City, County & Local Affairs Committee- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (24)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1879
· 3 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…OLLECT FEES FOR ATTEMPTED SERVICE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. HB1879 Lundstrum TO REQUIRE ALL CITY COUNCILS AND COUNTY QUORUM CO…”
|
TO REQUIRE ALL CITY COUNCILS AND COUNTY QUORUM COURTS TO POST VIDEO RECORDINGS OF PUBLIC … | Lundstrum | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1130
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TION ORDINANCE IS NOT ADOPTED; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. HB1130 Pilkington TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESID…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION; TO AMEND THE FAST-TRACK PERMITS ACT; … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1331
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…N CERTAIN INSTANCES. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1331 Barnes TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE…”
|
TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE … | Barnes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1416
Act 673
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE REGULATION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENT. HB1416 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING FIRE DEPARTMENTS; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING FIRE DEPARTMENTS; AND TO ALLOW A VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT SERVICING … | L. Johnson | Notification that HB1416 is now Act 673 |
|
HB1436
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…OW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE A HOUSING IMPROVEMENT ZONE. HB1436 Steele TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCE…”
|
TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS OPERATING A SLAUGHTERHOUSE ON THE SAME … | Steele | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1448
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Puryear HB1448 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND T…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO … | Puryear | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1555
Act 995
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 4/2/25 @ 7:24 AM) Added HB1555 and SB505 House Committee on City, County, and Local Affair…”
|
TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE. | Painter | Notification that HB1555 is now Act 995 |
|
HB1567
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “McClure HB1567 TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY"…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY" RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY … | McClure | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1627
Act 877
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION POSTED ON AN ONLINE DATABASE. HB1627 Barnett TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF; AND TO REQUIRE COUNTIES TO PROVIDE NOTICE … | Barnett | Notification that HB1627 is now Act 877 |
|
HB1660
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “S. Meeks HB1660 TO AMEND THE HORIZONTAL PROPERTY ACT; TO REGULATE PROPERTY…”
|
TO AMEND THE HORIZONTAL PROPERTY ACT; TO REGULATE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS; AND TO REQUIRE AN … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1711
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Unger HB1711 TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A POLICE F…”
|
TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A POLICE FORCE; AND TO ESTABLISH THE … | Unger | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
|
HB1783
Act 834
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Clowney HB1783 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REDUCTION OF A CITY OF THE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REDUCTION OF A CITY OF THE FIRST CLASS TO … | Clowney | Notification that HB1783 is now Act 834 |
|
HB1790
· 2 mentions in transcript, agenda
Matched: “all right we're going to move on to house bill 1790 representative mckenzie you're recognized to run your bill…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENT. | B. McKenzie | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1872
Act 693
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THIRD PARTIES TO PERFORM PLAN REVIEWS AND SITE INSPECTIONS. HB1872 Gazaway TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE FEES THAT MAY BE CO…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE FEES THAT MAY BE COLLECTED BY A COUNTY SHERIFF; … | Gazaway | Notification that HB1872 is now Act 693 |
|
HB1894
Act 842
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ILS OR COUNTY QUORUM COURTS TO BE RECORDED IN VIDEO FORMAT. HB1894 Beaty Jr. TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPE…”
|
TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPERTY USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND TO … | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1894 is now Act 842 |
|
HB1901
Act 844
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…REAL PROPERTY UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5. HB1901 Milligan TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PASSPORT FEES COLLECTE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PASSPORT FEES COLLECTED BY COUNTY PASSPORT ACCEPTANCE FACILITIES. | Milligan | Notification that HB1901 is now Act 844 |
|
HB1902
Act 845
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…RT FEES COLLECTED BY COUNTY PASSPORT ACCEPTANCE FACILITIES. HB1902 Milligan TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A CERTIFICATE OF MARRI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE AND BOND; AND TO AMEND THE … | Milligan | Notification that HB1902 is now Act 845 |
|
HB1911
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “Lundstrum HB1911 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY FOR…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPERTY TAX; … | Lundstrum | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
|
HB1912
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CT TO TAXATION BE LISTED OR REPORTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER. HB1912 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "ASSESSED VALUE" FOR P…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "ASSESSED VALUE" FOR PURPOSES OF THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY; AND … | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1936
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TION PURPOSES UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5. HB1936 R. Burkes AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CE…”
|
AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES. | R. Burkes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB505
Act 595
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 4/2/25 @ 7:24 AM) Added HB1555 and SB505 House Committee on City, County, and Local Affairs Wednesda…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING; AND TO REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE FOR CHANGES … | J. Bryant | Notification that SB505 is now Act 595 |
|
HB1565
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TERHOUSE ON THE SAME GROUNDS AS THE FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS. HB1565 R. Burkes TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNT…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSOR; AND TO PERMIT … | R. Burkes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB322
Act 591
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…SERVICING UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY TO LEVY DUES. SB322 J. Bryant TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT; AND TO ALLOW THIRD PARTIES TO PERFORM … | J. Bryant | Notification that SB322 is now Act 591 |
|
SB374
Act 751
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…AL OFFICE. RE-REFERRED TO COMMITTEE Number Sponsor Subtitle SB374 B. Davis TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE CIVIL SERVICE SYST…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM. | B. Davis | Notification that SB374 is now Act 751 |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 6, 2026
Speaker 1
0:00
chair sees the quorum we'll go ahead and get started representative wing I think you have some stuff that's gonna be real easy starting off with let's let's start with that knock it out thank you mr. chair
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
0:15
Thank You committee representative wing district 70 North Little Rock and Sherwood what this is we've brought back you might remember we let me pause you for a minute do we have this is an amendment we're going
Speaker 6
0:24
to have to adopt in committee. Right. So let's get that passed out real quick. Oh, okay. Yeah.
Speaker 13
0:36
Okay. all right i think most people have it if you want to start explaining yes so the amendment
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
1:17
lines 22 and 23 of page one had been stricken and a little bit
of 24 had been some stricken language we've just taken out the strike so that language is back and uh that was what was already um in there with regards to public notice so we've gone back to where it was uh and that's that's the amendment that's the whole reason why we came back that just after we'd gotten through and it had passed through unanimously uh some folks had some concerns about that and that's not a major part of this bill so we just went ahead and struck that through so we could get
Chair
Unverified
1:49
everybody happy all right we have any questions on the amendment I don't think anybody signed up
speak for or against so I guess I'm assuming you're closed for its way of motion to adopt any discussion on that motion all in favor say aye all opposed congratulations you have adopted
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
2:07
your amendment all right thank you and then with the rest of the bill now it's the
same as it was before and with that amendment anybody has any further questions happy to answer appreciate a good vote.
Chair
Unverified
2:18
All right. Seeing no further questions. Nobody signed up to speak for or against. I'm
assuming you're closed for your bill. What's the will of the committee? I have a motion do pass as amended. Any discussion on that motion? Seeing none. All in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations. You have passed your bill as amended.
Speaker 21
2:36
Thank you very much. Thank you, committee. All right. Representative Painter, I think you have concurrence in Senate amendment. I want to go ahead and take care of that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
2:57
committee representative Stetson Painter, district three, Baxter and Fulton counties. Uh, so my Senate sponsor, uh, Bart Hester, uh, thought it, uh, our bill needed to be amended. So they admitted on the senate end so the amendment amendment number one on page two line three deletes b and if and it substitutes except as otherwise provided under subdivision of this section to remind you guys this is the uniform procedure of filing a vacancy for a municipal office page two it delights line six through nine and substitutes the following municipality may
appoint and a qualified elector of the municipality a member of the governing body of the municipality shall not fill a vacancy under this section page two line 14 is deleted and substituted with except as otherwise provided under subdivision a to b and ii of this section page two lines 17 through 19 were deleted and substituted with municipalities serve in the office until the office is filled at a special election a member of the governing body of the
municipalities shall not fill the vacancy under this section and that's all that a senate amendment does sorry
Chair
Unverified
4:12
any questions seeing none we do have one person signed up to speak against mr wilkerson you're welcome to come to the table introduce yourself for the record and you may speak against john wilkerson general counsel of the municipal
Speaker 25
4:29
league first of all i represent i really appreciate representative painter bringing this bill on the house end this was a bill this is a municipal league
bill it did a lot of things that helped clarify can make consistent the vacancy procedures and did a couple of other things as well but on the senate side unbeknownst to us an amendment this amendment was filed passed out here and this amendment causes a
Speaker 27
4:51
few quite a few problems for cities one in smaller cities and towns oftentimes the council member of the city or town is the the best one to fill the vacancy of the mayor's position as
Speaker 25
5:03
you might imagine in smaller towns city councils are tough to fill as it is and mayor positions are tough to fill as it is so
our cities have long relied on the ability to fill the
Speaker 27
5:13
mayor's position with whoever they need to fill it with and a lot of times that is a city or city council member who's been there and knows and knows and understands the the ins and outs of the city the second problem this creates is for city administrator and city manager forms of government a member of the governing body is the mayor and so to say that the city can't fill the city manager city administrator city cannot fill the vacancy with a member of the board runs contrary to what's allowed by law required by laws
to fill the vacancy with the mayor so it causes that that issue as well and then finally there's a drafting error we caught unrelated to the amendment this is totally on us we missed this But it says that to fill the vacancy, a majority of a quorum of the whole needs to fill the vacancy. So that means in an eight-member council, a quorum is five, which means all you need if the bill passes as is, all you need is three to fill that vacancy. So, again, it's going to be real hard on small cities and towns. The city manager and administrator
Speaker 25
6:14
form of government is going to be obviously inconsistent with other areas of law.
And then this drafting error, which is our fault, we take responsibility for that, would allow three members of the governing body to fill a vacancy where normally it would take a majority of the governing body, the remainder of the governing body. So, again, for those reasons, we would ask that you vote no on this bill. Okay. Representative Andrews, you have questions.
Chair
Unverified
6:38
You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Listen to everything that you said, Mr. Wilkinson.
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
6:48
if a member of city council, he had, he had a mayor vacancy and member city council wanted to be it, well, they'd have to, you know, write out the resignation letter immediately and then hope that the rest of their council members vote them in. Um, that would be a way. Yeah, that would
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
7:06
they just resigned their position for nothing. Right. Right.
Speaker 27
7:09
And the other problem is that the bill does allow that an interim be appointed to fill the mayor's position so the bill would allow two ways to fill the vacancy either have a special election or have
Speaker 25
7:19
it appointed by the remainder of the governing body if you choose a special election you can fill that position with an interim but this of course would not allow the city council member to fill that that vacancy either so yeah that's the only way to do it and resign and hope for the best okay seeing no
Speaker 5
7:38
further questions thank you for your testimony we have nobody else signed up speak for or against this you would you like to close for your senate amendment i'm closed and i'll make a motion do pass i have a motion do pass any discussion on that motion
Chair
Unverified
7:51
yeah when the motion to be clear is to concur in the senate amendment um any discussion on that motion seeing none all in
favor say aye all opposed no so the noes have it sorry that this Senate amendment has failed all right representative Clowney would you like to present your bill
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
8:30
Just introduce yourself for the record, and you may begin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Clowney, District 21, Fayetteville. This is a
pretty simple bill. Currently in the state of Arkansas, if you have a population of under less than 5,000, you can opt by resolution to become a city of the second class instead of a city of the first class. This ups that limit. So now, if this bill would pass, cities of 7,500 inhabitants or less would be able to opt into being a city of the second class rather than the first class.
The reason is that there are certain costs that come along with opting to be a city of the first class, and probably a majority of the cities would want to take those costs on because of the benefits that come with that classification. But there are certain cities in the state of Arkansas that cannot afford, for instance, things like a city attorney, which are required if you become a city of the first class. And so this just gives a little bit more leeway, a little bit more freedom to those cities to choose how they want to be classified. And I think also, you know, it doesn't penalize them for growing a population, which I think we all can agree is a good thing.
So that's what the bill does in a nutshell. Happy to try to answer
Speaker 21
9:44
any questions about it. Okay. Any questions from committee members? Seeing none, we don't have anybody signed up to speak for or against. Are you closed for your bill? Closed. All right. representative clown is closed for a bill what's well of the committee have a motion do pass any discussion on that motion all in favor say aye all opposed no congratulations you passed your bill thank you committee thank you mr chair
Chair
Unverified
10:09
all right we're going to move on to house bill 1790 representative mckenzie you're recognized to run your bill I believe we have an amendment on this so if you'll just introduce yourself and
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
10:26
hold up for a second we'll get that amendment passed out Rick McKenzie state representative district 7 Rogers Arkansas Simple amendment, this amendment removes language for a preemption on platforms.
bill my amendment so I make a motion to adopt
Speaker 1
11:06
we'll just give everybody a chance to look at that
Speaker 21
11:10
I agree it's pretty simple amendment all right everybody have a copy of it
We have a motion to adopt this amendment any discussion on that motion all in favor say aye opposed Congratulations, you're You have
Chair
Unverified
11:29
adopted your amendment. You may present your bill as amended not to belabor
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
11:34
the point We had some people out of the room last time
Chair
Unverified
11:39
close for the bill All right, I don't believe we have any questions from committee members We have nobody signed up to speak for or against
Speaker 21
11:48
this we're you're closed for the bill. Yes
We have a motion make a motion to pass as amended
Speaker 1
11:55
motion do passes a minute any discussion on
Chair
Unverified
11:59
that motion Yeah Representative Pilkington you're recognized for discussion on the motion.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
12:03
Thank you. I just want to say I appreciate all the work you've done Representative McKenzie I know there was some opposition and that you made this to kind of bring all the different factions together and so I know this probably isn't the bill exactly how you wanted it to be but I think it's a good step in the right direction and I hope that all those who were opposed now do their part and and vote for this bill since we've all
tried to work so diligently to bring this all together so that we can pass this and protect our cities but the same time protect our property rights or property owners so I hope the committee does the right thing here and
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
12:38
honors these agreements we've made to pass this bill I
Chair
Unverified
12:45
appreciate it thank you all right Seeing no further discussion on the motion, all in favor, aye. Aye. All opposed? No. So the ayes have it. Congratulations, you have passed your bill as amended.
All right, moving on down the list. Representative Lundstrom, I believe you have been sitting here waiting, so you're recognized. We'll start with House Bill 1879. And we have an amendment on this one, so if you'll just introduce yourself for the record, we'll get that amendment passed out, and then you can present your amendment. Actually, there are two amendments.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
13:32
One adds Senator Hammer, and the other adds a year extension, or a year to comply to the
bill. And State Representative Robin Lundstrom, District 18.
Chair
Unverified
15:15
okay I think everybody has a copy of amendment number one so if you'll start with that one amendment
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
15:29
number one add senator hammer I think that's gonna
Speaker 21
15:32
well I don't have these amendments numbered so yeah let's go with that amendment number one add senator hammer yes sir all right what's what's will of committee we have a motion to to adopt Senate or amendment
number one to add Senator hammer any discussion on that motion all in favor say aye all opposed congratulations that amendment has been adopted you are now recognized to present amendment number two
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
15:58
amendment number two allows a year to comply to the bill
Chair
Unverified
16:07
right we have a motion I have motion to adopt amendment Number two, all in favor say aye. All opposed, congratulations, you have adopted amendment number two.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
16:16
You may present your bill as amended. Thank you. This bill simply adds cities and city councils and quorum court to post the recordings of their videos of their meetings online or on their Facebook.
Basically, we have a lot of small towns that you can't get the information, and it's helpful if you have the video. So this will allow them a year to post it on Facebook, which is the reason I say Facebook is because there's no charge. And it opens up transparency so people can see what's going on in their city hall. It's a pretty straightforward deal. There have been some questions about, well, what if they don't know how to set up Facebook? My 16-year-old set up my Facebook years ago when she set up hers. This is not a difficult or heavy lift for a small town.
um what about man do we need this or that this on a stand on a book whatever but we could have video of our city council meetings now first class there's most of them already do that so this is not going to impact this now there's smaller cities it will so that's the reason we're giving them a year to figure it out um and with that i'll entertain any
Speaker 1
17:25
questions okay any questions is yes representative Pilkington you recognize for questions motion at the
Chair
Unverified
17:30
proper time okay we do have somebody sign up to speak against this bill John Wilkerson you're recognized to come to the
table and speak against John Wilkerson general counsel municipal league first
Speaker 25
17:52
of all I really appreciate Representative Lindstrom talking with me this morning. I wish time would have given me some more time to get a hold of her earlier, so I apologize if it was just now, but I appreciate
you making the amendment to add the year. The trouble we're going to have, we have 500 cities and towns, and so for the larger cities, this will not be a huge problem at all. I mean, most cities like Representative Lindstrom mentioned do this anyway. It's the violas and the strawberries that I'm really worried about, the towns of 100, 150 people or even less that are having to do this requirement the law already requires sound recordings to
Speaker 27
18:26
be kept for a year and so we think that that's already in the law already allowed and we have seen cities not comply with that
no excuse for not complying with the law at all but it does it has bred lawsuits of course again that is a law they should have complied with it and they didn't and that's that's not their it's not anybody's fault but their own this additional requirement to have to video record one then place on the website, too, for a duration that I think is undefined in the bill. It's one thing I wanted to chat with. We mentioned really
Speaker 25
18:58
briefly earlier when we talked, but this is going to be really hard for small cities and towns, very, very hard for small cities and towns. We do appreciate the
one year, but we're very concerned that this is going to be unworkable for a lot of small cities and towns and breed unwitting or really unintentional violations of the law. So from from our perspective we would ask that you vote no because it's just going to be too hard for small
Chair
Unverified
19:25
cities and towns. We do have a question. Representative Hudson, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
19:32
Representative Lindstrom has made it pretty clear that all they have to do is
put a phone on. I mean, they don't even have to have a holder. They could have somebody literally holding their phone up to comply with this. I'm having a little difficulty understanding what's so difficult about this for these towns i
Speaker 79
19:50
mean what's the issue you'd be very surprised about the the town that the
Speaker 25
19:55
the age is an issue a lot of cities have very very elderly folks that are not not very savvy computer wise i understand it's not that hard for you or i really in this room but i can foresee there being issues with this i it will there will be issues whether there'll
be a ton of issues i'm not going to say the sky is going to fall i'm not going to be that person obviously but there are going to be issues with this i know that for certain but we do appreciate the year very very much and by the way it's not just the recording it's the putting it on the on the website which we don't have websites but it does allow for social media pages that are pages that are created or maintained i do have a i do i am worried how long they have to be on there if it's the year that's
Speaker 27
20:35
one thing but what if they take it off after five years is that going be a violation? I don't know. That's another question that I have. Okay. Representative
Speaker 82
20:44
Mike Linder, you're recognized for questions. Thank you, Chairman. Thank
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
20:49
you for being here. So I echo Representative Hudson's questions. I feel like this is a really small lift for towns. I understand that not everyone is as educated, but I also think with the year that Representative Lundstrom is giving that it actually gives the Municipal League an opportunity to come in and help those towns who may not have a Facebook page yet or to help educate the person in charge of that Facebook page how to load a video up. So I think it gives plenty of time for the help that they need in order to make it happen. So am I misunderstanding something?
Speaker 25
21:16
I think I would hope, I'd ask you to appreciate the difficulty it is to educate 500 cities and towns. It is incredibly difficult. We have done things like during the opioid settlement to try to get every city to sign on to the opioid settlement. The massive lift it takes to even get, I think we got 587 was our final tally. It is monumental lifts to get this sort of education done for cities and towns and to let them know exactly how to set up a Facebook. I don't know what we can manage because we do a lot of other things, of course.
So you're not wrong in the sense that there is education possibilities, but our person power is somewhat limited as well.
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
21:57
Follow-up, Chairman? So just real quick, how many of the towns that you're – you said 500 cities and towns. how many of those do you think will actually have an issue with getting this done like
Speaker 79
22:12
ballpark percentage or number ballpark percentage you may scoff
Speaker 25
22:15
at the 40 but it's probably close to 40 percent because you know we're the largest cities there's 35 or 40 largest cities and the rest are
very very small and so once you get down below maybe across it about you know 2,500 people it there's a lot below the 2,500 threshold. I think the second class cities and towns, I think there's 260 cities, cities, the second class and incorporated towns. So it's, it's a lot. So I would venture to say be 40% would have somewhat, somewhat, not difficulty in getting it done. I don't, again, I'm not saying the sky is falling because they can get it done, but 200 are going to have, we're a small town. How do we do this questions? And of those 40%, maybe a hundred,
I think would have somewhat substantial problem. And then we have the issue of getting this information out there it's not as easy as you would think either so 20 i think is what i'd say okay thank you all right representative pilkington you're recognized uh
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
23:10
hi mr wilkinson would you not agree that if a mayor who is managing a city cannot operate a phone properly maybe that mayor should not
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
23:16
be operating and running the city no i wouldn't agree with that no appreciate that Representative Rye, you're recognized.
Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me ask you this, John. Do you think the basic problem in here, you probably got two, but the basic problem is probably people that are in positions of leadership in our smaller towns that are older folks. Yes. And they probably don't know a lot about computers. Yes. And they may have a big problem getting this done. Is
Chair
Unverified
23:50
that? Yes. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Andrews, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
23:57
I'm just kind of curious, do you know of any city halls that are across the 500-some-odd town cities that don't have cell service or Internet access at all? I've been to
Speaker 25
24:07
a few in my day when I was litigating for cities and towns, traveling out there. It was difficult to
Speaker 75
24:12
get cell service. So, yes, that's another issue that I've seen across the state. Okay, seeing no
Speaker 1
24:20
further questions, thank you for your testimony. We do have one other
Chair
Unverified
24:23
person that I think wants to speak against. If you want to come to the table and introduce yourself, you're recognized.
Speaker 99
24:37
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Josh Curtis, Association of
Speaker 100
24:40
Counties. Dennis Thornton, Hot Springs County
Speaker 101
24:44
Judge. I'd first like to say Representative Lundstrom is always great to work with. She amended out a few things, but I told her we still might not be great with the bill. We've heard from small counties in South Arkansas, in the Delta, that just are opposed to this. A lot of counties do do this. I know Representative Lundstrom's County does video record, stream it, make it so accessible.
But it was a local initiative. The county judge or the quorum court supported to do that. It came from the constituents, and that's how it came about. We advocate for this, but we represent all county judges, all counties. If my county, my county does this in Saline County, but we represent all county judges, and Judge Thornton's probably got a few other things to say as well. Thank you for
Speaker 103
25:33
allowing me to speak this morning.
I do see it as a burden to counties. I think, as Mr. Curtis said, that to some of our smaller counties, it could be a true burden. It's an unfunded mandate. I know it sounds good in principle, but someone has got to man something. And if you're putting it on Facebook, I think as elected officials here today, we all know the scrutiny of Facebook,
that people that don't don't understand so the best method would be to have a web page well if you've looked into web pages uh quite expensive uh a lot of small counties out there that have eight or nine thousand people that struggle to make payroll literally let alone have to have a web page or something of that manner so and i will speak for the county clerk and for the county judge office as well um hey we don't lift our head up all day and this is just another burden
placed upon county judges and county clerks uh to take care of another situation so i would ask
Speaker 104
26:50
that you vote no okay any questions from committee members
Speaker 1
26:56
seeing none thank you for your testimony i like your jacket mr chair thank you thank y'all all right we have nobody else signed up to speak for or against Representative Lundstrom, would you like to close for your bill? Yes, and
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
27:09
thank you. First of all, I don't agree that this is going to be difficult. We're giving them a year.
Facebook is free. Other websites are free. I do think some of them will need help. That's where they can call their local church, their local high school, the government class, the journalism class, the speech class. There is help out there. I'm not asking the county judge to handle this all by himself. I think this is part of getting somebody else to help out. um it's not a difficult lift there are going to have to be some rules i'm sure that's part of working out any bill once it's passed this bill allows transparency it also gives our cities and
counties a chance to say did you see the footage this is what actually happened press can't cover every single county meeting every single city council meeting but they can go watch it on facebook and keep up with what's going on so with that i would appreciate a good vote all right representative lundstrom's
Chair
Unverified
28:04
closed for a bill what's the will of committee we have a motion do pass as amended as
Speaker 21
28:12
amended all right thank you um any discussion on that motion do pass as amended seeing none all in favor say aye all opposed no so ayes have it
Chair
Unverified
28:23
congratulations you have passed your bill as amended thank you colleagues thank you for your time committee without objection we're going to take a couple out of order representative Lundstrom we'll just keep you at the table and
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
28:38
let you run House Bill 1911 if you're ready thank you I do have
Chair
Unverified
28:41
someone to come up and speak with me may I bring him up yes you'll just take a seat and introduce yourself for the
Speaker 111
28:57
record y'all may begin your presentation. Russell Hill, Washington County Assessor. Thank you
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
29:03
colleagues. I want to go off script a little bit. Every single year we go through this lovely kabuki dance and it's basically commercial property assessment form my husband calls it the stupid form no offense to anybody but what happens is you have to list your 20 year old desk that you paid taxes on you have to list and here's a just a funny list this morning your old 20 year old desk your chairs your lamps your pictures your art or whatever's hanging on the wall paper clips if you're a barber you have to list your comb and
that blue stuff that's in there to keep your comb clean but all of that you turn it in and somebody in the county either has to verify it stamp it approved it's a waste of time we never ask what is the cost to a business now there is an alternative and a lot of the larger businesses pay this and that's a dollar 25 a square foot not to fill out the form my request would be we remove this form completely the other issue that you have we pay taxes on all this stuff that we continue
to report year after year after year when is enough enough this needs to be worked this needs this is an issue that it's way overdue and with that i would like to have the assessor talk about it russell hill
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
30:27
um well i'm just here to kind of answer so a little bit the way that our office works and and uh we call them business renditions uh i remember before i was assessor i own a freight brokerage company I got a little card in the mail at that time our office was located in Benton
County and I get this card from Bear Chaney who's the assessor first thought was like what is what okay what is this I'm a new business owner uh who names their kid Bear what am I supposed to do you know but uh but you do go through this rendition now that I'm in the in the office in the business and doing this um um the first year it can be a little overwhelming um because you do require to list everything typically after that you just manage that list over the years we
got rid of this we added this and so it is a very detailed uh description that is in order for the assessors to be as accurate as possible at the end of the day we just want to be accurate in what we're doing. Uh, so it's a little extensive on that side of it. Um, again, we just follow the laws. We're not writing the laws. Uh, there are a number of businesses that do not turn in a rendition that does create extra work on the part of the assessor. We actually have teams that go out and we look, we have to go out and, and, uh, look for businesses who haven't assessed.
Um, there's a software program that you can use that will you pull in it and it has most common businesses and it will list those items that that particular business would have say if you had a beauty salon or a barber shop or a speedy mart or a restaurant or dog you know there's so many thousands of these businesses and they each have their own different equipments furnitures and fixtures that are required to be placed on there if they don't so we we will offer those
in our office to business owners to help guide them so they don't have they go oh I need to add that I didn't know I needed that you know and so it's it's a learning curve for a business owner and that first year can be a little frustrating then after that you just manage it each year of what you have if a business doesn't fill out a business rendition then we are what we do what is called force assessment and so we will look at the business we will pull up the square footage
of the size of that business and then the Arkansas assessment coordination department has some guidelines for us on if it's this type of business it would the value of that business would be so much per square foot and each business would have an amount allotted to it and so we're guessing at that point when when they don't turn in a rendition so it's just kind of a guess that we're to try to be within the ballpark to help handle the tax burden
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
33:15
for the entire jurisdiction so that's that's pretty much how it works all right representative rye you're recognized for
questions yes sir thank you mr chair russell let me ask
you this should this bill become law what will the process be from that point forward sir uh from
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
33:34
that point well it would then businesses would not be required to turn in a rendition so then it would be up to the assessor to force assess all of these businesses and and i would imagine in my office what i would do is what we currently do with businesses that don't turn that in and we would do we would apply the square foot uh price to that and uh typically when we do that we find out a lot of times that
we're on the high side of that as opposed to you know as being accurate so our accuracy is going to be off more uh it might be a relief to the business owner that they don't have to fill it out and they might not mind paying a little bit more uh but we do have to track them down uh that creates a little bit more work on our side of things and then force assessing it we're guessing at what it would be thank you sir all right representative hall you're
recognized for questions thank you mr chair uh so i own a storage facility business and and uh we have a hundred
thousand square feet so you're talking about adding a dollar 25 a square foot to that i mean so wouldn't necessarily be a
dollar 25 it would yeah and again it would be furnitures fixtures and equipment the real estate is a completely different other buildings are different yeah buildings are yeah real property is different this what about people that
own like car washes and stuff like that that has you know they have to go in there and they always have their equipment on there and there's soaps and chemicals correct yes and you know nobody knows how many gallons of soap you have yeah you do you do a yearly average you know yeah yeah you do you apply a yearly
average to that okay so so will you still be able to do it the old style or with this bill here you're going to change it out to a dollar 25 a
Speaker 113
35:18
square foot well it wouldn't be a dollar 25 it would depend a
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
35:22
dollar 25 well that was just an example yeah it wasn't an exact so uh we have recommendations from the state department that on a car wash it would be this many square feet or this size of a car wash then it would have uh and a value attributed to that and you would multiply
that okay i just didn't want uh you know my people to get a tax increase and me uh you
understand oh yeah yeah and and typically when we force assess a lot of times that the owners do come in and we sit down with them and we walk them through that rendition and help them in or when we send out a card we'll send out a card saying hey it's you know a reminder you need to assess your business are you still in business i mean that would be the other thing too we could be forced assessing businesses that aren't in business anymore and then they're fighting with the
collector over a bill that they shouldn't even have but we didn't know that because we were never notified that
they weren't so it really kind of puts us in the
Speaker 85
36:19
dark okay representative Andrews you recognize for questions thank
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
36:21
you this is a little off topic but at what point do we have a conversation of the ridiculousness of taxing soap and personal property I mean taxation is theft isn't it representative Andrews I couldn't agree with you more
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
36:35
which is why I brought this bill and I'm not looking for if if y'all want to pull it down or push it forward I'm fine with that
but we need to have a discussion about when do we let businesses off the mat we charge them property tax we charge them taxes on their car then we ask them to either fill out this form if they want to avoid having the assessor come in and that's no offense the assessor they try to be accurate they're not trying to be the bad guys but at what point do we let businesses off the mat and we also have corporate income taxes so at some point the words stop need to come out of our lips
or our customers our taxpayers are going to look at us and say stop so we either need to stop doing some of these forms maybe we need to make it so the assessors don't have to do that and there's an alternative way or we could just stop all together which would probably be the best way to do it is stop all together pay your income tax pay your the tax on your vehicles you pay taxes on the chair that you buy on i even talked to a business owner and not this assessor but in another county they actually came in and counted the toilet paper
that's this has gotten way out of hand and and so much more burdensome than it needs to be so i'm committed to find a way to make this thing work if the answer is no and stop that's an okay answer by
me so i guess that's a long and short question answer
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
38:06
to your question okay representative rye you're recognized thank you mr chairman you know russell one other thing that we have
to think about here is we really don't have any figures of how much money is actually being produced
by this type property and you need we need to know that but at the same time we need to think about the funding formula for the schools I mean this is a big factor for our schools and if if you lost that top revenue you could be in real trouble you'd have to figure out a way to replace it that's for
Speaker 125
38:42
sure yeah to do to do away with that you would definitely
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
38:46
need to have a income or you'd have to do an adjustment somehow whether whether that be increased millage rates
or that's for you guys to figure out i'm just here to tell you the process and what we do typically when someone turns in or if we force assess them to if they don't agree with that we usually can sit down with them at that time and if there is a disagreement they can they can go before the board of equalization and uh appeal the value that we put on that business thank you thank you mr chair all right seeing no further questions we do
Speaker 21
39:15
have a couple people signed up to speak against we'll start with the shannon sharp thank you um if i could just
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
39:23
with the chair's pleasure just to speed things up i'd like to pull this bill and work on it just a little bit i realize that we have don't have a lot of time left in session but if i could just stop there and say let's hold off and try to hear what people's concerns are and and close for the bill and then pull it okay yeah um trying to think
Chair
Unverified
39:49
about the best way to handle that because we do have people well i don't think these people necessarily travel just for this bill so we'll
we'll allow that to happen if you want to pull your bill without objection we'll we'll let you pull your bill down and i will give you this list people who signed up if you will get with them work with them on their objections see if y'all can work
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
40:10
through that that'd be great thank you thank you chairman um colleagues this bill will not go away um i think it's important it may not happen this session but at some point we need to let businesses off the mat and find a better way to help them and not the question always seems to be oh we're going to hurt somebody else's budget
but we never ask about the business's budget we never ask about the business's time we never ask about the cost of doing this inventory those are questions we need to ask and i thank you
Chair
Unverified
40:42
for your time all right thank you for that so house bill 1912 are you do you still want to run that or do you want to pull? Yes, sir. We do have a fiscal impact statement on this one. I'm assuming that's
all on your desk already. So you were recognized to present House Bill 1912. House
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
41:04
Bill 1912 is simply taking the assessed value, which currently is
20%, which is the cap, and taking it down to 15%. So when you buy a house or say the house is $300,000, right now you would times that by twenty percent and then by the and that's sixty thousand dollars so that's your assessed value and then you would times it again by your millage rate and that's what your property taxes would be what has happened is property taxes
have gone through the roof this bill simply shaves off the peaks and I want to say this simply shaves off the peaks every single year your personal property tax is going to go up five percent regardless it's going to go up ten percent for everything else you're going to have an appraisal every four years so this is just simply like i said taking it down a notch we've had property tax increases in every county now some of the smaller counties in south arkansas they may have only been 10 or 20 or 30 percent
in northwest arkansas and some of the more populated areas the property taxes have gone up sometimes up to 100% averaging out around 70%. So at what point do we let the taxpayer off the mat and give them a little bit of a break? This does that. I'd like for Mr. Hill to answer a few questions. He has been extremely patient with me when I have asked numerous questions multiple times each because it's such a difficult concept for the taxpayer to completely understand.
but they see the end of the bill and the end of the bill is making them angry if you've ever been on the
other end of those phone calls where property taxes have gone up you
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
42:53
know what I'm talking about with that I'll turn it over to Mr. Hill what we've experienced in Washington County we did a reappraisal in 2020 it was a five-year cycle at that time we saw a fit on average residential properties went up 50 percent in value so that triggered a three-year cycle over that three-year period which was 2023 residential homes went up another 70 percent
so over the last you know eight years total but last two reappraisal cycles which is five years we've seen 120 percent increase in home values the market is done things we've never seen in the history of of our county ever um so that did create a rather large number of board of equalization appointments in the hundreds that we would have most people coming in we had their properties valued lower than what they paid for it um and so we had a number of them that really
weren't there to argue the value but so the way that the system where amendment 79 is great what you did in 2000 was wonderful for current property owners it protects them starting with the homestead credit and then it applies on your homestead primary residence during the event of a runaway market which we i think have experienced statewide more so in some areas than others it protects that current property owner by limiting. So for example, your house went up
70% in value over that reappraisal cycle. You're only going up 5% a year. So it would take you 14 years to reach the full assessed value for just the 2023 reappraisal cycle. Myself currently, i will freeze before i hit that full value and i've got 13 years before i hit 65 i will freeze before i hit that full value of 2023 and i still have 2020 in play i haven't even hit the full
2020 value so amendment 79 does a great job where where the pressure comes in is when that property sells and then goes to full value uh in in washington i can't speak for every county there's other counties that haven't seen the increases like we have but again like I said we've had people coming in not arguing their value you're going I want to know why my property tax bill went up two thousand four thousand dollars in one case we had one I mean
it was an expensive house but it went up six thousand dollars it almost it went from seven thousand to thirteen thousand
dollars in one year so that's
that's the pressure that we're up against with with the property values increasing. Um, I don't anticipate the market to continue to do this. Um, our next reappraisal will be in 2027 and I'll be very excited to see what happens. I don't think we're going to go down, but, uh, I really hope we don't see another 70% increase. Uh, I don't think the bark, the market can bear it and it will eventually correct itself. Um, so that's just, that's where
we find ourself um what she is issuing here um now this would be from a 20 percent now you got to remember uh this is a 20 is the maximum and this also applies to businesses and personal property so your vehicles as well vehicles are assessed every year uh vehicles tip typically We depreciate. So, you know, you buy them at the top and then each year we're lowering that value according to NADA and what the market is doing and what those cars are selling for.
And we do an overall average on that. So those are going to depreciate businesses, furnitures and fixtures. They all have their own depreciation schedule as well. They're just everything has a life. A computer has a six year life or a five year life. Certain things have different lifespans. And so we depreciate those. this would basically take everything that we value and drop everything 5%. So, I mean, it would be devastating as far as the revenue comes in.
And I guess as far as the schools are concerned, I guess the state would have to pick up whatever
that difference is. I don't know what the financial impact would be, but I imagine it would be pretty
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
47:36
substantial. Representative Vrya, you recognize the question? Yes, sir. Russell, you know, we really
don't have a lot of play with this. Market value, that's the law.
Speaker 143
47:50
Isn't that right? Correct, yeah. We have to
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
47:53
be within a certain range. So when it really gets right down to it, Russell, you're actually just valuing property. You're not creating a tax bill. the the bill that comes out is something that's actually done after the valuation is performed so by law you guys have got to make sure that that that property is valued correct yeah yeah we have to we have
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
48:17
to be within a range we can be anywhere from 10 below or 10 above as an elected official
i assure you every assessor does not like to be above we like to be below i try to get in as low as i can and still still pass um uh still pass my grading for that and so yeah so we do but yeah we just take all the information all that data we crunch it and
then we just hold up a mirror and we just say this is what the market's doing these are what the values
are representative hall you're recognized for questions thank you mr chair uh with the
5% reduction with the increase of values wouldn't that offset the 5% reduction pretty easily I mean if you if you've said that the values in the last few years have went up to 70% you know why wouldn't that more than take up the slack of reducing the the 5% that that this bill
calls for going from 20 to 15% correct so for
example she gave a $300,000 home that that multiplier is you know 300,000 times 20%, what was your number on that? 60,000. So the full assessed value would be 60,000.
You multiply it by 15%, you're going to have a lower number. And so that would be the max that anybody would pay. So there'd be a number of people, it wouldn't affect me. I'm so far below 20 percent because of amendment 79 you know it would take a long time for that now it would affect me immediately on my
vehicles or my business i would see a reduction in that because you're you're lowering that multiplier with the with the value that we have attributed to that
property so you're going to see a reduction in the property taxes market value is going to be the market value but
it also help out for like our children that go buy a house correct because they're buying a new house or somebody moving in from out of state or like me my house burnt so now I'm not living in the same house you know so my freeze is over or whatever you call it and so when I build my new house back you know I'm going to all of a sudden be readjusted up you know to the top rate you know so I just think the value increase of land and and housing the last
few years would be more than offset the five percent reduction in the question in
Chair
Unverified
50:45
there wouldn't you agree wouldn't you agree yes all right sorry thank you seeing though seeing no further questions from committee
Speaker 21
50:51
members we do have two people signed up to speak against um we're going to ask if y'all want to come up together lindsey french and monavance if y'all come up all
Speaker 5
51:03
right i figured you did you can slide over and get along yes
Speaker 1
51:11
yeah y'all just introduce yourselves for the record y'all may begin your testimony
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
51:15
thank you mr chair lindsey french association of arkansas counties mona vance clark county assessor um first i'd like to lead off that the assessors association is unanimously opposed to this bill I just want to speak briefly on what this bill does and does not do. There has been a lot of talk about the exponential growth and unprecedented growth in northwest Arkansas
and the sticker shock when someone sells a property and they buy another one that's at full value. This bill does not affect that. If someone sells a property that is frozen and they buy a new house, it's still going to go up to full value. the relief that they're going to get is that they'll pay a 15% rate on it on that full value instead of a 20%. The number 5% has been thrown around a lot because we're lowering the taxation rate from 20% to 15%, but that is a 25% cut in property tax revenues. This bill would cut
all property tax revenues, real and personal, by one quarter. 80% of that goes to fund your local public schools. So I think there's some confusion about what this bill attempts to do or is meant to address and what it actually does. And I have reached out to the state and confirmed they agree with my analysis on that. And with that, I'll answer any questions or hand it over to Mona. Mona, Ms. Vance, do you have anything to add? Okay. The biggest issue that I have with
Speaker 153
52:58
this bill is we all want everyone to benefit from not paying taxes as high as they are because we do feel like we're taxed to death the assessor's job is hard as enough as it is so when you come in and we're going to treat people differently how are we going to tell everybody we're treating everybody equal whenever someone purchased a home last year they're
Speaker 156
53:17
going to have a different set of rules versus somebody that purchased a home this year the the
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
53:28
other thing I would like to add
is we have been working with representative lundstrom and and we enjoy working with her and we do understand the frustration with property taxes and the fact that you know maybe they haven't been looked at in several years certainly since some of you all have joined and we would certainly support support an interim study getting together studying this over two years we just think it is too big and too important an issue to throw something last minute that will not actually address the issues but will have a detrimental effect on the property tax revenues
Speaker 1
54:03
all right thank you for that testimony we see no one no questions from committee members
Speaker 21
54:10
appreciate it um we have no one else signed up to speak for or against this bill representative lunchroom would you
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
54:19
like to close for your bill um first of all this is not a heavy lift when it comes to applying this bill. The 20% changes to 15%. That's not a heavy lift. Also, every single year, as Mr. Hill pointed out, takes 14 years to get to full assessed value. If I could offer you
a product that guaranteed you a 5% increase every year, and then every four years you'd reappraise and it would go up again, if I could guarantee your product that would give you 10% every year and it would be reappraised every four years and the amount would again go up, there would be a line out the door in me selling that product, giving people a guaranteed rate. We have the taxpayers to listen to. They have had enough. We need to find a way, and this is a start, to maybe capping.
they're going to always be increases with property taxes because there's always increases with our needs but we also can cut spending that never seems to be a problem we expect our taxpayers to cut spending and pay their bill but we never cut the spending with their money this is a chance to cut the spending with their money and be respectful of their money and still pay our bills that need to be paid and with that i would appreciate a good vote all right representative
Chair
Unverified
55:40
Lundstrom is closed for bill what's the will of committee have a motion do pass
any discussion on that motion seeing none all in favor say aye all opposed to no no so the nose have I'm sorry your bills well thank you colleagues thank you for your time representative Johnson are you ready for house bill 1416 no you've been waiting for a little bit you'll introduce yourself for the record you may begin your presentation Representative Lee Johnson district 47 you're recognized thank you mr. chairman committee
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
56:32
there is a law already in existence on the books that provides for a mechanism for volunteer fire departments to assess their fire dues in conjunction with property tax. So a lot of these volunteer rural fire departments have trouble collecting their dues from folks. And so we came up with this law some time ago to allow them to petition the quorum court to have the fire dues assessed at the same time they're assessing the property tax. And that's resulted in a great uptick in fire dues collection for our volunteer fire departments, which is a critical part of our
fire infrastructure in arkansas i think you you may know that over 80 of arkansas is protected by true volunteer fire departments when we created that law there's was a loophole that we're trying to correct in this bill there are certain city fire departments volunteer city fire departments in small cities that have a fire district that extends outside the city limits and so i have several of those small communities in my district and one of them who came to me with this issue as
a volunteer fire department leader and said hey you know there needs to be a way for us to do the same thing the county folks do if we have county people outside the city limits we'd like to be able to go and petition the quorum court to collect fire dues on those people we're protecting they were excluded from that because they're city volunteer and so this language here is just empowering a city volunteer department that has jurisdiction outside of city limits to go to the quorum court and have that same right to petition that other rural volunteer fire departments have.
It would just be for the individuals that were in the county region, not in the city. The city's already protected as part of the essential service and I'd be happy to answer any
Chair
Unverified
58:21
questions on the bill. Okay, any questions from committee members? Seeing none, we have nobody signed up to speak for or against this bill would you like
Speaker 21
58:30
to close your bill close from bill thank you mr. chairman representative johnson's closed for his bill as well the committee have a motion do pass any discussion on the motion all in favor
say aye all opposed congratulations you thank you committee thank you mr. chairman appreciate it committee we've got representative gas away chairing state agencies that all is on his way down here to run a bill i think that one might take a minute but we do have somebody signed up to speak
Chair
Unverified
59:05
on that one so if if no no you're not that fortunate representative pilkington
Speaker 154
59:13
all right if if we'll go into just a two-minute recess give him a chance to get down here Thank you.
Unknown speaker
59:54
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Speaker 154
1:01:54
okay we're going to go back in we're
Chair
Unverified
1:02:08
back in from our short recess representative gazaway you are recognized to
Representative Jimmy Gazaway
Unverified
1:02:14
present house bill 1872 thank you mr. chair committee state representative Jimmy Gazaway district 31 house bill 1872 is It is a bill that will seek to help our sheriffs in the recoupment of some of their costs when they serve process.
We had a bill proposal, some of you may recall, I kind of talked about earlier this session where we were proposing to raise the fees because the fees for service of process by our sheriffs have not been raised in over, I think it's been 25 years. So, but that had, there was some opposition to that, that we didn't want to raise any fees. And so understanding that we filed the bill this way. The point is, you know, the sheriff serves process. So if you have a lawsuit, if you have subpoenas, summonses, writs of possession, writs of execution, lots of types of different documents, the sheriff can serve those.
They don't have to. lot of people use process servers I don't even use the sheriff anymore I unless it's required by statute and some documents are required to be served by statute by the sheriff but many others can be served by private process server and quite frankly I use a private process server the rates that are currently in statute that sheriffs can charge are not even up to par with what private process servers charge but private process servers not only charge more but they also charge per attempt of service and so I'll just give you an
example I had a case a guardianship case where we had to get someone served in Alabama this was just about a month ago and paid the private process server over four hundred dollars and I think he charged a hundred dollars an attempt and he had to go out four times trying to serve this person at their house they weren't there then somebody answered the door and said they didn't live there then he had to contact the assessor and determine that they do in fact live there and then he went out again and the guy wouldn't accept it but and then he went out again and finally got him my client had to pay over four hundred dollars so this is not an uncommon thing unfortunately and
our sheriffs uh have to spend the time they they're taking their vehicles out there they're spending their gas they're putting miles on their vehicle they're going out trying to serve these documents they're taking time away from what their real legitimate job is which is crime fighting and keeping our communities safe to go serve documents and they're not getting reimbursed at an appropriate level and quite frankly we should have increased the fee if you want to know the truth but this bill doesn't do that all this bill does is says that if they have to go out more than one time
that they can get paid per attempt as opposed to just like private process servers do because every time they have to make a trip out somewhere they're spending gas in their vehicle they're putting miles on their vehicle they're taking time away from what they're doing and they shouldn't have to go out and make 10 trips and get paid 30 dollars so i will say this is at no cost to the state this is private litigants that are using our courts who are paying these fees so it's only it's only a user fee it's not like everyone in the state pays these fees it's only the people that
actually use the sheriff's office office to serve documents so with that i'm happy to answer any questions all right any questions from committee members
Speaker 21
1:05:34
seeing none we have no one signed up to speak for or against this bill anyone
Chair
Unverified
1:05:39
in the audience want to speak for or against seeing none representative gasway would you like to close for your bill
Representative Jimmy Gazaway
Unverified
1:05:46
i'm closed for the bill sheriff's association supports the bill i should say um this would be a big help to them their county budgets are hurting already and uh they're spending a lot of money and this stuff hadn't been
increased in over 25 years this would be a big help to them i know they'd appreciate it so with that i'm closed and would appreciate
Speaker 21
1:06:06
a good vote all right representative gasaway is closed for his bill what's well the committee have a motion do pass any discussion on the motion all in favor say aye all opposed no congratulations you have passed your bill thank you mr chairman
Chair
Unverified
1:06:20
thank you committee. Representative Pilkington, we will now pick up Senate Bill 322 if you would like to do that.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:06:35
Senate Bill 322, if you'll give them just a minute to uh representative aaron
Speaker 174
1:07:04
pilkington district 45 johnson pope county uh james walden uh president of the uh arkansas chapter of the american planning association
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:07:08
all right you're recognized thank you uh today i present senate bill 322 uh
an act to amend the concerning construction development to allow third parties to perform plans reviews and site inspections for other purposes as we know in building time is money and so we found that one of the ways to help speed up the timeline was allowing third parties private professionals being a professional engineer as defined in code a registered architect that's fun code or a person
licensed certified or registered by the applicant agency or body to conduct type plan review or inspection covered under
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:07:45
this section so essentially we're just allowing third parties to that are licensed in some way to come and do these inspections and i'll turn it
Speaker 174
1:07:56
over to my witness to expand on that a little bit yeah this is um i would say this is particularly an issue within rural areas i deal with a lot of communities where they have problems getting staffing for building inspectors for folks that do that do plan review and so a lot of times
there's really not compliance that that occurs in those locations so this would provide an opportunity for an applicant to bring their own inspector or bring their own plan review associated with it that I think would be something that would help with that that compliance issue that we see in so many rural communities where they really just don't know how to respond when someone says I'm wanting to build a subdivision or I'm wanting to build an apartment complex and
they really just don't have the the professionals that that deal with that particular issue this is also something we understand that the professionals that deal with this type of work It's relatively new in Arkansas. There's not really an existing profession base for this type of thing, and so this is being pursued in an effort to kind of cultivate and create a market for that to allow that to exist.
Speaker 1
1:09:20
All right, seeing no questions from committee members.
Chair
Unverified
1:09:25
Okay, we do have some questions. Representative
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:09:28
Walnut, you're recognized. Okay, so if I understand that this is an effort to alleviate some of the onerous requirements as far as meeting these planning, I mean, that's the effort here, right? Yes,
Speaker 177
1:09:44
yes, sir, yes. Okay. To speak to that a little bit more
Speaker 174
1:09:49
directly, there are some instances where if someone is working in a community
and there are some relatively very fast-growing communities where there's a level of dysfunction in the way that things operate at times, and sometimes developers have had difficulty in those particular communities. We don't necessarily see that this would be utilized everywhere. It is kind of a difficult process, but in those places where it would be better to have a third-party inspector or a third-party plan reviewer we see that being utilized okay i'm still good mr chair
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:10:30
so i'm assuming there's a cost associated with hiring this third party
Speaker 174
1:10:36
yes that that cost would be borne by the by the uh the applicant if if if the city asserts that they they can conduct the plan review within the told period of time then it is on the applicant to hire the third-party inspector if the city says we can't conduct the plan review within the within the the told time that's within the bill uh then they can ask the city to to hire that third party uh plan reviewer
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:11:04
inspector okay can you point me to that in the bill please yes and then i'll yield for a second
Speaker 177
1:11:24
so if you go to page three line 23 um on that on the third
Speaker 178
1:11:32
page thank you so it's two ai and and uh two and b1 or bi
Speaker 21
1:11:37
okay we're going to give you a little time to digest that and move on to representative mccullough and we'll
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
1:11:47
come back to you represent mccullough you're recognized thank you mr chair So could this law lead to conflicts of interest if you hire inspectors that might
Speaker 177
1:11:57
have financial ties to some of these projects? So the person, the individual that is hired
Speaker 174
1:12:03
can't be associated with the project. So in that respect, they're not.
Certainly there are relationships within the development community, but there
Speaker 192
1:12:11
is some level of protection that is built into the bill to deal with that. Okay, seeing no
Chair
Unverified
1:12:21
further questions, Representative Womack, did you need to, yeah, okay, you were recognized. I'm just slow, read slow, but I'm not finding that. So I'm
Speaker 194
1:12:30
sorry to slow this down. No, you're fine. You're fine.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:12:34
All right. So you're on page three, line 23 at the local government official determines that the person
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:12:39
to employ or contract by the local government cannot provide action by plan review within the time required. Is that, are you there at that point?
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:12:51
Mm-hmm. Okay. you remind me of the question sorry i'm um who bears the cost of this and and or can is the city required to reimburse if they can't do the job they're
Speaker 178
1:13:01
already texting people to do so in the instance if the if the if the municipality can't complete the the they
Speaker 174
1:13:08
can't assert that they can complete the plan review within the required period of time then the applicant can request
that the the the city or the municipality pay the cost of the the the plan review in that instance is is there otherwise
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
1:13:22
is there a requirement for them to do it though or because they just can request it so they can request and the city can go no
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:13:32
yeah you look on page four it says local government officials shall refund all regulatory uh fees for the request for the permit so speaking of that they i mean you could put in that request that they refund
Speaker 178
1:13:44
those fees is that correct well Well, and I realize this is very complicated.
It just says that they may request it in that instance. It is not necessarily required that the local government do that. In all other cases, it's going to be the applicant that is bearing the cost of it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, if
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:14:05
you look on that next page 4, line 7, if the applicant elects to retain the service
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:14:09
of a private professional provider, the applicant shall bear all the full responsibility and of expenses of the private professional provider any records or fees associated with the request for permit
Chair
Unverified
1:14:22
okay seeing no further questions we do have one person
signed up to speak against this Curtis Ritchie if
Speaker 21
1:14:28
you would like to come to the table introduce yourself for the record you may begin
Speaker 200
1:14:51
I'm Curtis Ritchie with the City of Little Rock Planning and Development, and I'm the
guy who's in charge of every building permit that comes through our city. And I will tell you that this is extremely cumbersome. going to have to with all the notifications that are supposed to be made okay we're supposed to notify you and within five days and then we're supposed to wait on a notification within three days that's a time frame that in a process we're trying to speed up we've just added eight days
to our review okay we issue about half of our permits in eight days okay so so you're slowing us down we have city ordinance that says we can't look at a project until they've paid the review fee okay and so we're waiting eight days and then if somebody comes in and says well we're going to do a third party review what they're actually telling you is they're going to try to do something
that's impossible okay there's not a firm anywhere that's doing a conclusive third party review they do not exist okay i can go find me an architect and some really good ones and they come to me on a daily basis okay big firms I talk to people in big firms the biggest firms in Arkansas and they will come to me and ask me to interpret code for them every single day
because what they're involved in is all of the minutiae of a building okay and that's what 95 percent of their training is. The code book, it changes every few years. We're on a six-year cycle most of the time. And what a code professional's job is, what my job is, is to stay up to date on what that code says. And the professionals in our society rely on us to tell them what the code says
in many, many, many instances. When I tell you it's every day, I mean it's multiple times every single day and an architect will come to my office and sit down and say let's go over something and and see and how do I get to what I want to do and so we're going to try to ask a third party to come in and review something and then we're going to add mechanical electrical and plumbing reviews they don't work for architects okay these are people who are not with an architect firm an architect these days they are not um employing civil engineers all right they're not employing
people who understand what city regulations are what are our zoning requirements what are our civil requirements with our master street plan and and they don't employ people with who know how to that we're going to require a driveway to be there's a lot of things in here that nobody can do okay there's a reason that we have a building down here that has 40 people working in it who are trained to look at each individual piece and part of a building permit in in it was stated in
the senate and the introduction of this bill that this bill was that a bill similar to this was adopted in atlanta in in georgia okay and so i'm not somebody who just says okay it was in georgia it must be great i looked it up and it is indeed it was adopted in georgia in 2020 okay i called the city of atlanta the biggest municipality there and the city of atlanta says
we do not do third party reviews there is no one who can do a third party review so we're trying to send people off into an abyss that's impossible to do something to speed up a process and we're going to slow it down okay there's at the end after somebody does a third party review at the end they hand the responsibility back to me and they're going to say now you have 10 days to see if what we did is okay so we're not relieved of anything we're going to take our 10 days that we
would have taken before they got this and we're going to do our job then okay so they're not going to save money on the fee they're going to pay somebody else and then they're going to pay the city as well because we're still doing our review and then they want to do the this great justice to us and say okay but we're going to let you issue a certificate of occupancy okay what we're doing is we're allowing people to do a review and hand us back all the responsibility okay we can say
they have insurance and they're going to say to us well the city looked at it the city issued a occupancy permit for these people it's a catastrophe okay we there will be more litigation born out of this than we can possibly deal with okay and the people who don't agree say we have some third party review and the people who don't agree okay this bill says that if we can't agree on what the code says then in the very end the last
resolution to this is the Department of Labor is going to come along and solve this problem I'll be frank with you the Department of Labor knows nothing about this okay the Department of Labor probably doesn't know ten building codes in the entire room okay that is not their job but we're going to give them that job I've studied the code extensively we have people in our office
who are in charge of the code and making sure that it's enforced evenly between all parties and and we're handing off a process here that will not work invites in all kinds of potential things that are going to create illegal activity they're going to create malice between parties if I'm a civil engineer and they handed my plans to a civil engineer across town and he comes up with 40
things I'm mad okay I should have drawn it better there's no question but the ability to have all these people to do all these things it's not there okay in In Atlanta, Georgia, it's not there. In Dallas, Texas, it's not there. I looked it up, okay, and they list, they want us to say, okay, y'all tell us the parties that can do this. I'm not going to provide you with a list because there are no parties who can do this. In Dallas, they have that requirement, and they list six firms.
one is a civil one is a surveyor one is fire and three are mechanical electrical plumbing companies okay they're not even tied to each other okay so we're creating this thing where we got to get out and have architectural firms hire people to work for them to provide reviews we've already done that we're the city of little rock we have these people we do these things we don't have this
problem in our 800 000 population central arkansas we do not have this problem and if north arkansas has this problem it's too onerous on us to make us do some things to meet this because north arkansas is having a problem okay we shouldn't have to hire a couple of people to send out confirming emails because uh we got to keep this in order so that somebody didn't
come along later and say well you didn't tell us in time now you got to pay for my review or my review is free can't allow that okay so we'll be hiring people when we hire people fees go up so we're causing we're going to have more money spent to do the same thing because the legislature's put something on us that's impossible to do okay it's a reality this is not possible okay then there's some things that come up later on here in the bill that that i'm just
astounded at the it says in here well let's let me talk about this first page 10 line 26 this subchapter does not apply to you know who you know who these people are that it doesn't apply to the state of arkansas that's who does this that's who reviews these things so so we're going to make cities go to all these hoops but we're not going to make because we have somebody that works for the state
of arkansas who's in charge of hospitals and nursing homes and penitentiaries and all these things they're state of arkansas okay and they're difficult to review i've reviewed them all okay i look at the hospitals just like they do and and so we're exempting the the the requirements on ourselves on the state um they don't have to go through this but they're expecting local municipalities to go through this this is this is not a well thought out legislation there's a there's a piece in here and i want to
point you to the line that among other things is just a a bad idea okay my job let me tell you what my job is my job is to help you understand where you have to go in the end before you get started okay i deal with people every day who god love them they don't understand okay but it's my job to understand and help the citizen to understand where he's going I get people all the time who
come in and they want to do this and and they want to get started and we don't allow them to get started on very much because they don't know where they're going in the end they don't understand that they're going to build a building that has to have fire sprinkler and it's going to cost them another 150,000 code says you got to have fire sprinkler in that all kinds of things and i don't want somebody to start investing their money when they don't know where they're going all right it happens i cannot tell you how often this happens so in here it says we shall
he uses the word shall um the local it is page four yes page four line 34 the local governing body shall allow the applicant to begin work on the project if a portion of the initial phase of work is compliant with applicable codes laws and rules that is a catastrophe in itself because the
the people who drew the plans miss things the all down the line there are things and I and and to allow somebody to get started on a project when they don't understand all they got to have we do projects where people didn't know They had to have multiple elevators and fire-lined, you know, stairwells and all kinds of things that if we allow them to get started, you know who they're going to be mad at? Me. The city of Little Rock. The municipality who allowed them to get started on something that they cannot complete, and we've done them a great disservice.
We allow people to start on demolition after I've looked and I understand the things they have to be able to do. I allow people to start on some things when we've gone through a process of understanding their building footprint cannot move, okay? I did a lot of work on that with Carti over here. but if their building footprint is set it doesn't move no matter what we say and no matter how far out of bounds it may be okay so this this while in theory sounds good on the top
it's just not something that will work this won't work in north arkansas okay this won't work anywhere in arkansas it this is this is something that in in uh you know the the wizard of oz somebody could try to figure it out it's not it's just not something that will apply um there are several things that are bad ideas um the theory of wanting to hurry up plan review in places that it takes forever i'm not against that but those people need to feel the pressure of
their community and hire the right people to do plan review they have 600,000 people in the population of five cities in north arkansas and you can't tell me that they can't hire people to do reviews in a timely manner that should be their mandate it shouldn't be our mandate to do all these other onerous things because those folks can't get their house in order and the third party review part of this that's the last two pages three pages um cities by code don't need
permission to do third party reviews i mean third party inspections okay we built or saw built out here amazon 3.2 million square feet they're working 24 hours a day i mean they're working around the clock all right and we we don't have inspectors to do that okay we can't they can't stay out there all the time and watch every concrete pour and everything going on they have every craft working 24 hours a day and so we we met with them we came to an agreement they're doing
third-party inspections they have to be ICC certified inspectors and they're sending us the results we work with them and we do that when that is what is necessary when somebody is going to build one of those many thousands of coffee shops that we have in our cities these days they build a prefabricated building okay seven brew builds a prefabricated building it comes in and all the finishes are in it and we can't see anything so we came to the agreement with them
that they're doing third-party reviews in their plant with an ICC inspector for those things okay so we solve those problems the code gives us the levity that the gravity to solve those problems but we're being handed requirements unrealistic as they can be because somebody doesn't have their house in order and and so I'm just going to encourage you I'm told that y'all are going to vote to approve this regardless of what I say but I'm here to tell you this is a bad idea and
this went through the Senate 44 to nothing with one abstention because they didn't understand what they were looking at okay you guys are great legislators and I'm not going to question that not not any and I am proud that we have a process where we do legislation and we try to take care of our communities but i'm not going to bring you a set of plans to review and and building buildings
it is a process that is very difficult it's very detailed and you have to have a great deal of knowledge this bill doesn't support doesn't speed up doesn't lessen the cost of anything it just makes things more difficult for everyone Fayetteville Springdale those cities up there they can't do this okay they can't there's not a firm to hire to do these things and so we're
going to say to them ignore this or hire more people and raise our fees okay they need to take care of what's going on up there we've taken care of what's going on down here okay we're we're doing permits the right way with the right number of people and we're and i'll tell you this half of our municipality we give away the permit we don't charge for it everything from 630s across little
rock it's free okay they got to pay a thousand dollar fee to the state and we lose money just processing that and sending it to the state they don't pay anything every tornado victim free okay and this bill is going to make it where we got to have a five-day what's going on period and a three-day what are you going to do period and we're going to slow down everything and when we can't we don't want to slow everything down that's just not the way to do this so I thank you for
Speaker 199
1:32:32
your time if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer them
Chair
Unverified
1:32:38
all right seeing no questions from committee thank you for your testimony thank you we have nobody else signed
Speaker 21
1:32:44
up speak for or against representative Pilkington would you like
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:32:48
to close for your bill uh yes and and can my witness also make closing statements as well with me or is it just me i
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
1:32:58
believe it's just the representative on closing okay gotcha no problem i'm sure he would like to add that um well like like they
said you know this passed unanimously in the senate
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
1:33:08
um municipal league is neutral on this bill they have no opposition to this uh we're just trying to get things rolling and get things moving and faster i do not agree with the witness from little rock uh that this would be catastrophic and we wouldn't be able to implement it but it doesn't matter because there's no firms that would be able to do it anyways I mean it was a lot of contradicting comments in that but the reality essentially is this is we have growing parts of the state even places like me like Clarksville that I
represent the River Valley can find use in this and getting third parties to come in do site reviews and have them and get them going once again the onerous is on the developer. And if they were to start a project and there were issues that they weren't addressed, that is on the builder. But a lot of times you have these people who are building developments who have done this time and time again. They know what they're doing and bureaucracy is getting them in the way. And I think the best thing we can do to help our housing situation and to help our development situation in this state is to make it easier to
build. And, you know, I'm a Yimby. I am a yes in my backyard kind of guy. And I think this is good for arkansas and good for us growing and so with that
Chair
Unverified
1:34:22
i make a motion do pass all right we have a motion do pass uh any discussion on that motion seeing none all in favor say aye all
Speaker 21
1:34:30
opposed no the ayes have it you pass your bill representative
Chair
Unverified
1:34:35
milligan are you ready house bill 1901 and we'll go ahead and knock out 1902 after that
Speaker 209
1:34:46
yes sir miss mr. chairman if you don't care
Speaker 11
1:34:56
i'll call miss barter up here also just in case uh she has to correct me on something fine if you'll just introduce yourself for the record and say who you're with y'all may begin margaret darter partner county clerk john john milligan district represent state representative district 33 we're doing 1901 first right yeah uh 1901
Representative Jon Milligan
Unverified
1:35:18
you see i mean it's a real simple bill that the uh the clerks and i didn't realize
clerks done this they they do the passport uh process and in the past they have when they do this they may do it on overtime they may do it on saturdays anyway they need what this bill does allows them to keep the funds generated from that the the fed the fed set the funds there's no fee hacks nothing like that everything's the same only thing this does is lets the clerks keep the keep the money um and uh the judges are good with it of letting them keep their money and uh that's
all the bill does it's real simple we have i think we have four or five counties do it now more is possibly going to do it you know if they can keep their their funds and the auditor wants them to have a designated account to put this money in and this will help that process with auditor
Chair
Unverified
1:36:14
so pretty simple all right any questions seeing none nobody signed up to speak for or against would you like to close for your bill
Speaker 1
1:36:22
i am and make a motion do pass i have a motion do pass any discussion on that motion seeing none all in favor say aye all opposed eyes have it
congratulations you passed your bill you may present house bill 1902
Representative Jon Milligan
Unverified
1:36:34
okay again representative milligan district 33 and the house bill 1902 it's a it's another simple bill this is just marriage license uh people go get their marriage license before they can get them turned in to the clerk they lose them maybe they get mad and they burn them i don't know but but they've made up now they need them back and this allows instead of a correct me if i'm wrong another hundred dollar fee this is a ten dollar fee short and in the time just makes it easier I'm
getting their license back and getting them filed real simple that's that's all it it saves them $90 replacing their license at
Speaker 1
1:37:11
the end of the day any questions seeing none nobody signed up speak for against you closed I am make a motion do pass have a motion do pass any discussion on the motion seeing none all in favor say aye all opposed congratulations you passed your second
Chair
Unverified
1:37:30
bill thank you don't see representative Burks in the room so represent McKenzie
Speaker 1
1:37:34
are you gonna run Senate bill 505 you need time to get somebody
Speaker 21
1:37:55
down here okay We've pretty much cleared off all the rest of the agenda, but if we need a recess for five minutes, we'll take a five-minute recess.
Agenda
CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT
Painter HB1555 TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE.
RE-REFERRED TO COMMITTEE
B. Davis SB374TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM.
REGULAR AGENDA
Clowney HB1783 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REDUCTION OF A CITY OF THE FIRST CLASS TO A CITY OF THE SECOND CLASS.
Clowney
S. Meeks HB1660 TO AMEND THE HORIZONTAL PROPERTY ACT; TO REGULATE PROPERTY WNERS ASSOCIATIONS; AND TO REQUIRE AN AUDIT FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS.
Unger HB1711 TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A POLICE FORCE; AND TO ESTABLISH THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
B. McKenzie HB1790TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
McKenzie
L. Johnson HB1416 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING FIRE DEPARTMENTS; AND TO ALLOW A VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT SERVICING UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY TO LEVY DUES.
Johnson
J. Bryant SB322TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT; AND TO ALLOW THIRD PARTIES TO PERFORM PLAN REVIEWS AND SITE INSPECTIONS.
Pilkington
A Gazaway HB1872 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE FEES THAT MAY BE COLLECTED BY COUNTY SHERIFF; AND TO ALLOW A COUNTY SHERIFF TO COLLECT FEES FOR ATTEMPTED SERVICE IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
Gazaway
Lundstrum HB1879 TO REQUIRE ALL CITY COUNCILS AND COUNTY QUORUM COURTS TO POST VIDEO RECORDINGS OF PUBLIC MEETINGS; AND TO REQUIRE ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS OF CITY COUNCILS OR COUNTY QUORUM COURTS TO BE RECORDED IN VIDEO FORMAT.
Lundstrum
Beaty Jr. HB1894 TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPERTY USED FORAFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5.
Milligan HB1901 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PASSPORT FEES COLLECTED BY COUNTYPASSPORT ACCEPTANCE FACILITIES.
Milligan
Milligan HB1902 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE AND BOND; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING A LOST, BURNED, OR DESTROYED CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE.
Milligan
Lundstrum HB1911 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPERTY TAX; AND TO REPEAL THE REQUIREMENT THAT PERSONAL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION BE LISTED OR REPORTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER.
Lundstrum
Lundstrum HB1912 TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "ASSESSED VALUE" FOR PURPOSES OF THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY; AND TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OR PROCEDURE FOR THE VALUATION OF PROPERTY FOR TAXATION PURPOSES UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5.
Lundstrum
R. Burkes HB1936 AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES.
J. Bryant SB505 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING; AND TO REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE FOR CHANGES TO THE ZONING OR DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY IN CERTAIN INSTANCES.
DEFERRED BILLS
Barnes HB1331 TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE PRIOR YEAR IF A NEW ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE IS NOT ADOPTED; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
Pilkington HB1130 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESIDENTIALCONSTRUCTION; TO AMEND THE FAST-TRACK PERMITS ACT; AND TO ALLOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE A HOUSING IMPROVEMENT ZONE.
Steele HB1436 TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS OPERATING A SLAUGHTERHOUSE ON THE SAME GROUNDS AS THE FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS.
R. Burkes HB1565TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSOR; AND TO PERMIT A PROPERTY OWNER TO OPT OUT OF HAVING THE PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION POSTED ON AN ONLINE DATABASE.
Barnett HB1627 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF; AND TO REQUIRE COUNTIES TO PROVIDE NOTICE TO TAXPAYERS CONCERNING CERTAIN PROPERTY TAX RELIEF OFFERED UNDER ARKANSAS LAW.
Puryear HB1448 TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND TOREQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
McClure HB1567 TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY" RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY PERMITS IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — CITY, COUNTY & LOCAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE- HOUSE, Apr 2, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Speaker 1
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
Speaker 6
Speaker 13
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 21
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Speaker 25
Speaker 27
Representative Wade Andrews
Unverified
Speaker 31
Speaker 5
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
Speaker 79
Speaker 82
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
Speaker 75
Speaker 99
Speaker 100
Speaker 101
Speaker 103
Speaker 104
Speaker 111
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
Speaker 113
Speaker 85
Speaker 125
Speaker 143
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
Speaker 153
Speaker 156
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 154
Representative Jimmy Gazaway
Unverified
Speaker 174
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
Speaker 177
Speaker 178
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
Speaker 192
Speaker 194
Speaker 200
Speaker 199
Speaker 209
Speaker 11
Representative Jon Milligan
Unverified