fighting was it a battery or did he, did he harm that person? Did that person go to the hospital and did not go to the hospital. They would
not have physical because it's not just a regular fighting. I was just trying to make sure if, if there's injury, then it, it raises the level of the offense.
That's all, that's the only reason I wanted to know.
It was terroristic threatening, um, OK. OK, so those are the offenses. OK, that's, that's what I wanted to
Speaker 277
1:52:38
know was that I mean he was punished twice and then I still like it was a lot around just Just that Moment. We had just got into the neighborhood. We had just got to the school, um. is I don't think he wanted to hurt
the person it's just who he, you know, his own body makeup of and the person I I don't know, I'm not trying to defend his action, um, but I think it was a little much that he received what he received. Follow. Yes, I understand as a parent, I'm
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
1:53:12
a father, but, but also there's a law, and I'm just from a law perspective, they, they look at a regular fight just a scrap between two guys. That's one thing, but if there's
an injury which brings harm to the to the opposite person when you say terroristic threatening, that's really that elevates now, so. That's, that's, that's what created um the heightening of the situation. That's all, that's all I'm saying, no, no offense. I'm a father, I understand. You worry about your child. I understand that. Thank you. And, and so
Speaker 278
1:53:48
I'll respond to that quickly. Um, I don't know what he looked like because I was only
Speaker 277
1:53:54
called to say he was being arrested, he could
have been hurt too. He went straight from there to juvenile without me. And he's 15 at this time. So I just think all of it was just not right whether. Uh, the guy was not harmed till he went, he went to the hospital. Because boys fight and they tussle all the time up in the schools. I see it. I was a substitute. And nothing happens. So they elevated it to that particular crime because they might have wanted to or
whatever, but my son, I never saw him. I don't know what kind of what he endured and I didn't even ask if he was hurt in the situation. He just told me what happened and I was like well that's just a fight. And then he was in there for 45 days instead of saying hey OK let we're gonna release you to your mom and then we're gonna give you community service every weekend or whatever the situation could have been, but for him to be in there 45 days, I thought was a bit much at his
age in my opinion and me not to see him physically for myself, I don't know what he looked like because I didn't see him for 45 days. Thank you and thank you for your testimony. Uh,
Speaker 33
1:55:14
next to speak on the bill is Will Cheatham. Please introduce yourself and you'll be recognized. Good morning, Madam Chair,
Will Cheatham
Unverified
1:55:27
members of the committee. My name is Will Cheatham. I am the Arkansas state director for Right on Crime.
Uh, right, right on crime, we, we support conservative criminal justice solutions resulting in less crime, fewer victims, and safer communities, and we believe our criminal justice system should absolutely function to deter and punish dangerous criminals, but it should also rehabilitate low risk offenders and do everything we can to try to put an end to the cycle of recidivism. This bill recognizes that our youth are the most vulnerable population, and they have the most potential for rehabilitation as they're maturing. Set on these kids and their
families with debt that most of them can't afford, really, you know, doesn't, it does very little to deter kids from a life of crime and, and early intervention. It is really a conservative solution to to be a good stewards of our tax dollars and create stronger and safer communities and, and most importantly, you know, this bill, HP 340 gives Arkansas children a real chance to turn their lives around before it's too late, and for that reason we're in support. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Are there questions for this witness? Singing Nan, thank you for your testimony.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:56:39
Um, next, and I believe all the judges are going to come
Speaker 34
1:56:43
together, um, we get a package of judges today. Judge Braswell, Judge. Bird Judge Medlock, Judge Broadway. And if you will all
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
1:56:52
please introduce yourself, you'll be recognized. You can fit around.
Speaker 302
1:57:13
Judge Medlock, 21st judicial Circuit, which is Crawford County. Thank you. And
Speaker 58
1:57:19
if you'll only have one mic on at a time, it will help us
Speaker 303
1:57:25
all to hear you better. I'm Judge Mary Broadway and I represent the 2nd judicial district, which is
Speaker 304
1:57:30
Clay, green, Craighead, Mississippi, Crittenden, and Poinset counties. And I'm Tawana Bird Manning and I
Speaker 306
1:57:37
represent and was elected by citizens to serve Pulaski and Perry counties.
Troy Braswell
Unverified
1:57:48
We're still in the morning. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Troy Braswell. I have the honor of being
Speaker 309
1:57:55
a circuit judge in the 20th judicial district, which is Faulkner, Van Buren, and Cercy County. So we certainly appreciate the opportunity to be present today and discuss what you've been discussing all morning. Quite honestly, and that is what is the role of the juvenile court system and what are things that we have the opportunity to do to make a difference and I, I
appreciate, uh, Ms. Smith's, uh, presentation. uh, she and I went to law school. I'm pretty certain she finished above me in our class and, and we have worked very closely together for a long time on juvenile justice reform efforts. In fact, when this body, um, several years ago sessions ago created The juvenile justice reform board. I had the honor of serving as the chair of that reform board. I now serve in a capacity on the Supreme Court uh commission for Youth and
Families. Um, we have for a, uh, several sessions now worked very tirelessly to come up with reform efforts that are data-driven. That reduced the number of kids that come into come into court. Reduce the number of kids that go to jail and reduce the number of kids that are committed ultimately to DYS. And so I heard, uh, you know, Representative Shepherd, and when she presented and there's
been uh more conversations about uh changes in reform, and I would submit to this body is we are doing that. And we need to continue to work in that area. It's interesting to note that Ms. Smith and a member of disability rights, which is a part of the group that's advocating for this. They're also both members of the Supreme Court commission on Youth and Families. We have several working committees to look at different ways that we can provide services and make an
impact on use across the state and moving away from justice by geography so that no matter where you live, you have the same opportunity to be in community to be lifted up and be given an opportunity to succeed. Over the several times that they have run this bill, not one time. Have they brought this issue. Before the Supreme Court commission where we have worked tirelessly to implement a validated risk assessment tool that's now required to be used
in every court across the state before someone is committed to DYS. The use of that tool in our court had the opportunity to be a pilot court for that through the use of that tool. We've reduced the number of kids in the 20 judicial district coming into court on delinquency cases by 73%. Drastically reduce the number of kids that go to jail. You've heard today from two individuals with two similar but also different experiences on what it's like to have a family member that's locked up. That is a heavy burden that we share.
That is not a light decision that we make. And so we want to make sure that courts around the state have the tools necessary. To increase recidivism to keep kids out of court to offer these diversion programs.
Speaker 312
2:01:11
At the last legislative session, we increased the ability amended the law to increase the opportunities for kids to Participate in diversions to keep the low-risk kids. When appropriate, out of court. And
Unfortunately, right now in the state of Arkansas. An overwhelming majority
Speaker 309
2:01:33
of the courts, the only way that they are able to function. is to provide services. And use funds that are in the statutory allowed fines, fees and costs fund to provide those services and our representative Duffield stepped out, but Judge Coker is, is his judge and he finds amazing programs. A gardening program. Um, other diversion, uh, tools that he uses to provide those services.
And so we have had lengthy conversations. There there's not a one of us up here that's saying the only way to rehabilitate youth is
Speaker 313
2:02:08
to find families. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. At the end of the day, it is a huge financial issue. That needs to be addressed at
Speaker 309
2:02:19
one day and that that is a decision for these bodies to make. And so we're here today and uh you can tell this is a very important issue for us. Not because we're one of fine
families and kids. But we want to help them and meet them where they are so we can keep them out of the court system. Representative Springer, yes, a great question. The money amount in Senate Bill 341, it's a guess. I, I've, I've told them for years, like we were here 2 years ago and I said, hey, you're asking the wrong questions to the wrong people if you want to find out what the money is. And and we're still here without knowing it it's a very difficult thing to figure out, but we're willing to work.
We're willing to to figure it out. I don't know a judge in the state that's ordering a parent to pay for a commitment to
Speaker 314
2:03:10
DYS. That's in the statute. Right? So there are things in here that look, we're not assessing some of these things. The main issue comes down to fine
Speaker 309
2:03:19
fees and costs. And it's not a mandatory representative to we talked about a $500 fine. That's not mandatory. That's the maximum. That's the maximum. Right? And so, uh, the biggest issue is how do we continue to provide services. How do we continue to
have success in different parts of the state to keep kids out of lock up, to keep them in schools, to keep them in the community. How are we gonna do that if we're gonna Cut the funding To those courts and and that's, that's the dilemma. I believe uh that we face, and I, I'm gonna, I'll, I'll stop talking because I could probably. Go till dinner time. But um um obviously, um, uh, there needs to be more clarity in terms of is number one is the state of Arkansas.
Is the position of this body going to be that um juvenile courts are funded through general revenue. I, that, that's a, that's a question and decision for y'all to make, not, not for us. But if we, if, if we pass 340 and 341, the concern is what are we cutting from courts? Um, it did pass through Senate Judiciary. We did not have an opportunity to be present that night. And, uh, for we were prepared uh for the couple
Speaker 314
2:04:32
of days later when we thought we were gonna be
there and just for those, uh, members of the Senate Judiciary for those counties, those 13 counties, the funding, uh, through fines, fees and costs for those areas, $500,000. That's 13 counties. And we're talking about 140,000? Right? And so that that that becomes the issue and so we're willing to work. We're willing to come to the table. And do
Speaker 309
2:04:58
the hard work to figure out what that number looks like and then bring that back and say, if it's this body's will to fund juvenile courts through general revenue, then here would
be the starting point. And I would just respectfully submit that $140,000 is nowhere close to a starting amount. Um, the other thing is, and these are just technical issues. This bill also addressed district court fines and fees.
Speaker 314
2:05:18
We're not district court judges. We don't assess fines, fees and costs in district court. Um, I do think it's worth noting though
Speaker 309
2:05:25
if your kid gets a speeding ticket, right, right, they're likely, I mean, now if this, if this is the will, what will happen is you'll pay more in fines, fees and costs for your kid getting a speeding ticket, then if they
break into 3 houses. That's interesting. Um, uh, also eliminates costs for parenting classes
Speaker 314
2:05:44
in my area. I, I, I have the ability, I don't have to charge parents for parenting classes. We have community partners. Some areas aren't as lucky. So we're gonna send families to a private company to get parenting classes. Who's gonna pay for that now? So now we don't have parenting classes, um, and then the AOC is they're they're required to go back and Try to identify every
outstanding fines, fees and costs across the state and do that. By next year, Or the end of this year that that's gonna be a very difficult um uh issue and then lastly, and I, I promise to be quiet and I'll do that. Um, this, this doesn't even, this doesn't address Finn's cases and I won't go off on my thing on fins cause truancy drives me crazy. we are suffering y'all we are suffering in our state from kids not going to school. And we are trying very hard to come up with alternative ways to
incentivize and motivate kids and have a parent, I mean, you want to talk about what the number one. program and the entire state is to get a kid back on their feet. It's a present and willing parent, period. Show me that, and I'm closing my case. You got fines and fees, they're wiped. Because we're ready to go. We're ready to go. So we've got to continue uh to engage in those, but in, in Finn's case, they're not, they're not even asking to do away with sin, so we're gonna do away with fines, fees and costs
for kids that are found true delinquent of committing crimes, but for kids that miss school, oh no, go ahead and find them. And sometimes we do. And sometimes we do. And a lot of times
Speaker 309
2:07:24
I say, hey, look, your fine is $200. If you complete every program that I've ordered you to do, it's gone. Oh, Oh, I can, so if I do this, then I don't have to
Speaker 315
2:07:33
pay? Absolutely. A financial incentive. And so we try to use that as an incentive. Um, so with that, uh, Madam
Speaker 314
2:07:43
Chair, I apologize. I love this is, this is what we do. That's why when Representative Shepard was talking like, here we go. So I'll, I'll
Speaker 316
2:07:54
pass the baton. I would like to mostly just answer your questions, um.
Speaker 302
2:07:58
I've been on the bench. This is my 23rd year. And so we got uh Sort of a variety of tenure here with the different judges and experiences, uh, I don't find, uh, delinquent juveniles. I find
parents for truancy, and I collect a probation fee. And one of the questions that was raised as far as where to get the figures and the numbers and Judge Brasil mentioned a figure that's probably not gonna reach the total state figure for trying to reimburse all of us, uh, statutorily, we're entitled to collect our fees and fines either in our office in the juvenile office or through the county clerk or circuit clerk through the clerk's office. Many
districts do it different ways. I know how much which I collect because I collect it in my office. Many judges do not know when asked uh about what these figures are, what you collect or what the judges are collect again. Most of the time you ask the wrong person because most of us are not. We're not bookkeepers, uh, and so we will, we won't know. And some of the responses I'm sure were we don't know because we don't have that data. Uh, it's coming into a different
office. I happen to know, uh, one of your colleagues last year sent out the request and I filled it out the best of my building. Um And tell them exactly where the money was, where it was spent, and what we use the money for, uh, There may be some alternatives. There may be some other things that we can use as tools. Uh, I wasn't going to talk too much about the fine process, but in my experience on the bench, some of the time, the only way I can
get someone's attention if I talk about money. Uh, unfortunately, that's just the way it is, and we're not talking about a lot of money, uh, I usually assess at the most $150 to $250 fine against a parent who won't send their kid to school. We're talking about something different, but that's, that's the only thing that's assessed, and this fee, and most kids that complete their probation, as Judge Brazil says, we in their fees if they complete it early, and most kids in my district are on probation
for 6 to 9 months, so we're not talking about a lot of money. Different districts have different numbers of kids and obviously it adds up, but you're not talking about the sort of fines and fees that impact somebody to the extent they couldn't pay. And the other thing is, anyone, anyone, and we're required statutorily to look at this. Anyone that ask, hey, can I get a pass? Can I get a waiver? I can't pay this. I don't have any money. We're required to assess that in my court, I have a great public defender who who will
say, hey Judge, can they file a budget? If they file a budget, I don't collect any fees. It's just that simple. So If they're, if there's some, uh, district here that's not looking at that. I can tell you as judges this group and as far as all the judges we know, we're doing our best to try to do better at that. If there's been some problems in the past, we continue to try to change that. And again, I know some of you had personal issues, and I respect that. We don't have a
perfect system. We're not here to say that. Uh, we believe we have the best system, but it's not perfect. It's not. without need for some change, but this is not the way to fix it and without a guarantee. That there's gonna be funding to provide for multiple services throughout our state that these fees are going to effect without a guarantee for that, then, then we really can't. Even guess what the outcome is
going to be, and so I guess I'm here to answer any questions you might have, maybe later, but for you to recognize as one of my colleagues said, there's always unintended consequences, and without knowing all the answers, this is one of those things that has a lot of unintended consequences when you talk about. About the services that many of us will lose, so I'll pass. Thank you. Again, good afternoon.
Speaker 304
2:12:26
Um, my name's Mary Broadway. And 10 years ago, right now, I was sitting in one of your chairs. And I served 2 terms, both of them on this committee and much as reflected uh by um. I'm sorry, hope representative last name. Duke. Um, I stayed on this committee because I thought it was important work. It is not the sexiest committee that it is in the legislature.
Um, then I run and am privileged to be elected to the bench, uh, in the second judicial district. And lo and behold, I become a juvenile judge. And I'm gonna tell you that that is not the sexiest kind of judge to be. Uh, I am not trying big jury trials. I'm not trying capital murder trials, um, I call myself a social worker judge, but again I was in this committee and I am a juvenile judge and I chose to be one
because I think that we do the most important work there is to do, and that is for the benefit of vulnerable populations predominantly our and youth, but also this committee, of course, serves the aging and veterans and those are very uh important in a disadvantaged populations and that is my heart. I have no doubt I think the world of Kisa. And I have no doubt that her intentions are very good. But
As Judge Medlock mentioned. Often what happens is when we pass bills that are really good ideas we get great unintended consequences and what I feel is this bill is going to undermine the very population that's intended to benefit. And it's because it is going to remove services and we have talked about the disparity in our counties. I was elected to serve in the
2nd judicial district that is geographically the largest judicial district in the state. It is 6 counties. Um Uh, representative. A car Is it, is, is Clark what Clark, I'm sorry, Representative McGruder both, uh, have a constituencies in my judicial district, uh, and I will tell you that I'm telling you this
because it is so eye opening the disparity. I sit in Clay County, Arkansas. In no disrespect to anybody here. It is the most homogenous. I don't think there is an African American or an Asian person in that county. The problems are completely different. They're rural and they're very poor. It goes all the way down to Crittenden County where we face problems with gangs and guns in violent crime, rapes.
Then we have property and drug issues in Mississippi County in Craighead County, uh, and Craighead County is basically a combo of all of it. But That the challenge to us is how to try to deal with those different problems. Um, I, I wanna talk to you predominantly about Clay, um, because I've got a couple of problems in Clay. One of them in in.
I, I, I shooting a lot of information at you, but when we talk about appropriations, we have one pie in the state of Arkansas and you guys have to to figure out how to divide it. But In Clay County, Arkansas, I can only hold court, even though I'm supposed to have court once a month, every other month because I can't get a public defender up there. That is too much for a parent in a juvenile to have to wait to be brought into the system to have their case dealt with.
And part of that is the problem is there is simply not enough money in the state budget uh to serve the public defenders part of this legislation calls that that uh every juvenile is to have a free public defender that happens right now that nobody pays for a public defender and and it's, it's regardless or in my courts, it's regardless of the parent's financial situation. Those juvenile get a public defender, but.
The public defender system is spread so at the end that we can't even conduct court in Clay County. When I first started to get on the bench, I went and talked to the juvenile department in Clay County, and I said I wanna know what we can do here to make some changes to be impactful to these juveniles and I was a proponent of the scared stiff. Let's take them down to the penitentiary and let them look at that. Uh, that I I quickly figured out that that was not a good thing,
uh, and, and I also, uh, entered the system with more of a punitive mindset than a rehabilitative, and I learned quickly that that is not the way to do it, so what we wanna do is we wanna try pub uh community service in Clay County. In Clay County, Arkansas, there is no one to supervise community service our um. 3 different juvenile probation officers that cover the entire
county are on um call 24/7, all of them. And there are 2. Deputies over the whole county that are available that troll that county. Nobody can supervise these kids to do their community service. So it's a great theory, but it's not there. Also, to tell you about Clay County. The Biggest problem that we have in Clay County. Sexual offenses.
We have a lot of incest, a lot of kids that are preying on their uh siblings. And we have no uh sexual uh therapy available at all in Clay County, Arkansas, so those kids have to be transported. Often their parents don't have cars, so who ends up transporting them, the juvenile officers to those appointments, these funds that we are
collecting or paying for vehicles, gasoline. Basic things to provide super basic services for these kids. Now that may not be true in every county. I know it's not. Some of my counties have much more um resources, but there are counties that if you do this basically these kids are gonna have nothing and their families are going to have nothing. The 5 years that I have been or
4.5 years that I've been a juvenile judge, I have never imposed a single fine. Where the money is coming from is a $20 a month. Probation fee. Um And $35 in court cost. Occasionally there will be a public defender fee, but most of the time is Judge Medlock said, those are waived. But I, I asked for the numbers. I
have not been asked for numbers before. I asked for the numbers after the AOC asked me and in Craighead County, Clay County, and Greene County. Uh, those three counties. $95,000 was collected to help support these programs and these services. Um, so to think that $140,000 is gonna take care of our state.
Is just not realistic in any way. Another thing that is a former rep uh legislator concerns me is it's wonderful if we find a magic number. But are we guaranteed that that is going to pass budget every other time when we have budget hearings. Those, those numbers change. And so we are very possibly um defeating what we want to do when we want to rehabilitate our
youth. Um I know it's a low bar, but when I started this, I thought if I can stop. 35 to 40% of the juveniles that come in front of me from going into the adult pen we have done something because I know you all have heard about the numbers that it costs for the adult penitentiary and so if we can save these kids, but the last thing I'm gonna say and and it's
again it's kind of a connect the dots. These things don't work independently, but I know you all are familiar that there is much talk about. The elimination of the Department of Education. Do you all realize that that percentage wise that Arkansas is the 3rd highest recipient of funds from the Department of Education in the nation because we're a poor state, and we need that money and that money is to provide services for special
education occupational therapy. Speech therapy for ABA therapy. I have a child with autism, autism, our children are suffering from mental health crises, and that's where that money comes from. And so if we lose that money, where is the money gonna come from to address those problems, So, um, I, I think the bill is well intentioned, but I think that it is going to be a.
A very large mistake and a very big disservice to our children if this bill should pass. Thank you. Thank you. Again,
Speaker 306
2:23:00
I'm Tawana Bird Manning and I, uh, serve here in Pulaski and Perry County. I am mostly here to support my colleagues, as was stated every jurisdiction is a little bit different because the needs of the population are different and the resources are available are different. I am. And for you To um Not
Pass this legislation because everything you've heard here I agree with and is true. We are able and Pulaski because we do have access to some resources that other places do not. To have additional or. Pots of money available for us to. Connect with resources for our our children that we serve but every place does not. And If the objective is for us to serve children all over the state of Arkansas. We can't
Create the harm that I think will be created by passing this legislation, so I'm also available to answer questions, but I'm mostly here to support my colleagues. Thank you.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:24:07
Are there any questions by committee? Representative McClory, you. Well, first of all, judges, thank you. I
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
2:24:14
know you have a very, very difficult job, each situation is very, very different. Each location is very, very different. I don't want to change positions with you at all and uh to the parent
that spoke, there's 3 things that are gut-wrenching is watching your child being incarcerated and not have any answers. It's a feeling that you just can't describe. So my question is to the judges collectively if, if you, because I hear a common thread here if operational expenses are covered or were covered, would you support this bill? Um, Representative McClure, thank you for that question, um,
Speaker 309
2:24:58
it's a big if, right? Uh, and so I think there's a lot of ifs that can go into it. Part of
Speaker 313
2:25:05
our discussion was Um, where's the money and where does it come from? And how do we allocate that appropriately. And so if we can have those conversations, I, I think there is room uh to look at uh the potential for elimination of fines, fees and costs.
Speaker 309
2:25:20
There's still going to be conversations, uh, about having the ability to provide it as incentives, but I certainly think it moves us, uh, to
getting a position to either greatly reduce them, uh, or potentially one day eliminate them. Well, I agree on the if,
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
2:25:36
and that is a huge if and there seems to be a great disparity on the amount of
money that it's going to take even from district to district. So let's just take the if out and assume you have your operational cost. Cleared. Sure. Would you support the bill? OK, so I'll, I can speak for my judicial district,
Speaker 313
2:25:59
right? Because I can't answer the questions that have different funding mechanisms. So for me personally, the impact that this would have would not be as significant as others, so if you could give me what I'm taking in right now and I can operate the same way that I am, I'm fine with it. But we have to, I mean, we have to be able to provide those services and if that money's not guaranteed to be there every year, then we run the risk of But we have to, I mean, we have to be able to provide those services and if that money's not guaranteed to be there every year, then we run the risk that I appreciate the questions. It's a good lawyer question.
Speaker 302
2:26:30
I've forgotten who uh. One of the representatives said, you know, the fines is one of the tools that judges use and why do you want to take away our tools. I agree with that. I also agree that here, here's the thing, the impact of this is, is not, even though the aggregate in in funding or in an amount is quite a bit. I mean, individually, district-wise and individually as to persons, it's not a lot, and they'll correct me if I'm wrong. $20 a month probation
fee, that's the maximum anyone can pay. Most of the kids are on probation 69 months. If they mess up, maybe it's extended, but that's typical. The maximum court costs, the maximum $35. The maximum fine $500 and nobody's assessing the maximum fines that I'm aware of, at least we haven't ever discussed that. I mean some people have different amounts, but that's, that's the amount. Well, in felony court, you know, it's 10,000 15,000 and so we're
talking about a huge difference, and so if, if we're using that as an incentive sometimes. We need that tool. I don't disagree with what Judge Brazil said. If you can meet our needs as far as what our expenses are. Uh, I'm one of the districts, as I said, that we collect all our fines and fees, and I can tell you that that's a headache. Uh, but I also look at that like I know how much I'm bringing in. I know how much it is. Uh, it's decreased quite a bit since
since since I started, uh, so I think there's good to be had from everything. There's also an argument to be made that it's still an incentive sometimes. As I said, we're not talking about fins here, we're talking about delinquencies, and I, I do find parents for not Sending their kids to school, and I find that that's an incentive, so, uh. As long as that's still on the table, I guess I would agree that if we could meet all those expenses, and that's certainly a discussion we can have, uh, we
haven't been able to get to the point of that kind of discussion where for whatever reasons, and maybe some of us are to blame. We don't have all the accurate figures, but to jump in the pond here without the life jacket, it's gonna be pretty risky, uh, you know, and to find out, oh well, it's going to be a million 5 or it's going to be 2 who knows. And so I think that's where we are, and I'm just afraid to do that. And again, that's one of the consequences I think it's really risky for us, so thank you.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
2:29:08
My chair Bentley recognized for her question. Thank you, Chairman. So just real quick, can you tell me how much you're spending on collecting fees and fines. Do you have
any idea how much you're spending on collecting those spending on collecting. How much money are you spending? You have staff that's going to have to collect to keep up with this. So how much are you spending on your staff? How much time are they investing in collecting, so that's you know I run my own company so I know how much money I spend on collecting money. So how much do you spend on collecting? How much are you investing on collecting money?
Speaker 321
2:29:38
of my staff, all of my probation officers, I have 4 probation officers. They all
Speaker 302
2:29:44
are able to collect. Um Probation fees when people come in. All right, so when they collect probation fees and or truancy fines, they give them a receipt when they come in for their usual probation meeting, uh, in the estimate. That I responded to from one of your colleagues, I, I said maybe 5% of their time or 5% of their salary was used in that. They
don't, they don't actively collect. Have a collection force as such. They collect those amounts when they meet with the children when they come in for a probation meeting. So it's not like we're sending letters or we're using the collection force or we're caught making phone calls. We have them collected when they come in for a meeting. In the event they don't pay, and, and there's, we find that they're able to pay, they're not paying for some other reason, then they're set for court and they come to court and we have that
discussion about when and how they might be able to pay as far as time spent, it's basically part of anything else that they would be doing because they're not in a collection mode as such, they collect those fees at the probation meetings. There's nothing, there's no other process for them to do that. That answer your question or anybody else want to share or just
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
2:31:03
I don't know if I had the judges had any response. In different counties they're
Speaker 304
2:31:11
collected in different ways and several of our counties, they are collected by the circuit clerk's office, so there is no additional, at the circuit clerks collect other types of fees, so there's no real additional expense to collecting that space. OK, I, I would, would you agree? So now, as, as
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
2:31:25
your discussion, uh, Judge Broadway, on closing the Department of Education. We're not going to lose any money in Arkansas. If you look at the wording we're going to get more money because we're not wasting money and Washington DC so Arkansas are actually going to receive more. Of my back, so maybe we can fund
this, um, so I don't think, you know, do you not agree? Have you not looked at the money's coming back to Arkansas, we're just not going to keep the money in Washington DC at their Department of Education, so Arkansas's Department of Education actually should get more money. I
Speaker 304
2:31:54
I'd, I would have to look at that a little bit more closely, but I, I, I appreciate you say that. I, I pointed out my concern and you are alleviating that and and I'm appreciative of that. Are there any other questions by committee?
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
2:32:12
Representative Duffield, you recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. So The the primary reasoning that that you guys are opposed to this legislation would, would be the funding that you guys would lose for juvenile rehab services prevention initiatives and juvenile programs and
so forth is that Is that the primary reason you're opposed? Represent Duffield, thank you, uh, for that question and
Speaker 313
2:32:38
I don't wanna um go full lawyer mode here. We signed up to speak
on the bill. It's obvious that we're here to present our concerns of what would happen if this bill is passed, and so I wanna make sure that um that as representatives of the judiciary that we're not coming in here, um, and telling you what to do. This is a poli policy decision for you to make, um, but what
Speaker 309
2:33:01
I would say in response is our, our biggest concern if this passes is. How do we fund juvenile courts across the state. So that's the only correction I make is
Speaker 340
2:33:09
we're here to speak on the bill, obviously expressing our concerns with it.
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
2:33:16
I have a follow up. So, so I guess my question is, These funds are very important to what you guys do, but from what I'm hearing today is there's not been a method. To keep up with how much that is. So You kind of answered this, I believe, but I guess I'll ask again, why is that or could there be some steps changed to where We know We know that what funding is
needed to continue to operate and do what you guys
Speaker 313
2:33:51
need to do. It's a fantastic question, um, and this has been part of kind of the frustration over the years is the references to to FOIA and those things. The requests that we've been getting are not, they're not asking the right entities to question, so they'll send a formal request and provide these reports. Those reports don't exist in a certain courts, so the response to that is we don't
Speaker 309
2:34:17
contain those records and so that was part of my recommendation when we were here 2 years ago is why not come to the Supreme Court Commission on Youth and Families that has members at the AOC, uh, and they're,
Speaker 313
2:34:27
uh, tech team bring those people together let's Sit down and have a working group and figure out a way to do it. I mean, I floated the idea, every county has a budget. The statute sets aside a separate budget for fines, fees, and cost. If you want to do, if these groups wanna do FOIAs, then FOIA, the county budgets and find out how much money's in the
fines, fees and cost budget each year and you'll have a pretty good ballpark on what that is. There are reform efforts in, in Faulkner County specifically, when I first took over as judge, there was over $200,000 in that account. We were paying salaried positions out of that. That's not a best practice to pay employees out of fines, fees and costs because it was certainly could appear, but the only reason I'm finding somebody is so I can pay my employee. So we had to start moving those things. I'm fortunate in Faulkner County to have a quorum court over the years that's been
Speaker 309
2:35:20
able to support those efforts, right? And so now I'm at 21,000. Because we've got fewer kids coming into court, not on probation long enough, so I won't go back and all that, but just to your point, but like for Judge
Speaker 313
2:35:34
Coker. I mean those fees and costs that he's collecting are going to those um diversion programs
Speaker 309
2:35:40
as gardening programs, as girls restorative justice programs, um, and so there is, I believe, a way to get close enough. That's gonna go up and down some court.
One of the biggest issues too, ladies and gentlemen. We're closing JDC's down, which sounds great. That and, and we're, I'm a huge proponent
Speaker 313
2:35:58
of reducing the number of kids that go to jail. But what happens if you live in an area like Texarkana or Hot Springs where they've reduced the number of beds that they have and you have a kid that's charged with a very violent offense. I'm not talking about a fight at school, I'm talking
Speaker 314
2:36:11
about a gun in somebody's face and stealing a car and now they have to send a kid to another county. To have that kid detained,
Speaker 313
2:36:18
who's paying for that? Well, the, the juvenile court is
paying for that. The county where that court ultimately I guess is having to pay for that. So in Hot Springs, for
Speaker 309
2:36:29
instance, um, the judge there. They, they have to use funds, money from this account sometimes to reimburse other counties for housing kids that they can't hold. And so that's, that's
Speaker 313
2:36:39
the other problem with identifying what is the exact number. Because from year to year depending on those things that happen, right? That that could, that could change, um, and that's a long
answer to your question. I apologize, but I, I, um, but I do believe that through these working groups there are opportunities to get closer to a legitimate number. And, and, and Miss Smith knows this. We, we've, we've spent hours and hours and hours that we have discussed alternatives. We have discussed negotiations. Here's the reality. We could agree, let, let just hypothetically, we could agree to cut monitoring fees in half and they're gonna come back next session and they're gonna ask to
do away with fines, fees and costs. So let's have the conversation. Let's have the meeting, let's have a real discussion about what it's gonna take to fund juvenile courts because there are other programs that are out there that we're courts across the state are trying to get funding for that work. Uh, Representative Barnes in Pine Bluff, your GBI program is amazing and we are, we are begging. For funding for the opportunity to expand that across the state because it saves lives and increased graduations and we're
trying to do that and so on one breath we're saying. Hey, we're gonna cut this, but now, now how do we, how do we do both? And so it's a lot, it's a lot more than just fines, fees and costs. It's what is this, what is the will of this body. In the state of Arkansas because Ms. Smith said in this and Representative Shepherd said it. We have got to do something. To what And it's easy for me to sit here and talk about y'all money. I don't get how your budget stuff
works. I've tried very hard to figure it out. Maybe one day I'll get it. There is a serious lack of funding for mental health services,
Speaker 309
2:38:33
substance if there is no inpatient substance abuse service program available in the state of Arkansas for kids 0. There is one place that we can send kids to have sex-specific problems that need services. one and we've lost youth challenge. We've had Cep beds reduced. And so that's why for us, it's
like we don't we don't love fine seasons and costs. But we can't afford
Speaker 314
2:38:59
to lose something else that affects the services that we have. So if we wanna sit down and have a table and talk about the money. It's got to be more than just how much, how much do you need in
Speaker 313
2:39:08
fines and costs. What's the state of Arkansas need to bust the pipeline that's been referred to today, because when I go to work and we go to work, that's exactly what we're trying to do. I'm keeping you out of court. I don't want you to be back. And so it's a bigger issue than just fines, fees and costs and if we don't address it all together. We're gonna be in the pond with
life jacket. Thank you. OK, committee, just to
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:39:30
let you know where we are, we have still 2 more people signed up to speak on this bill, um, and I'm not telling you not
Chair
Unverified
2:39:37
to ask your questions, I'm just letting you know where we are, as you, as you see the time going.
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
2:39:43
Representative Barnes you recognized there's one quick question. We're dealing with juveniles there have been times when a juvenile uh commits a traffic violation, which puts them in another court. I'm asking if this bill is passed,
will we be paying for juveniles traffic tickets. Is there
a possibility? It, it certainly removes the ability. We'll be paying for that traffic tickets.
Speaker 345
2:40:08
Is that correct? I would say that it would prohibit district courts from
Speaker 313
2:40:13
assessing fees uh delin district court doesn't uh have delinquency jurisdiction. So it is traffic tickets, um,
Speaker 346
2:40:19
I'd have to go back and look specific to the district court language because
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
2:40:27
and the reason I asked that is because there have been times when district court judges partnered with juvenile judge to let them do their community service to work off traffic time. So if we're going to be trying to alleviate any uh punitive uh responsibility, then we could very well be paying for juvenile traffic tickets. OK, that's fine. Thank
Speaker 302
2:40:58
Chairman, I think are two remaining witnesses. I don't, I guess we've got 2 or 3. I think there are Casa folks, and I just want to say that that's where my money goes. It all goes to Costa, and I think I probably can answer, speak. I think we have Crawford County, which is my county and Sebastian County and the lion's share of our fees support that program, and so statutorily that is a program we can use these fees for and so that's where, that's where my money goes. I'd ask my director comes so maybe I Stole, stole the thunder from
her, but uh uh. So those of you who are familiar with Cosa know that that's a very good service and very much needed and I can't speak for all the state, but I'm fairly sure that different districts use some of their funds to help Casa, so that's what we do. So anyway, thank you. Thank you and thank you all for your testimony. Thank you all very much. Next we have Melanie Allen to speak on the bill.
Melanie Allen
Unverified
2:42:12
If you'll introduce yourself, you're recognized. OK. Thank you. Um, thank you for the opportunity
to to speak with you today. My name is Melanie Allen, and I'm here representing the court appointed special advocatesOSA program in Crawford County, where nonprofit organization that advocates for children in foster care. Children who are victims of abuse and neglect. We ensure that their voices are heard in court and that their needs are met within the community. Today I come before you with a pressing concern regarding the spill. It threatens the vital funding we rely on to support
our program. Cost of spending is primarily derived from fees and fines, and we already are facing the potential loss of other critical funding to the Victims of Crime Act. If this bill passes, it could result in a substantial reduction in our ability to assist the children who depend on us. Last fiscal year our program served 82 children, each one of those children had unique needs, and Costa was there to provide the advocacy and support they desperately needed, but if we lose this funding, we'll be forced to reduce services,
leaving many children without the consistent support they deserve. Costa's role in the child welfare system is unique and irreplaceable. We're the only program in Arkansas directly appointed by the courts to advocate for the best interests of children are dedicated workers, volunteers work one on one with children, providing advocacy, educational sport and mental health assistance. This is especially important in a system where Arkansas, the Department of Human Services overwhelmed with high caseloads and staff shortages. Many of the
children we serve are left without the regular attention of case workers in those cases. Costs of volunteers become the constant support of adult in their lives. Our advocates ensure that children's safety is addressed. Their needs are met, and the court has information it needs to make informed decisions. I'd like to share a few stories that highlight um the profound impact that Costa has. I have changed the names to protect um confidentiality. Abigail, 4 year old girl who was removed from her home due to severe abuse, including a
complex skull fracture, her cost of volunteer Lisa provided unwavering emotional support during a time of great uncertainty. At one court hearing, Abigail, who had been clinging to her mother, refused to leave her side. Despite several attempts by others to separate them, Abigail refused to leave her side. Um, but then Abigail went willingly into the uh Lisa's the advocate's arms whenever she approached. In that moment it was clear that Abigail trusted her costs to volunteer and felt safe with her. She fell asleep
in Lisa's embrace during the rest of the hearing. Finding cover in the only constant adult figure she knew. This is just one example of how costs of volunteers build trust and stability in the lives of children who need it the most. We have Mason, a 10 year old boy on the autism spectrum. He suffered trauma from neglect and affected his academic performance. His casa volunteer Nancy noticed Mason's struggles at school, issues with concentration, behavior, and academic progress. Nancy worked closely with Mason's school to advocate for a revised IEP that
addressed his unique needs. She also fought to include a behavior plan ensuring that Mason's educational environment would support his growth and development as a result of Nancy's advocacy. Mason's behavior improved and his grades increased and his confidence was restored. These stories are just a glimpse into the powerful impact causes of volunteers have on the lives of children in foster care. Our volunteers offer something that no one else can, a constant dedicated advocate who will fight for a child's best interests in a way that is personal and meaningful. If this funding is lost, the
children we serve will lose that bottle advocacy. They will lose the one person who shows up for them when everyone else is overwhelmed and ultimately we risk leaving children in situations where their needs are not met. Their voices are unheard and their future is uncertain. I urge you, um, as members of this committee to consider the real world impact of this bill. Please think about the children who rely on our programs like COSA to ensure their safety and well-being. Without the support of this funding will be forced to scale back our services, and children will suffer the consequences. Thank you for your
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:46:18
time and considering the importance of CASA. Thank you then question for this witness? Sing Nan, thank you for your testimony. Um, next we have Maryanne Craig. If
Speaker 354
2:46:42
you will introduce yourself, you are recognized. Sorry, try that again. Good afternoon. My name is Maryanne Craig. I'm the executive director of Kosse Sebastian
County in Fort Smith, Arkansas. I could echo exactly everything that Melanie said. She described what we do. We have volunteers to advocate for children that make sure they are in safe. Situations and safe homes, and that all their needs are met. We do receive funding from our juvenile judge and we have heard, which is another conversation that we may have are probably have some really
deep cuts this year. So it is crucial to our program that we keep this funding so we can continue to serve children. We have had a case where young man was in foster care for 15 years. He, when he was 16 years old, he had had over 65 different placements 40 some case workers, 2 or 3 different ad litems, everything in this
child's life changed over and over and over, with the exception of Casa, he had one casa volunteer for those 15 years, and that's what we train our volunteers to make. connections with these children to make sure that they are safe in their foster homes. So I would urge you, please, to ensure that we continue to get this money to vote against this bill, please. And thank you for this witness.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:48:22
Saying Nan, thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Can we have one more signed up um circuit judge, Honorable Latonia, and I would say your
Speaker 58
2:48:28
last name, but it's not on here. Sorry that's not my title honorable is Well, look at that.
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:48:36
Honorable Latonia Honorable It happens a lot. Um, I apologize if you, if you will introduce
Speaker 4
2:48:43
yourself, you're recognized. Yes, ma'am. I thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. My name is
Judge Latonya
Unverified
2:48:48
Judge LaTanya Honorable. I had the pleasure of serving here in the
6th judicial circuit, um, in the 5th division here in Pulassi County. I have a criminal docket, um, and I thought that it was necessary to show the correlation between juvenile division and criminal division, um, sad as it may be, many times when you are in the juvenile division. They graduate and they come see me in circuit uh in the criminal division. If I and I just want to highlight a few things um that Director Smith pointed out, which is what prompted me to comment.
She made a point to emphasize that juvenile court, um is there to provide services and hopefully to avoid problems from juveniles. At age 14 and keep them from preventing those same offenses when they're 22 or older, when they're in adult court, um, there's plenty of evidence to show, as she indicated that community service diversion type programs change behaviors, however, if this funding is lost, those services can't be provided and that's been said many times, I just wanted to show the correlation between
what happens in the juvenile division and how that will have a direct impact on adult court because if they don't get the services in juvenile coordination. graduate to the criminal division, it's gonna be really hard for us to do anything but incarcerate, um, because the funding won't be there to offer those services and. If that happens, the system is gonna cave. We don't have a perfect system now, no, however, without this funding, it is destined to get worse because we will not be able to provide those type of services to
families that are necessary to prevent them from coming to the criminal division and uh and so finally I will just um echo what my colleague, um, Said, and that is. We have to be able to provide these services, we have to be able to account for things that are unknown, um, we also know there are some other bills and there's there have been other um acts that have been passed dealing with the criminal justice system more so on my
side than the juvenile justice system and the two are directly related and so I will. Indicate my concern if the bill passes without stating whether I'm voting for or against the bill, but I definitely wanted the committee to understand the direct correlation between the juvenile courts and the criminal division of circuit court and what defunding um. Those programs or those courts would do for our system. Madam Chair, thank you so much for allowing me the time. I'm I'm
open to any questions although I feel like a lot of what I said is duplicative. Are there any questions for
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:51:33
this witness? Sing Nan, thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you.
Speaker 45
2:51:37
OK, that concludes our list. Representative Bentley, would you like to close for your bill? Thank you,
Chair
Unverified
2:51:42
Chairman. Thank you committee, uh, for your time. I know
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
2:51:54
it's late. It's probably one of the longest committee meeting we've held this session,
but I think it's very much worth it. I think our kids deserve it. I think, um, just discussing what we can do to change things in our state, and again, um I come I think it's time we do something different and we're not, again, I think Cos is wonderful, strongly support it and would not even think about supporting this bill if I didn't think we could get the funding to support what they're doing, uh, from other avenues. Again, this money is not coming from general revenue. The money for this was coming from central services, which already supports some. the things that we're doing in our court we've made major changes already, um, with the cities and counties were coming through central services to pay
through for that some of our, uh, the, um, Judges' fees and all that are coming through central services. So again it's coming from that and not from general revenue. So I know this is a lot for you guys to hear today. But again, I'm passionate about us looking at things in a different manner and with children not doing a punishment. What can we do to change behavior and it's not going to affect traffic fines. It's not going to affect, uh, truancy, those fines are not addressed by this bill. So um there is some funding that will still be there, and I just want to give Keith a chance to share a couple of things if that's OK, Chairman, before we close quickly.
Speaker 232
2:53:02
Thank you again, committee, and, and, and thank you for hearing this, and I, and I hope that I conveyed at the beginning that the work that the judiciary and everyone that is engaged in the juvenile justice system is critical. Again, if we were trying to, we are not trying to hurt the system. We are here to highlight that it is underfunded. Um, you have heard a lot of testimony. I think what is concerning and what we should really be talking about is that if there are shortfalls in budgets, we do not want to
see those shortfalls be filled by collecting fines. I'm not saying that any judge is doing those things arbitrarily. I don't think that anyone is trying to find individuals to come with budget shortfalls, but we have heard horror stories of things that sound like that. And again, if every member of the judiciary and everyone engaged in the juvenile system where the four judges that came before you, then we would not be here with this bill, um, but I do want to point out that back in 2021 when we did this the first time. We started asking those
questions. We said, can we sit down and talk about how these fines and fees are collected, how much courts are seeing. When I took this role in this position, I immediately went to individuals that I call friends in the judiciary and said, Tell me what we need to do to fix this bill and what I heard was, oh well I don't really levy all those many fines and fees. It's not that much. Um, I respect the fact that sometimes that changes. I respect the fact that one judge can't speak for another. But if we are trying to address
the, the fact that this system is supposed to be for rehabilitation, and we are trying to address the fact that we should not be funding these by families. How do we get to that number if we cannot ask and we cannot have that conversation and we've been asking for years, and I will say that we were asking for an amendment all the way up until last night and so we are open to having a conversation because again, we are not trying to harm the system, but we can't do that if we can't have accurate numbers. We can't say
how much is the needed amount if the judiciary cannot equally say that. Um, I will also say before we close, um, I did, we did get some some information. Louisiana and Texas, Louisiana has been in place for 2 years. Texas has been in 4 years. Neither of those states did the backfield that we are trying to do here. Um, they ended fines and fees, um, and they did not utilize state revenue to. Um, replace that and those things are still in place, um, and again there is no indication
that those programs are going to end in those respective states. So I think that it can be done. I think we are having a conversation that is critical. It is a part of a much larger conversation about how we address juvenile crime in this state so that again we can make sure that these children do not end up in adult prison. And we thank you so much for being willing to hear this, being willing to hear the testimony of individuals that were. impacted um by the system and willing to think about the changes we need to make.
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
2:56:08
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you committee, and as a member of the committee, I, I make a motion to pass. As
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
2:56:18
amended, right? OK, on the floor we have a motion to pass as amended. Is there discussion on the motion? Representative Duke Thank you, Madam
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:56:25
Chair. I'm going to make it real quick because I know we're all hungry. Um, so, um, a couple of things that members for this discussion that I
don't want for at least for me and for the people I represent and the feedback I've gotten, I don't want to lose sight of. I'm not opposed to
looking at uh alternatives on how to fund things. But I do think that having the ability for these judges to have be able to Institute fees, fines, whatever lane that needs to fall in because I'm not a judge and I don't know exactly where that falls there for them. I think that's important and it makes me, there's some similarities I hear in this conversation, I heard in conversations when I started on the school board when we started looking at other discipline procedures and we're being told, oh we can't do this and you can't do that, and, and then we start taking all these tools away from our teachers in
the classrooms and then started wondering why they had some of the problems they had, and now, and the same arguments were used as well, not completely equating it, but I think there are some parallels here, that other states were doing these things to, and we need to give this a try as well. And what over the years are happening, and many of us have had these conversations, is teachers are complaining, we don't have these tools in our tool belts anymore and we need to be able to do these things and please help us and the other states are starting to roll those things back, and we are considering that as well as I think we should. So I think we, we've got to be careful when we start taking
away tools from the tool belt. Those people that are sitting on the bench, have done a lot to get to earn the people's trust to get there. They can also be removed and I, I think we need to be careful before we decide we're going to take away the fees as an option period. Looking for funding because I think they've got some great programs going on out there that do what I think needs to be done with the juveniles, and I think when you look at it, the second thing I would say is also blanket solutions. When panties are having problems or different courts are having
problems, making everybody else across the state have to do it their way or change because of an issue in one part of the state. I don't think that's right or fair either because you're shutting down the voices and programs that are working well in other places, so, um, and I'm a little disappointed that from what it sounds like, I mean, I know I was here last time, this keeps coming back up again, that I don't understand that one, and I would like to see answers to that rather than keep coming up again, but I don't want to see the fines and fees taken away, or at least that tool from the
tool belt of our judges. I guess I should reiterate that way. I don't think they should be funding everything necessarily, but I think there needs to be a tool there and some accountability and some responsibility, and I think I at least I feel like we can trust our judges. They not perfect. I'm not either, but I, I think we can trust them to make some of these decisions and then encourage them maybe if they need to make some changes. So for that reason I'm going to be a no. Any other discussion on the motion? OK, committee, we have
Chair
Unverified
2:59:16
a, oh, sorry, Reverend of Gonzalez Worthen you recognize?
Speaker 196
2:59:20
Yes, so something that keeps standing out in my
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:59:22
mind, listening to all of the wonderful testimony from, I mean, I got a really big picture of all of of everything and it's it's multifaceted. It's not just one thing fines, fees, um, that was mentioned earlier, um, but one thing that keeps coming to my mind is the, the budget, so when we think about money and how these interventions are
going to be paid for. I keep thinking, so should we. Ask the kids so are they, the kids, uh, should the kids pay for the interventions when they're trying to be rehabilitated. I guess that's my, my dilemma, rehabilitation, um, and how can we offer these interventions without with with while we're trying to rehabilitate the kids. I mean, I'm, I'm at a crossroads here on that, um, I heard.
uh, that if we can figure out the operational expenses, then maybe they consider it, it would be considered possibly that we wouldn't have to pay these fines and fees, um, uh, one of the judges mentioned that um that either you pay a fine, uh, or you do the intervention program. And so, um, and so there wasn't any monetary, uh, charge, but you do the intervention program. If another judge mentioned, if, if they're a low income. Family, you know, provide a budget.
Maybe there aren't any fines there and then another judge doesn't charge fines, so I think that that we have a lot, uh, to consider and maybe just looking at the county's budget, uh, to be able to provide these interventions but not on the backs of children. That's, so I'm, I'm gonna be voting, um, yes to Senate Bill 340, um, and those are my reasons. Thank you. Thank you. Any other discussion?
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
3:01:23
OK, the motion is do pass as amended. All in favor say aye opposed no. Sorry, Representative Bentley, your bill has failed. Thank you committee for hanging in there. Thank you for important work. Please go eat lunch quickly. We're adjourned.
Agenda
REGULAR AGENDA
SB340 A. Clark TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING CERTAIN FEES, EXPENSES, AND COSTS IMPOSED ON A JUVENILE OR THE PARENT, GUARDIAN, OR CUSTODIAN OF A JUVENILE.
HB1887 Pearce TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATEWIDE CHILD ABDUCTION RESPONSE TEAMS.
HCR1010 T. Shephard REQUESTING A STUDY OF WAYS TO IMPROVE THE STATE'S JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM FOR YOUTH.
HB1921 Torres TO AMEND THE CHILD WELFARE AGENCY LICENSING ACT; TO AMEND THE TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROCESS FOR FOSTER PARENTS; AND TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS OF TRAINING AND CERTIFYING RELATIVES AS FOSTER PARENTS.
SB371 J. Scott TO ESTABLISH A STANDARDIZED SYSTEM TO AID IN THE SEARCH OF MISSING CHILDREN WHO DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR ACTIVATION OF THE ARKANSAS AMBER ALERT SYSTEM.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — AGING, CHILDREN AND YOUTH, LEGISLATIVE & MILITARY AFFAIRS- HOUSE, Apr 2, 2025 | Agenda | 1 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
Speaker 4
Representative Shad Pearce
Unverified
Mike Hager
Unverified
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
Speaker 27
Representative James Eaton
Unverified
Speaker 34
Speaker 36
Speaker 40
Speaker 33
Speaker 46
Speaker 49
Speaker 51
Speaker 58
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 69
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
Speaker 85
Speaker 88
Speaker 100
Speaker 99
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
Representative Glenn Barnes
Unverified
Speaker 157
Representative Joy Springer
Unverified
Speaker 91
Speaker 168
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
Speaker 45
Speaker 174
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
Representative Mary Bentley
Unverified
Speaker 197
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
Speaker 209
Michael Lindsay
Unverified
Speaker 225
Speaker 229
Speaker 232
Speaker 241
Speaker 243
Speaker 230
Speaker 249
Speaker 265
Speaker 277
Speaker 278
Will Cheatham
Unverified
Speaker 302
Speaker 303
Speaker 304
Speaker 306
Troy Braswell
Unverified
Speaker 309
Speaker 312
Speaker 313
Speaker 314
Speaker 315
Speaker 316
Speaker 321
Speaker 340
Speaker 345
Speaker 346
Speaker 48
Melanie Allen
Unverified
Speaker 354
Judge Latonya
Unverified
Speaker 196