State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (64)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1243
Act 994
· 4 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…END THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE ARKANSAS FAIR HOUSING COMMISSION. HB1243 Underwood TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY REGARDING CAMPAIGN CONTR…”
|
TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY REGARDING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES; TO AMEND CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTING AND PROTECT … | Underwood | Notification that HB1243 is now Act 994 |
|
SB343
Act 734
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…PARKS, HERITAGE, AND TOURISM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SB343 Irvin TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC PROPERTY; … | Irvin | Notification that SB343 is now Act 734 |
|
SB351
Act 592
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SENATE BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB351 J. Dismang TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT … | J. Dismang | Notification that SB351 is now Act 592 |
|
SB370
Act 462
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…OF 1990; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996. SB370 Irvin TO TRANSFER THE ARKANSAS WINE PRODUCERS COUNCIL FROM…”
|
TO TRANSFER THE ARKANSAS WINE PRODUCERS COUNCIL FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TO THE DEPARTMENT … | Irvin | Notification that SB370 is now Act 462 |
|
HB1028
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…EAL THE LAW PROHIBITING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. Page 3 of 5 HB1028 A. Collins TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE LAW CONCERNING OBSCEN…”
|
TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE LAW CONCERNING OBSCENITY AND THE PROCESS FOR CHALLENGING MATERIALS INCLUDED … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1035
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1035 A. Collins TO CREATE THE ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 2…”
|
TO CREATE THE ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 2025; TO ALLOW ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION; TO … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1036
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1036 A. Collins TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION;…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO ALLOW VOTER REGISTRATION DURING EARLY VOTING AND … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1037
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NTEGRITY; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996. HB1037 A. Collins TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING PERSONS WHO MAY…”
|
AN ACT TO CREATE THE PREREGISTRATION TO VOTE ACT; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1038
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1038 A. Collins TO CREATE THE NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING ACT OF 2…”
|
TO CREATE THE NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING ACT OF 2025; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1039
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NG; AND TO REPEAL VOTER QUALIFICATIONS FOR ABSENTEE VOTING. HB1039 A. Collins TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOT…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1040
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1040 A. Collins TO CREATE THE WATER IN LINE ACT OF 2025; AND TO…”
|
TO CREATE THE WATER IN LINE ACT OF 2025; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1041
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1041 A. Collins TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES I…”
|
TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS. | R. Scott Richardson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1042
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1042 A. Collins TO CREATE THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2025; TO R…”
|
TO CREATE THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2025; TO REPEAL THE ENSURING ACCESS FOR ALL … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1043
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NG OF A BALLOT INITIATIVE PETITION AND REFERENDUM PETITION. HB1043 A. Collins TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING OF NONCANDID…”
|
TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING OF NONCANDIDATE EXPENDITURES PERTAINING TO APPELLATE JUDICIAL ELECTIONS; AND TO … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1058
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1058 Unger TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF I…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; … | Unger | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1059
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…GIVING ADVANCE NOTICE TO ENTITIES OF REQUIRED INSPECTIONS. HB1059 Unger TO PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR A FREE LIFETIME HUNTING AND…”
|
TO PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR A FREE LIFETIME HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSE TO A COMMERCIAL … | Unger | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1069
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…DIANS TO BRING THEIR INFANTS SIX MONTHS OR YOUNGER TO WORK. HB1069 S. Meeks TO OBSERVE STANDARD TIME YEAR ROUND IN ARKANSAS; A…”
|
TO OBSERVE STANDARD TIME YEAR ROUND IN ARKANSAS; AND TO ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME IN … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1078
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1078 Long TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING RUNOFF ELECTIONS; AND…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING RUNOFF ELECTIONS; AND TO PROVIDE FOR A RUNOFF ELECTION FOR … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1162
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TO ADOPT NEW LAWS CONCERNING APPELLATE JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS. HB1162 Duffield TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLI…”
|
TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLIDAY. | Duffield | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1187
Act 858
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AL INFORMATION FROM THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967. HB1187 Vaught TO AUTHORIZE A LICENSURE BY ENDORSEMENT FOR MARRIAGE…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE A LICENSURE BY ENDORSEMENT FOR MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPISTS. | Vaught | Notification that HB1187 is now Act 858 |
|
HB1281
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CANDIDATES FOR THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. HB1281 McAlindon TO AMEND REPORTING FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CERTAIN MU…”
|
TO AMEND REPORTING FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES AND FOR COUNTY OFFICE; AND … | McAlindon | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1415
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1415 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF THE ST…”
|
TO REQUIRE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO RESPOND TO A REQUEST FOR A FIRE INQUIRY. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1459
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1459 L. Johnson CONCERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GE…”
|
CONCERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1461
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1461 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE EVALUATION OF NE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE EVALUATION OF NECESSITY OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1470
Act 582
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…EVALUATION OF NECESSITY OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. HB1470 Beaty Jr. TO REPEAL THE LAW CONCERNING THE REVIEW OF INFORM…”
|
TO REPEAL THE LAW CONCERNING THE REVIEW OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PLANS. | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1470 is now Act 582 |
|
HB1494
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1494 Hawk TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS GUIDANCE OUT OF THE DARKNESS AC…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS GUIDANCE OUT OF THE DARKNESS ACT; AND TO REQUIRE STATE AGENCIES … | Hawk | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1614
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1614 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED TO CERTAIN CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRANT PROGRAMS. | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1621
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TICE GRANT PROGRAMS. REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1621 Wardlaw TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO EXEMPT PERSONAL INFORMATION OF … | Wardlaw | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1631
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…S, ELECTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS, AND THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY. HB1631 Wardlaw TO ADDRESS THE ISSUANCE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICE…”
|
TO ADDRESS THE ISSUANCE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS. | Wardlaw | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1632
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS. HB1632 Wardlaw TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME…”
|
TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME AND FISH COMMISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED … | Wardlaw | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1667
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AT WAS MANUFACTURED IN WHOLE OR IN PART USING FORCED LABOR. HB1667 Bentley TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | Bentley | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1683
Act 924
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AND THE STATE LIBRARY BOARD TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. HB1683 McAlindon TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENT…”
|
TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE OR A COMPONENT … | McAlindon | Notification that HB1683 is now Act 924 |
|
HB1706
Act 829
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES. HB1706 McCollum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS; AND TO PROH…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT RANKED CHOICE VOTING. | McCollum | Notification that HB1706 is now Act 829 |
|
HB1720
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CONCERNING ELECTIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT RANKED CHOICE VOTING. HB1720 Vaught TO CREATE THE BABIES AT WORK ACT; TO ALLOW STATE AGE…”
|
TO CREATE THE BABIES AT WORK ACT; TO ALLOW STATE AGENCIES TO PERMIT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES … | Vaught | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1739
Act 814
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…RKANSAS; AND TO ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME IN ARKANSAS. HB1739 M. Brown TO ADOPT THE UNIFORM ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIALS AC…”
|
TO ADOPT THE UNIFORM ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIALS ACT. | M. Brown | Notification that HB1739 is now Act 814 |
|
HB1753
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…estrictions designating areas as 'Members and Staff Only'. HB1753 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT-OUT OF THE NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1769
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…BLIC MEETINGS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967. HB1769 Barnett CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDARDS; AND T…”
|
CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDARDS; AND TO REQUIRE A PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION OR ASSESSMENT TO BECOME … | Barnett | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1773
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1773 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BALLOT QUESTION COMMITTEES AND LEGISLATIVE QUESTION COMMITTEES. | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1774
Act 562
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…OT QUESTION COMMITTEES AND LEGISLATIVE QUESTION COMMITTEES. HB1774 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE ARKANSAS FAIR HOUS…”
|
TO AMEND THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE ARKANSAS FAIR HOUSING COMMISSION. | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1774 is now Act 562 |
|
HB1797
Act 944
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…EPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS. HB1797 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS DEVELOPM…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AUTHORITY; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1797 is now Act 944 |
|
HJR1001
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…L CENSUS. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Number Sponsor Subtitle HJR1001 A. Collins A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE THE CITIZEN…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE THE CITIZENS' REDISTRICTING COMMISSION AND TO REPEAL THE BOARD OF … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1002
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ICTING COMMISSION AND TO REPEAL THE BOARD OF APPORTIONMENT. HJR1002 J. Richardson AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REPEAL THE EXCEPTION TO THE PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY … | J. Richardson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1003
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ON TO THE PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE. HJR1003 A. Collins THE ARKANSAS GOVERNMENT DISCLOSURE AMENDMENT. Pa…”
|
THE ARKANSAS GOVERNMENT DISCLOSURE AMENDMENT. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1004
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ICENSURE BY ENDORSEMENT FOR MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPISTS. HJR1004 Ladyman APPLYING TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR AN ARTIC…”
|
APPLYING TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION OF THE STATES FOR … | Ladyman | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1005
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE ARKANSAS GOVERNMENT DISCLOSURE AMENDMENT. Page 2 of 5 HJR1005 Long AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO CREATE TH…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS. | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1006
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ONSTITUTION TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS. HJR1006 B. McKenzie AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION PROVI…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION PROVIDING THAT A GOVERNMENTAL BODY SHALL NOT USE STATE … | B. McKenzie | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HJR1007
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH A LOBBYIST FOR LOBBYING PURPOSES. HJR1007 Cavenaugh A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE A PROCEDURE…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE A PROCEDURE FOR THE RECALL OF CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS. | Cavenaugh | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1008
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TE A PROCEDURE FOR THE RECALL OF CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS. HJR1008 S. Meeks AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CONCERNI…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CONCERNING THE TAXATION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1009
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…RSONAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS. HJR1009 K. Brown AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KN…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KNOWN AS THE ARKANSAS VICTIMS' BILL OF … | K. Brown | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1010
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1010 Unger A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT BY A TWO-T…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT BY A TWO-THIRDS VOTE, THE SENATE MAY REMOVE MEMBERS … | Unger | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1011
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1011 S. Meeks A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING THE CONSIDER…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING THE CONSIDERATION OF BILLS OTHER THAN APPROPRIATION BILLS DURING A FISCAL … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1012
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1012 R. Scott Richardson AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTI…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REPEAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE REAPPRAISAL AND REASSESSMENT OF … | R. Scott Richardson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1013
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 79, CONCERNING REAL PROPERTY TAXES. HJR1013 Pilkington A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT CERTA…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN VACANCIES SHALL BE FILLED BY APPOINTMENT BY THE … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1014
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…N VACANCIES SHALL BE FILLED BY APPOINTMENT BY THE GOVERNOR. HJR1014 Beaty Jr. A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DE…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL … | Beaty Jr. | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1015
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…OMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. HJR1015 Lundstrum A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY BY REQUIRING A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE TO DECLARE HIS OR … | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1016
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…AFFILIATION OR INDEPENDENT STATUS WHEN RUNNING FOR OFFICE. HJR1016 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF A…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 5, § 1, ALLOWING … | Ray | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1017
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1017 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED ST…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED STATE-WIDE INITIATED ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME … | Ray | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1018
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1018 Ray THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT.”
|
THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT. | Ray | Approved by the Governor |
|
HJR1019
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE STATE. HJR1018 Ray THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT. HJR1019 S. Meeks AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REMOV…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REMOVE REFERENCES TO GREYHOUND RACING FROM ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB12
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB12 B. King TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING … | B. King | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB184
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…NG THE REVIEW OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PLANS. Page 4 of 5 SB184 D. Sullivan TO TRANSFER THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ARKANS…”
|
TO TRANSFER THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION AND THE STATE … | D. Sullivan | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB403
Act 449
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…IONS REGARDING REDISTRICTING BY THE BOARD OF APPORTIONMENT. SB403 C. Tucker TO CREATE THE THE 2030 ARKANSAS COMPLETE COUNT CO…”
|
TO CREATE THE THE 2030 ARKANSAS COMPLETE COUNT COMMITTEE; AND TO PLAN AND CONDUCT STATEWIDE … | C. Tucker | Notification that SB403 is now Act 449 |
|
HB1024
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TION, AMENDMENT 100. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1024 A. Collins TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES; AND TO REPEAL THE LAW PROHIBITING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1740
Act 585
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1740 K. Moore TO EXEMPT CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION FROM TH…”
|
TO EXEMPT CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION FROM THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967. | K. Moore | Notification that HB1740 is now Act 585 |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin
- Processing date
- October 8, 2026
This meeting of the State Agencies Committee is hereby called to order, Chair sees a quorum. We are back and I want to announce on the record before we begin that we're going to rank constitutional amendments on Monday. Staff has prepared a ballot essentially where you'll rank the top five constitutional amendments. The constitutional amendment that would be your number one choice will be awarded five points, Number two choice, four points, three choice, three, choice three, three points, et cetera.
And then we'll tabulate all of those. We'll ultimately determine which received the top five in votes. And then we'll come back next week and have presentations on those five, top five again. And then ultimately we'll vote on a top one. Of course, the House will be able to refer out if we choose to. We certainly don't have to refer out anything, but if we choose to, we can refer out one constitutional amendment. Representative Woodridge? That
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
0:59
was my question. If we had to make a choice in this
committee. And we don't have to refer anything out.
So, but that will be the process, and we'll have those ballots, and we'll take that vote on Monday. So, with that, we still have several items on our agenda, so we're going to get through as many of those as we can. Representative Long has a couple of bills. Representative Long, you ready to run those? I promised those folks that I wouldn't have been running today, but once it comes off the basement. All right. Representative Beatty has a bill, but he's not here at the moment.
Representative Underwood, we talked about you running your bill this afternoon. And that's House Bill 1243. All right. Representative Underwood, you're recognized. Thank you,
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
2:03
Mr. Chair, thank you committee, Kenden Underwood, State Representative, District 16. I'm
excited to step back in the batter box in this committee and field all your questions.
This bill, so I discovered this last election cycle, and I think you heard this earlier today on another bill, but if you're running for a local municipal race or county race, you only have to file currently a campaign finance report like seven days or a week before the election, and then you have to file a final report. So you legitimately don't have to file anything. Nobody knows how much money you've raised or spent throughout the entire cycle if you're running for one of those races. To me, that's kind of crazy because some of these races or some of these positions, you're
running to manage the budget of an entire city. It's a full-time job. You know, you're making more money in some of these cities, certainly, than maybe even the governor makes in her position. So I really think for transparency purposes, we need to increase the frequency of the filing. So originally, my idea was to just put them on the same schedule that we're on. I have amended the bill since that point because I do recognize that people running for school board or JP or city Council positions likely really don't need to file. They're not raising and
spending that much money, so they don't really need to be filing that much. So there's probably a million different ways we could do this, but essentially what this bill does is it requires local candidates on election years or for the years that they're on the ballot to file campaign finance reports on the same schedule that we're on, which is monthly reports, if they have raised or spent $5,000 or more. I'll admit that number is arbitrary. It could depict any number. I just felt like $5,000, if you're spending or raising $5,000, you certainly should be able to file
campaign finance reports. A candidate who has raised or spent in excess of $500, which is the current trigger, would be on the same reporting schedule that they currently are on. One right before the election and then the post report. And then if you don't raise anything, if you're below $500, you don't have to file a report, which is again the same as it is now. On off years where you're not running for election, there's just an annual report. So I
picked December 31st to cover the entire year of what you've raised. Again, maybe it's not the perfect situation but it's still more reporting than what they're having to do now and so um i have a bunch more arguments i know this committee runs long so i'll just open it up for questions
all right representative underwood has explained the bill are there any questions about the
committee representative meeks uh good with the bill just real
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
4:54
quick uh any feedback from any of the uh you know cities counties you know people that would be you know affected by this
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
5:00
yeah very good question thank you for bringing that up uh two things i forgot to bring up that as that reminds me.
One, my initial bill they did not like, so that's why I amended it, and now the Association of Counties and Municipal League are both good with this bill. And then the other thing that you didn't raise, but it reminds me, earlier today we talked about Representative Hawk's bill, about moving it to the Secretary of State's office. This bill currently leaves it with the clerk's office, and the reason for that is because that obviously hasn't became law yet. I recognize that that could create a problem.
And so my plan is to hold, if this bill were to pass and we get to the Senate and it looks like the Senate is favorable to his bill, I'm going to amend the bill to change that from clerk to the Secretary of State's office. Obviously, I don't know if
the Senate's going to vote for that bill or not. I hope they do. But
if they don't, then my bill would be
accurate based off of what it is today. Representative Meeks, is that satisfying? Yes, sir. All right. Yeah. And I had the same questions, I think, that Representative Meeks asked. So in terms of your JP's, city council members, people like that, just to be clear, this only applies if they receive more than $5,000 in contributions. Is that right?
Right. Or spend $5,000. Okay. So if they loan their candidacy $5,000, then they'll have to report. Is that right? Right. Okay. Yeah. Which would be, it's going to be,
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
6:31
it would be the same reporting that we're on based off of the $5,000 trigger. Anything below that is, I guess, essentially what they're doing now. Okay. Now, you talked
about that the, however, their reporting frequency is not going to be as much as ours. Is that right? That's correct because, as you know, we
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
6:48
still have to file in off years.
We have to file, I think, quarterly. I'm not requiring them to do quarterly reporting. just has an
annual reporting on the off years. I see. Yeah. And
so during an election year, though, they will have to file, what is it, monthly?
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
7:04
Yes. The monthly report, if they hit that trigger. Gotcha. Right. Okay. Very good. And the
Association of Counties, and we just believe, have removed any opposition they have. Yes. That's my understanding. I
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
7:16
send it to both of them. I guess it was Monday or Tuesday. I don't know what day it is, but I sent it to them and they
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
7:23
that they were fine with it so all right representative collins thank you mr. chair and i guess my only question would be we passed at least one bill i had a bill that moved that final report to january 15th and i'm for the state and district candidates and i didn't know if keeping those matched up was important enough that you if you were going to amend it down the road if you would make that or and or other changes we've already done through law just to sync those up Yeah, I'd be open to that, certainly.
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
7:53
I don't know if you were in here when I mentioned
that about Representative Hawke's bill that we just passed out earlier this morning. So, certainly, if we've passed some sort of bill that is going to affect the reporting, and I don't know what the status is of your bill, but they need to be consistent, in my view. Yeah, that one has been passed
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
8:12
and was signed, so that's enacted, and so I guess that would just be my suggestion. I don't think it's, you know, essential
necessarily, but if the goal is to match them, that would be one way. I think that would be fine to do.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
8:25
Thanks. Representative Beck. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, and I may be not understanding it, but it says that, I'm talking about the $500 trigger now. All right, so the $500 trigger is a pre-election report and a final report, correct? Correct. That's currently what they have to do. But the pre-election report is filed before the election,
so if I get halfway through the election cycle and now I trip the $500, I've already not filed my pre-election report because I didn't trip it that quickly.
See what I'm saying? Through the election, you could raise or spend $500, and you would have not filed your pre-election report because you hadn't tripped the $500 at that point. Are
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
9:17
you saying if you get within that seven, in that seven-day window, if you trip it then? If you trip the $500, which, again, that's already the law. So currently, if you raise or spend $500, then you're required to file the pre-election
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
9:34
report. So during the election cycle, and I'm not making myself clear.
So during the election cycle, halfway through, right, ten days into
this thing, you get contributions of up to $500. You were up, you know, $450 before. Now someone gave you $50, so now you've hit $500. You've already not filed your pre-election report. Right, and I could be
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
10:01
wrong about this, but I think once you trip that, then it triggers you having to start doing the reporting. Now, currently, my bill doesn't do that at $500.
My bill does that at $5,000. Yeah, but that, okay,
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
10:15
go ahead. I'm sorry. No, so yes,
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
10:17
if you're in the middle of your, let's say, I don't know, if you're running for office, once you get to that $5,000 limit, yes, you've now triggered it and then the next report you're going to have to file just like we do currently. So you're saying
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
10:31
as it exists, and maybe I didn't realize that, I thought they had to file the pre-election regardless now, but you're saying they
don't even file that now until they hit $500. Right. I believe, and
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
10:41
I think, and I could be, I don't want to misspeak, but I think earlier we heard maybe from Mr. Sloan that that was, that's currently the law, is that it's $500 is the trigger for that pre-election report, and if you don't raise or spend $500, you don't have to file a report. My bill doesn't change that.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
11:01
All right. I, I, all right. Thank you. So,
yeah, Representative Underwood, just to follow up on that, regardless, right now, a candidate has to file a pre-election report. That may be the only report they have to file. That's been one of the problems, I think, as you and I have discussed, is that the only real report they had to file was one that occurred just right before the election. So they could raise a ton of money and didn't have to file a report or show any of it until just a very short time before the election.
Correct. And so that would be the pre-election report. You've not changed the law with regard to the filing of the pre-election report. It's just if they raise more than $5,000, then they're going to have to start doing monthly reporting during the election season. Correct. No, that's right. And
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
11:48
so, and that's what brought this to my attention was we had mayor races that were of large cities and nobody knew how much they were raising or spending. And, again, it was for the one I was thinking of was for a city that I think it was like the salary is like $160,000 or something.
To me, that's crazy that nobody has a clue what you're raising and spending
Speaker 21
12:10
in that race. Right. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Very
good. Any other questions about the committee? Representative Rose? Thank
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
12:19
you. Yeah, I just kind of wanted to make sure I was clear and maybe for some of the other committee
members as well. But you kind of have a category of candidates who run a race and raise very little, spend very little, under $500 or whatever it is. Right. And the requirements on them are relatively loose, next to nothing.
Right. And then you have the category of candidates who raise in excess or spend in excess of $500 but less than $5,000. Right. And they have that pre-election report. And then you have candidates who raise or spend in excess of $5,000, and in an election year, they are then on the same
reporting calendar that we're on. Yes, that's correct. And the reason for that
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
12:58
is kind of what's on the outset is I'm trying to capture those races where a lot of money is being funneled. You know, maybe there's, you know, we don't know, but maybe there's out-of-state interest in that race or whatever.
but not trying to capture those people that are running for smaller races like a school board race or a city council race. Because some of the feedback that I heard for those races is that it's very difficult to find candidates to run for those races. And we don't want to discourage those people from running for office, and especially when they're not really raising and spending a bunch of money. And so I don't think they need to be filing a bunch of reports if they don't really have a lot of money to do that. And we don't need to create a lot of work for people filing reports that have zero dollars on it.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
13:43
It's a similar question when I asked Representative Hawke on his bill this morning, but implementing this would also bring accountability for candidates who may be violating campaign contribution limits or receiving illegal contributions as well and hold them kind of, well, not kind of, hold
them to the same level of accountability that all candidates running for office should. Is that correct? Yeah, I think that's true, and I
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
14:08
think, you know, the public should know those type of things before they're voting for these individuals to, you know, manage their city.
Thank you. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing no further questions by the committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill. Representative Underwood, you're recognized to close
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
14:32
for your bill. Committee, I appreciate you guys taking the time and kind of working with me, you know. I do appreciate the questions on this bill because I think it's an important issue and I know there's a lot of ways that we could tackle it. But this is just the solution that I felt like addressed what my concerns were.
And with that, I'm closed and
I'd make a motion to do pass. Representative Underwood's closed and made a motion to do pass. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing no discussion on the motion, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed,
the ayes have it. Congratulations, you've passed your bill. Thank you, committee. All right,
Speaker 56
15:11
next. Representative Ladyman was here earlier. But
you don't see him here now. Okay, all right.
Taking care of Representative Underwood. Representative Collins,
1037 waiting on an amendment. Also deceptive and fraudulent deep fakes. It's on members' own. Oh, the amendment on that. What about 1037, amend Arkansas law concerning persons who may register to vote? Both amendments. Both amendments, okay. And then we've got Beatty Jr. with two bills, he's not here.
Senate bills, we have Dismang and Eves on Senate Bill 351. Let's see, neither one of them. Senate Bill 370, Irvin and Eaton. See, neither one of them. Senate Bill 343, Irvin and Clowney. Are you ready to present on that? - Yes. - Okay.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
16:26
- Mr. Chair, with your permission, could I have some people from the Department transformation and shared services at the table. You may. My
understanding is there's an amendment? Yes, there is an amendment. Staff will pass out that amendment.
Speaker 70
17:29
All right. I believe the committee should have an amendment.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
17:37
Representative Clowney, you're recognized to present the amendment. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So if
you'll look at the bill as it stands right now, as I presented this morning, on page 3, lines 13 through 21, listed out, It enumerated certain agencies that have within them law enforcement type purposes, law enforcement purposes. Those vehicles were exempt, but it sort of kept, we kept learning about newer and, you know, different agencies that had things that we wanted to exempt.
So this amendment basically just says, instead of enumerating specific agencies that are exempt, It says, state-owned vehicles just does not include, categorically does not include any vehicles that are owned by a cabinet-level department of the executive branch of state government and used for law enforcement. That was a way to capture everybody that we were trying to. And again, as I mentioned this morning, we're not including law enforcement vehicles in this bill because they have their own systems that they operate on.
All right, Representative Clowney has explained
the amendment. Are there any
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
18:44
questions on the amendment, Representative Meeks? Thank you. So just two questions. Do we have cabinet level department executive branch folks that own vehicles? You see what I'm saying? It says, so the way this is worded, I catch your intent, but the way this is worded is it includes vehicles that are owned by cabinet level department of the executive branch.
so do we have do we have any cabinet level you know like mr chair can
i have our you may yes if you'd introduce yourself
Chair
Unverified
19:21
for the record sure courtney trailer chief of staff at tss and yes all 15 departments have vehicles that they've purchased
Speaker 79
19:27
and that they own right and then as the as the department the
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
19:32
the head of each department have their own are we Supplying vehicles to the head of each department is, I guess, the question I'm trying to get to.
To the head of each department? Right. So does the Secretary of Education and the Secretary of, you know, the head of TSS get one? No, sir. Okay, that
Chair
Unverified
19:50
was the question. These are just department vehicles that are
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
19:53
allocated to the department. Okay, so these are used for department personnel, and we're not buying personal vehicles, essentially, for these departments. Okay, that's all I was checking.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
20:04
All right, thank you. Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to make sure I was clear, too. It says, are owned by cabinet-level department of the
executive branch of state government and used for law enforcement.
So is this referring to only vehicles that are used for law enforcement that are owned by executive-level cabinet departments? Correct. So not
all cabinet-level department executive branch vehicles, only the ones used for law enforcement. So,
Speaker 85
20:32
our intent is to have telematics installed on all cabinet-level department vehicles. We want to exclude those that are used for law enforcement. So, the
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
20:43
amendment is saying only vehicles that are used for law enforcement are excluded.
Chair
Unverified
20:48
Correct. Thank you. And to clarify an
Speaker 85
20:53
earlier point, there may be some that the department have designated as for a specific individual. I'm not aware of that. We don't manage that at this level. But a department may
Chair
Unverified
21:03
have made a decision that individuals that do travel a lot have a vehicle assigned to them. So I
have a question. So, for example, let me take the vehicles that the governor's transported in. I don't know if those are owned by the state.
Same for the attorney general. I don't know that when they're taking them to and from an event, if that's law enforcement purposes, is there a specific exemption in here for them? Go ahead.
Speaker 93
21:36
Well, those vehicles, Jennifer Davis, staff attorney with the department, those vehicles aren't considered under the cabinet level, so the GPS portion of this only applies to cabinet level, so those would not
apply. I see. Okay, yeah, executive. Yeah, I gotcha. Very good. All right, any other questions by the committee?
All right, seeing no further questions by the committee, Representative Clowney, you're making a motion to adopt the amendment? Yes. There's a motion to adopt the amendment. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, the amendment's been adopted. Representative Clowney, you're recognized to present
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
22:10
the bill as amended. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee. I've spent some time explaining this morning, and I want to be respectful of y'all's time, but just to summarize, this is a bill that would consolidate the fleet management to underneath the Department of Transformation and Shared Services. I know there were some questions that arose this morning, and I was fielding them as best
as I could with some help, but we have some more people here with some more answers
for those of y'all that may have them. All right. I do recall there were a number of questions, and there was some thought that maybe there needed to be some additional people here to answer. It looks
like they're here. Any questions by the committee? Now everybody's shy. All right. Representative
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
22:54
Beck, you're recognized. I'm not shy. So it's my understanding that this is supposed to be a cost savings for us.
I guess the efficiency of the use of the vehicles would somehow be improved as a result of this. So with that said, the cost, I'm really going after this, is the juice worth
the squeeze on this, right? I mean, the GPS stuff, I don't see how it's going to save
you a lot of money. It might, it might, but are you saving more money putting the fleet together under one group?
And is there any cost, any kind of data out there that says, okay, this is how much we save by, you know, doing shared services with the fleet under one group, right? You're putting everybody's fleets
Speaker 103
23:48
together out of one place, right? Not necessarily. Right now we have the fleet is managed by all 15 departments separately, and then they report centrally into DF&A today. But right now they don't, they're not doing any, it's a very manual process.
So if someone wants to check out a vehicle, they have to go get a binder, sign it out, and then they have to manually put in, you know, what their name, where they're going, how many miles, if they got gas. And so what we want to do is automate that so that it reduces the risk of error and having bad data, which is what we have today. When McKenzie was here and helped us with this analysis, we struggled to put together the data on all our vehicles. I mean, it was a struggle just to figure out how many vehicles we had, what are considered law enforcement.
I mean, it just wasn't, it brought to light the fact that we're not doing good analysis today with the vehicles we have and making sure we're maximizing the utilization of those vehicles. So they did identify several hundred vehicles that are considered underutilized. Now, granted, those are just vehicles that had less than 100 miles on them. There's, since we've learned, there are many reasons for that. Some of that is the manual process. And so at the end of the month, someone has to then take all those slips of paper that you use when you check out a vehicle and manually key it in to a system.
But from there, nothing is really done with that data. But we tried to pull together that data, realize that there were probably 600 vehicles that had less than 100 miles on it. And what we learned is some of that is accurate because they're dedicated to a certain maybe a DHS facility where it's just mainly used for specific purpose on campus. And so that's legitimate. We're not trying to maximize the use of those vans for patient care or for specific needs.
But it did bring to light that we have inaccurate data. And so we don't know what the utilization of some of our vehicles really is. We do know that our average vehicle is nine years old, I think approaching 10 years old now. And we also spend about $8 million a year on mileage reimbursement. So somehow we need to do a better job of marrying the underutilized vehicles with the people that are traveling and getting high mileage reimbursement.
And I think there is some savings there. I could not quantify what that is today just because we don't have good
Chair
Unverified
26:27
data today. I don't know. I hope that answered your question of why
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
26:33
we went down this path. Yes, just to follow up, the, so okay, I
went down the wrong rabbit hole. I was thinking you're going to be recording closer to the mileage of the cars that are being used with the GPS and all that stuff. But what you're actually saying is what this, the GPS is a relatively small portion of this.
It's really more about keeping track of those vehicles and their usage automatically as opposed to manually. And that's the cost savings associated with that. Is that statement correct? That is probably the primary
Chair
Unverified
27:06
benefit of this, yes. All right. Thank you. Representative Rose, you're
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
27:16
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It seems like I remember discussing this, and I saw
it somewhere in the bill at one point. Is the GPS data available for, like, a FOIA request or a subpoena?
Could be used, one, in a court case or two for political
gain if somebody wanted to use it against somebody to say they traveled too much or something along those lines.
Speaker 91
27:42
So it is available for FOIA, I think, after 30 days has passed. A
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
27:46
subpoena would be, of course, we'd have to respond to a subpoena, so that would be different. But they are available under FOIA after 30
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
27:56
days. And as it is currently, these are not instituted on all these vehicles.
Speaker 93
28:01
Not currently. They are allowed. It's a May right now in the law. We're just changing it to a shall by January 1st, 2028. So there
Speaker 118
28:13
is some transition. And then you guys will be tracking all of
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
28:19
the data in terms of fuel, travel, imagining where to, where from, when, et cetera. And all of that would be publicly available
Speaker 85
28:29
then? I believe it is today, it's just not recorded, it's not automated today.
We capture that just handwritten in a binder for
Speaker 93
28:39
each vehicle. Right, we would have to go make copies of that binder, locate them
thank you. All right, just to follow up on that a little bit, you know, I raised the concern earlier that this seems a lot like micromanaging, maybe even more than is already being done. You're talking about putting GPS trackers on all the requiring, not just that you may
in the event that you thought there was a problem, but you're requiring in every state vehicle, cabinet level, I guess, and below, that there be a GPS tracker. Some might argue that that is oppressive to constantly monitor every movement of a state employee and that maybe the better policy would be to trust our state employees to do the right thing. And in the event that you have some reason to believe that they're not doing the right thing,
then you have the ability under the existing law to put a GPS tracker on their vehicle if you'd like. Now, part of what I hear the rationale being is essentially that you need to study the fleet to determine the most efficient use of these vehicles. And if that were your justification, you could probably place the GPS trackers on there for a period of time in order to complete a study to then know what the best use of your fleet is. but the way I understand the bill is that this is going to be a permanent requirement
and that this GPS data will be FOIA-able, it'll be subpoena, you'll be able to subpoena it. And again, I'm all for transparency, I'm all for efficiency, but
there's a fine line when we talk about efficiency and transparency of micromanagement and kind of this oppressive nature of constant monitoring. And so I'd just like to hear your response to that.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
30:43
a moment, I think there's a few things. I think, and obviously you know that this is an issue I care about. I will tell you that we already track this. I mean, we already track state employees, right? We monitor what state employees are doing. we fill out this paperwork, where they go, how they use their vehicles, that is already all foiable. Nothing new is being added. Nothing new will be discoverable, except that now our records will be more accurate. I would also add that it's actually a legitimate safety issue. We have people, you know,
I would say we're not tracking employees. We are tracking the vehicles that state employees are driving. And those vehicles can be used in ways that are very dangerous. And also, it is helpful to the state to have information if those vehicles are being driven safely and there are lawsuits that come against the state, the easiest way to defend our employees against that kind of charge is to have that data on hand to see the truth of the matter. Well, and so let me ask in
response to that, I mean, I think, you know, the idea or the
assertion that you're tracking vehicles and not employees is a difference without a distinction because there's an employee that has to drive the vehicle. So you are, in fact, tracking the employees, just doing so while also tracking the vehicle. To be fair, you said the employees' every
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
32:00
move, which is not true. The employees' moves that are taken while driving the state-owned vehicle. Which would be
my next question to you. Would you also be in favor of placing a tracker on their bodies so that we can know how many bathroom breaks they take? No, because their bodies are not state-owned. While they're being paid by the state, I think while the taxpayers are paying their salary,
movement is? How many smoke breaks are they taking? How much time are they spending doing frivolous things that
aren't related to their job? I certainly think that may very well be justified under this rationale. I will want to point out that we already do
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
32:37
that to a certain extent for state employees. I mean, when I log on to my computer every day, there's a notice that says everything that I'm doing is being tracked and can be monitored. Now, is there somebody in a control room that fits and like monitors what I'm doing all day? No. However, if there
are issues that come up, they can go back and look at my performance, how often I'm online, how
Speaker 93
32:59
often I'm not, am I, you know, on the browser more than that. So we're technically already doing that in some form or fashion and we're notified and we have been notified for 20 years at least of that. So we're already doing that to a certain extent. This is just doing
Speaker 103
33:14
it in a vehicle. And I'll add, you know, the primary goal of this is that we get requests
Speaker 85
33:20
for new vehicles, and it's hard to justify spending money on new vehicles when we know
we have some that are not being utilized. And so we're just, we're trying to get a better sense of where is the need for, where do we need to put our fleet, where do we need to put our resources on providing state employees a safe vehicle in which to travel to do their job. oil safety justification representative hawk you're recognized i don't think i
have a question sir i apologize i don't know how i got in the queue but
i'll think i'll think of one if you
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
34:03
want me to representative baity you're recognized thank you mr chair uh kind of walked in midway through the presentation so i got just a question i remember at a previous um alc meeting where there was discussion about an overall fleet management plan and program for the state that was to be conducted by shared services. Has that been completed, or is this what you guys are trying to propose for that fleet
management? I see a lot of heads shaking, but I don't hear
a lot of answers here. Yes, sir. That was completed, and I
Speaker 103
34:36
believe that was back in September, October time frame, and we committed to have that report. We submitted it December, I believe, the 16th, and that was the McKinsey study, and this is part of that plan that they recommended that we implement. Well, I remember the
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
34:50
McKinsey study, but I also thought that y'all were going to
create an overall plan that you were going to submit. So is this the plan that you, from the McKinsey study that you're submitting,
or was this not part of incorporating that overall fleet management? Because to me, a lot of what's in here should have been included in the fleet management
Speaker 103
35:10
plan. It was included in the plan that was submitted in December. Okay. Yes, sir. And
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
35:19
so now we're... This is part of that plan. So you're taking... What I'm trying to say is you're taking rules that you promulgated related to vehicles and you're going to reduce that to statute. Is that what this is doing?
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
35:35
Right. All right. We turned in a report that McKenzie had.
And so I think, Representative Beatty, I think maybe if this doesn't answer your question, let me know. But earlier when we were talking about this, I mentioned that this is sort of part two of something that Senator Irvin started, I think, 10 years ago. Yeah. Where she had the may. And so I think it's in statute that you may do this, and we are changing it to a shall. And so I think that has to be a statutory change. Well, all
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
36:02
right, I guess I just need to see that report and read that.
And then maybe I'll be a little clearer, because I have not seen that report. Yes, I mean, your report, I think I saw some of the McKinsey study. But if there's two different
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
36:17
documents, I'd like to see that. So thank you all. Representative Woodridge, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative, does it outline in here what kind of device would be
used to make these type recordings? Like, are we talking about dash cam
Chair
Unverified
36:32
or? It doesn't specify. It just says telematics, I believe, or GPS.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
36:37
So, I mean, that's pretty broad, isn't it? Because, I mean, if you could then choose to put a dash cam in every state vehicle, then you're going to record employees' conversations in
Speaker 103
36:47
the vehicle. And I think probably when the original bill or the legislation back in 2011, the technology was quite different. So I think today there are a lot more options and we can be- There is a definition. It says global positioning device. Global
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
37:03
positioning device is a device that can access a global navigation satellite system
that uses radio frequency information technology and provides reliable location and time information and is capable of recording the travel and location of a vehicle. Right. Can I have
Speaker 152
37:16
a couple of follow-ups? Yes, sir. You're
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
37:19
right. So my point to that is I saw that in the definition, but it doesn't prohibit you from using a dash cam and dash cams have all of those features as well, plus record everything that's coming up and down the road, the audio inside the vehicle, things like that. So, I mean, under this, you could,
I guess, or the state could put a dash cam in as long as it's got GPS capabilities and it will record those things, right? That's
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
37:45
true. They could. They could today. There's nothing preventing them from doing it today as well. Right.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
37:49
This would just require them to do something and if To
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
37:52
do something. For what they chose, right? Okay. My guess is that would be much more expensive than a traditional GPS, but, yeah. Yeah, I
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
38:01
don't know on that. The other question that I had, at what level does this stop? And my example would be, do cabinet secretaries drive state vehicles?
Speaker 79
38:10
I would think that would vary across each cabinet. I think some do and some don't. So theirs
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
38:30
Okay. If they're not law enforcement, yes. Representative Rose, you're recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had a couple
of questions about the data, but something Representative Woldridge just brought up was about the type of device and how broad that definition is.
Because, I mean, technically my phone, right, you can track everywhere I go with my phone. You can track that data with a dash cam, and I'm sure a simple AirTag or a GPS tracking device, something along those lines. I remember this morning there was discussion about this would eventually lead to cost savings. I'm not hearing that there's a very specific device decided, so I was just curious how you guys calculated that this would save costs. I think
Speaker 103
39:17
we calculate it because having the data, first of all, we don't have a comprehensive set of data as to what vehicle utilization is.
But we know that there's a set of underutilized vehicles that we don't need. And then fine-tuning where we need to reallocate vehicles for where we're reimbursing $8 million in travel and mileage. I think the combination of those three and just making sure we're maximizing the utilization of the existing vehicles that we have and then getting down to the right size will lead to some savings. So I think McKinsey estimated three to five million in savings.
That was their estimate. I don't know that that I'm not comfortable saying that that's what we're going to achieve because of the lack of accurate data today. Was
Chair
Unverified
40:08
that annual or one time? Part of that was
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
40:11
one time, and some of that was annual. So how many vehicles, roughly? About 4,000. Okay. And how much per device? I would say it's about
Chair
Unverified
40:20
20, if I had to guess. $20? On the GPS, you mean? That's it?
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
40:27
Just $20 for a GPS tracker? Mm-hmm. Okay. And so that $20 per vehicle for 4,000 vehicles, and you're estimating that that cost will be offset
by the savings of efficiencies? Yes, sir. Okay. And you don't have a specific device? We've talked to a few vendors, but we have
Speaker 103
40:55
not narrowed that down because we're trying to find the best price, the best value that gets us what we need, in addition to a reservation system that automates a lot of what people have to do manually today.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
41:13
So we've just explored. Was that $20 one time for a device, or was it $20 a month tracking? That's per month. So $20 per month per vehicle?
Speaker 169
41:24
Yes. For the life of those vehicles being used. Is that correct? Correct. So that's about a
Speaker 103
41:37
million dollars a year. Which we, that's why I think there's part of the time frame to install those is not till January 1, 28, so that we can recognize some savings through the vehicles that we do add that to.
I think some vehicles already have that. So we just want to expand that and then see if we can reduce that mileage reimbursement and reassign some vehicles. And then once we have savings, then we can add those to the vehicle. So it wouldn't be an incremental cost. Sure. The total cost of ownership would go
Chair
Unverified
42:08
down is the goal. I can't speak for all of the
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
42:19
committee, but... $20 a month for every vehicle annually is roughly a million dollars a year
that we're not currently mandating must be spent. And this says shall, correct? By 2028, yes, sir. Okay, so by 2028, that would be what we'd be agreeing to. Yes. And we don't have, to my knowledge, you have some estimates, have some some good ideas but you don't have the ability to ensure that this will actually bring cost savings we have a rough estimate of how much it'll be a month is there an install fee on top
Speaker 103
42:55
of that twenty dollars not for the not with the vendors
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
42:59
we've spoken to okay so the twenty dollars they're going to install these for free like like your coffee makers you buy coffee from us we'll give you the coffee maker or whatever
Speaker 175
43:09
okay um okay i want to come back to that can i have a few few follow-ups, Mr. Chair. You're recognized. I'm sorry,
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
43:14
can we just, I think there was one other thing somebody wanted to say on that before we move
Speaker 91
43:20
on. Is that okay, Representative Rose? Okay. Well, we have 4,000 vehicles in the fleet, but not all of those will be GPSed because if we are
Speaker 93
43:26
exempting those used for law enforcement, that is a good, a good number of vehicles, you know, Department of Corrections, Public Safety, and things like that. Do you know how many? I don't have those numbers. We would
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
43:38
have to, we would have to look, but I know there's other departments that do have some law enforcement that would be exempt. So it would not be 4,000.
Speaker 177
43:46
While I recognize that would be a maximum,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
43:53
it would not be. So an undeterminate number not to exceed 4,000?
That's correct. Okay. So, would this allow shared services to access
the speeds at which the vehicle was driven? Pardon? I'm
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
44:19
So, would that create a fireable offense? There's not
Speaker 103
44:24
currently a policy that would dictate that, no.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
44:36
intended? No, that would not be intended. Okay, so I'll ask you another way. If you knew that an employee was driving 100 miles per hour
Speaker 103
44:43
in a state vehicle, what would happen from there now that you have that data? If I had that data, I would think we would want to make sure that employee is aware that that's probably an unsafe manner in which to operate a state property. But other than that, I'm not sure what the decision would be on
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
45:00
how to handle any disciplinary action. The current fleet manual right now has one small thing about GPS, and it just says that
they're installed on state vehicles, and those opting to do so are asked to consider the cost of doing so in the best of business interest, and it deals with the records being foiable after 30 days. There is other language in here that essentially that, you know, when you sign up to get a state vehicle, you have to fill out the driver authorization form, and then they have to go and look at pull our driving record. And so they pull our driving record periodically as well to make sure that I haven't gotten any tickets in the meantime.
So in that, I take the responsibility that says I'm going to obey all traffic laws, that I'm going to wear my seatbelt, that any passengers will wear a seatbelt, and that if I am found to not follow those rules, then I can lose my privileges of driving
Speaker 93
45:53
a state vehicle. That's what our current manual says. And that's what's currently in
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
45:59
place. Are you saying here that if this were to be passed, you don't anticipate or
it's not the intention that rules will be changed that will then say these could be fireable offenses?
Speaker 129
46:12
I don't think that's been considered. I think the ultimate
Speaker 103
46:17
goal was to get more accurate data on the 4,000 vehicles that the state operates. And maybe there's also some safety options on that software that's included in that $20. So, like, if we, you can tell if there's low tire pressure or if the oil light comes on or, I mean, any of the other safety items that someone might need to be aware of to operate that safely, that would be the intent.
I don't, and I think, you know, the, yes, someone could be restricted from driving a state vehicle if they're not operating it safely. That privilege could be revoked if they don't demonstrate safe behavior. I'll hop back in
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
47:01
the queue after this little series, Mr.
Sheriff, that's all right. I want to go back to cost for just a second. The vendors that you said you had spoken with, is there, do you guys just have the ability, and it's ignorance here, Do you guys just have the ability to enter into that contract, or is it going to have to be approved by ALC or?
Speaker 103
47:22
It would have to be approved, I would assume, but it depends. Some of these vendors are on a state contract, but even entering into those, we would have to come for approval. We may not have to do a RFP to get, you know, to, I guess, get three quotes or three bids, but that's essentially what we're trying to do. but I believe some of these vendors are already on a state contract. I'll just say, and I'm sorry, it seems
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
47:47
to be just you and I that are going back and forth here on this, and I apologize, you're getting my ire.
If I go back, and this is on the floor, and my colleagues are going to say, you mean to tell me that you knew roughly a million dollars a year in monthly fees was going to be attached to this? You didn't know exactly how many vehicles it was. You didn't know who would have to sign off on it. You didn't know who the vendor was or what the exact price was. Because that $20 could change between now and 2028. It could be $40. You know, it could be $60. It could. And so I guess I'm just going to want to give you an opportunity to talk about that.
Speaker 103
48:24
And I'll hop out, Mr. Chair. So we've been shopping a lot of different vendors. We've been doing a lot of research because we don't have a specific vendor. We haven't narrowed that down because this obviously it hasn't passed yet. So we want to make, you know, we're just trying to come up with, okay, what are all the options and what do we think it could cost? So that's pretty much what we've done as far as research. And then, you know, by talking to all the different vendors, realizing, okay, who's on a state contract, who's not, we've talked to several different states to find out what they've done.
And, you know, we've, especially surrounding states, we've put out information to some of the organizations that we're a part of to find out, okay, what have you all learned? And every state we've talked to, they have telematics installed on their vehicles. Now, some of them use it for different purposes. Tennessee uses it primarily, my understanding, after talking to their fleet manager, it's primarily for safety. They're not looking at vehicle utilization. They are tracking speed. They are tracking who breaks hard. they are tracking those type of things.
They have a great story of how someone that was driving a state vehicle, there was an alert that they realized their car was hijacked. And so, you know, they were able to locate that car, go get that person that was on the side of the road. I mean, Tennessee has a good case story for why they do that. Louisiana, different story. They don't own vehicles. They rent all their vehicles. But that comes with telematics, and so they use that telematics through the rental vehicles because it's already on there.
So they're looking at where that vehicle went, who drove it. Some of the required reporting is automated through that. So we're talking to other states to understand what vendors have you used, who do you have positive experiences with. Department of DOT here in Arkansas, they have a big contract. All of their vehicles have telematics. And we're learning from them, okay, they've worked with, I think, a couple of vendors. And so which vendor have you had the best experience with and how do you use that information?
So we're going out there, I think, in two weeks to have more in-depth conversations with them. So it's already being used in the state. It's just we're asking for this information, A, to make it easier for state employees So they don't have to do, I hear a lot of complaints about the process of getting a vehicle, the manual recording of the vehicle, and then someone having to key that in at the end of each month. It's not efficient. It's 1985 process of doing that and collecting data.
And we just want to automate that and make it easier. And we want to have accurate data on those, on our fleet. And that's part of the problem why I can't give you solid numbers, because we don't have a really good process to collect that data and have solid information. We don't have a good process for identifying, which it's very manual, and I have to go to each department. So since this amendment has been made, I'm going to have to go to each department and ask, okay, give me a list of your vehicles that are considered law enforcement, because we don't have that.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
51:49
And I would just add, Representative Rose, I absolutely understand not feeling comfortable voting on a bill without knowing the cost. We need a number of vehicles that this will impact. I didn't realize we weren't going to have that today, so I apologize for that. We will get that. I will also say, just as I know you know, we can't have a vendor in mind before this becomes law. We have to go through the normal bid process and all of that. So I think it's a little bit tricky. it's a little bit chicken and egg. But to the extent that we can know at least the number of
vehicles that will be needing updates, I think you committee
members absolutely deserve to have that information before this vote. Sorry, I was hopping out. And I
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
52:31
appreciate that. I'm confused a little bit because I kind of would think it was along the lines
of what you said that we would have to go through the typical bid process. But just a second ago, you said kind of, sort of, Maybe not. Well, if it's on a state
Speaker 103
52:45
contract, if we do go with a vendor that's on a state contract, it wouldn't have to go through the bid process, but we would still have to come to you all
for the procurement of that contract with that vendor.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
52:57
And we couldn't come to any contract discussions with any particular vendor before we make this law. Right. Sure. So,
yeah. Yeah, I'll take a break for a minute. All right, Representative Beck, you're recognized.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
53:12
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I
have a couple of questions here. One is, well, the first one is that some
of your vehicles already have this. So, and I had assumed something earlier, and maybe that was my mistake,
that you were talking about what the vendor of the vehicle, the Ford or the Chevrolet, they all have GPS tracking on them if you just turn it on. But even that costs a monthly fee. And I don't know whether you guys are going to try to use that or whether you actually had a system now that's, when you say some of the vehicles were equipped with it, what are they equipped with? Maybe
Chair
Unverified
53:57
that's just a good start. We have several
Speaker 103
54:01
departments that have opted to implement GPS on their, or telematics on their vehicles.
Like TSS, we just added three of our vehicles, and I think other departments have done that, but it's not centralized at all. We all use different vendors, and there's no central look at anything.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
54:22
All right, that clears that up for me. But, you know,
I'm listening, and what's interesting, all the discussion and the questions here are around employees and vehicles. But yet, if you read what this thing, the bill says, it's talking about tracking your vehicles.
And you said the very cost of this savings is we're going to be able to better track our vehicles. So with all that said, why are we even talking about tracking the employees? You know, if you're going to do this, track the vehicles. You don't need to know who's driving it. You know what's going on with the bill. You know how it's being utilized. I mean, whether it's being utilized or not, I think that was one of your concerns. that you had. So why would we even consider tracking the vehicle as to who's driving the vehicle?
And that way it eliminates a lot of the concerns I think other members of this committee have with that you're tracking individuals. So, I mean, certainly if you saw that a vehicle was being operated in a manner that shouldn't be, you'd probably want to go back and look in a separate data and say, okay, that car was signed out to this individual at that time and you could do the safety things. But the concern that I have is like, I think some of the other committee has this concern, is you're using it to track individuals and it's like you don't need to track individuals
to do what you want and to do what this thing says. You don't have to track individuals, all you got to track is the vehicle. So you could say the things on the vehicle, employees would know that, hey, we track all state vehicles, and we keep records on them. So now you have all your data to get the efficiency that you want, and there's no
real master record as to who was driving and how all the state employees are moving around the state.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
56:16
Would you agree with that? And correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that that's what this bill does, Representative Beck. We're not tracking individual employees. We're only tracking
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
56:26
the vehicles. This language is only about tracking vehicles. So in that statement, just to be clear, what you're saying is there's a large data set that's on this vehicle that it's going, being utilized wherever it's going. And there's no connection, that data set does not include who was driving that vehicle at that time.
Speaker 103
56:48
We are trying to automate that so that we do know who the driver is because that's a required field that we have to report. to DF&A as far as, you know, that's part of the form that you have to fill out when you drive a state vehicle. You have to put who the driver is, the destination, the purpose of the trip, how many miles it took to get there, or your ending odometer mileage, as well as your beginning odometer mileage, and if you stop for gas. So we're just trying to automate that so it's not
required manual entry. Now, it's not manual entry at the end of the month as to who drives it, but let's say if someone complains about license, you know, they call with a specific license plate that a state vehicle ran them off the road, we need to know who drove that vehicle. And so we would have to, and I don't think that's the purpose of tracking that, but that also could, we could look that up and say that car was not anywhere near the, you know, they reported. So I So I think it could, but we have to know who drove the vehicle.
That's part of what is required to be turned in when they fill out that record.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
58:02
So maybe it'll help me clear, so answer me this, okay, I'm a state employee. I'm gonna utilize the vehicle. You
got your new tracking system in, okay, what do I do? Today or in the future?
Speaker 103
58:18
In the future. Okay, well, we don't really have that defined yet because we haven't finalized a vendor to know what, you know, all they're going to option.
Ideally, what I'd like to have is that they can go up to, with the code, unlock the car door, get in, and drive. And we know because they've gone on a reservation system prior to that trip to say who's driving, how many passengers, where they're going, and how many days they're going to be there. so that we can determine it's really beneficial to the state for you to drive directly and for us to reimburse you mileage. Like if you're going less than 100 miles, perhaps, you know, whatever that break-even point is,
and we can say you need to travel with those four people in one vehicle and we'll reimburse you mileage. Or you'll need an SUV, so we need to get a larger vehicle for you if you're traveling with four people to go to your destination. And then once they enter who it is, they can go unlock that vehicle and then go on their trip and all that is captured automatically and there's no month-end keying of that manual
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
59:28
for every single trip that vehicle took.
And that information is presented, I mean, is kept
now, right? All of that is required now and that is reported to leg audit currently and they audit the use of the vehicle.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
59:43
So that's all. Yes, I understand. But so you understand the confusion here because you're saying
you're going to fill out, I'm going to fill out a report that says I'm doing this regardless of the news system. I'm going to this
place and Chairman Gadsway is going with me and we're taking off and we've got a vehicle.
That's fine. If there's an approval process for us to do that, that's fine. And that's all the information you need. Your new automated system is not going to collect that information. It's going to collect the information that that vehicle left that lot. Now, you might know that I was authorized to take that vehicle. But other than that, now you've shifted over to a whole new set of data, which is about that vehicle, where it's at, what speed it's traveling, and all of those things, which is what you need. And I think that will help you out. But my point is, if you keep me, Chairman Gasly, separate,
It's not, you know, you know who had the vehicle at that time, but it doesn't have to be there. So now, if someone foyers the information on the vehicle, here's what the vehicle did. This is where it was traveling. This is the speed it was taking. So it seems like you're trying to take this new system and incorporate into it how the people are driving and who's driving and how they're driving. Whereas I don't think you need that. I think you just need that on the vehicle because you know who's driving the vehicle. Does that make sense? And that's all you need to know that it was under, I signed it out or whatever.
You gave me the codes and I operated it for that time. That's all you need. But you don't keep anything else concerning that.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:01:21
So those are separate. It's confusing, but they are kept in separate databases. The manual logout information, all of that stuff on where you are, who you're with, that is separate from the information that would be. Yeah. So typically a
Speaker 91
1:01:35
reservation system is going to have its data. So you have signed up to, you know, get a
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:01:40
vehicle, this is where you're going, this is how long you're going to be gone.
All the telematic information is typically kept in a different system. Now, with all systems, even as it is currently today, can those be linked? Yes, but do we generate a report that says Jennifer Davis has driven these vehicles and this is all the performance of those at this time? That is not something that we do, but that information is technically all there. it's just kept somewhat separately because they have different functions. You have the reservation function, and then you have the GPS telematic function.
Those are kind of separate functions, even though it's overall part of one system. But they are tied in so that way if there
Speaker 93
1:02:27
is an issue, whether somebody is hijacked or somebody is involved in an accident or something of that, that the developers, the reports and things of that can be pulled to correlate the user and the information at that time.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
1:02:43
So the reservation system, you guys already have that?
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:02:48
No, right now it's all manual. So even though it is manual, those cars that have GPS, they can still take that GPS system and the spreadsheet or whatever system that department is keeping their reservations in, whether it's a binder, and put those together and still have the exact same information. It's just whether or not it's going to be, the reservations are going to be automated. All
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
1:03:14
right. So the final question, then I'll just tap out here.
But then the reservation system is not, it does not exist. Now, this automated reservation system, is that part of the $20 per car system or is that another system
Chair
Unverified
1:03:34
we're going to be purchasing? We're trying to find one that integrates into
Speaker 103
1:03:40
that. A lot of entities do that kind of homegrown. Like, for instance, Energy and Environment currently has an in-house develop tool that they use for a reservation system.
And so we may do something like that, just build on what they've already built. We haven't, and I apologize, but we haven't gotten far enough into the research to know where that tool exists and, you know, what we can use. Thank you
very much. All right. Well, I think it's abundantly clear to me at this point that it is about tracking people. It's about tracking vehicles, but it's also about tracking people. It's been admitted that, other states anyway, track how fast someone's driving, how many miles they've driven, how fast they drove, including down to how hard they brake.
I mean, at some point, I just think we have to say, how much are we going to micromanage people and what's next? Are we going to put a body tracker on state employees to monitor how many bathroom breaks they take, to monitor how many smoke breaks they take, to monitor how much time they spend on their computer, to monitor how much time they spend on phone calls and texting on their personal phone, on their state phone. Just where do you draw the line on the electronic micromanaging of employees? And I just, again, note the irony that there was a bill presented today about tracking someone.
I understand it was without their knowledge or consent, but nevertheless, GPS tracking someone constituting the criminal offense of harassment. But we're about to do that to state employees and say, I hope
you like it. And so I just, you know, at some point, I think. Mr. Chair, I just, please. I
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:05:25
mean, that's the second reference to that bill today, and that feels highly inappropriate to
me. I mean, I just, I really don't appreciate the personal attack. If we could just keep this about the policy, that
would be amazing. Well, there's no personal attack, and it's precisely about the policy because it's a comparison between two ideas that are closely related that deal with GPS tracking.
It is precisely about the policy. It's not personal. I didn't reference you. I'm
referencing the law and how it applies in different scenarios and how it's related. And so, again. Can I say something? Hey, I'm Leslie Fiskin. I'm
Speaker 203
1:05:57
Secretary of Transformation and Shared Services. Can I? I just wanted to. Have you
been recognized? All right. Any other questions by the committee? Representative Woodridge. Thank you,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:06:14
Mr. Chair. I'm not an attorney, but I'm enjoying listening to you opine on this.
Can you show me, I know we had talked about it a while ago, and I'm
trying to find it in the bill. Where does it give you the authority that you may do it now that
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:06:28
you're changing the may to shall? That's on page three, Representative Orge, line 25. Okay. Each state agency board of commission may, you see how that struck through, shall. Right. So
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:06:41
my, I guess, question would be, if you've got the ability to do it now, why are you asking for a language change?
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:06:49
Because each agency does it separately now, and so some agencies do it, some agencies don't. This is TSS asking for
the authority as a department to have all of the agencies fall under it and have that, have those devices in all of
the state vehicles. So every agency has
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:07:05
the unilateral authority to decide that's not governed or that decision's not made at a higher level in the executive branch? I don't think so. No, it's not.
Department by department. So, okay. So that, I guess, a little bit of latitude, Mr. Chair.
You're recognized. The governor has a cabinet, secretary cabinet, and if the executive branch were to say we want these vehicles recorded, the cabinet secretaries would then have the authority, you're saying under current law, to say, no, no, we're not going to do that. And you're wanting us to change it to where they don't have a choice to basically go against the executive branch?
I don't understand, I guess. At what level is this being decided? who has asked for this bill to be brought? The
Speaker 103
1:08:05
governor. The governor. It's part of the efficiency study that was done with McKinsey, and part of the challenge was not having enough data to have, I mean, there just isn't enough accurate data to understand the full utilization of all the 4,000 vehicles.
And so this was the first step to have accurate data, which then we could make better decisions. Sure,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:08:27
I understand that. And last question. So earlier I'd asked about the cabinet level. If the cabinet person, it looks like the amendment exempts a cabinet level department executive. Is that right? And has law enforcement. And?
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:08:42
Okay, they have to have both. And used for
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:08:45
law enforcement. It has to be a cabinet level and used for law enforcement? Correct. Okay. So just regular law enforcement vehicles are not exempted?
Speaker 85
1:08:54
all law enforcement vehicles are exempt. This
Speaker 103
1:08:58
only applies to cabinet-level departments, so the 15 departments that are cabinet. And we're saying that of the 15 that we want to implement this on, all the law enforcement vehicles are exempt. So all of the law enforcement
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:09:12
vehicles in, say, Department of Public Safety, which are, it's going to be a huge chunk of the 4,000 that we're talking
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:09:20
about, that would all be exempt. Okay. I'm still confused, though. So cabinet-level All vehicles,
so cabinet secretaries that drive a state vehicle, unless they're a law enforcement officer, they will be tracked?
If they drive a vehicle, yes. If they drive a vehicle. But if they drive a vehicle and they are also a law enforcement officer, they will be
Speaker 209
1:09:41
exempt along with all other law enforcement officer vehicles? Correct. If the vehicle is used for law enforcement, not the driver. So why would we exempt law
Speaker 93
1:09:50
enforcement? Well, we worked with the Department of Public Safety in corrections on that. there's a number of reasons. It could be that many of those vehicles are used for undercover operations, and you don't want, especially if they're releasable under FOIA, you do not want the, you know, information about that vehicle getting out. A lot of them are using them for,
you know, sting operations and things of that nature. That was some of their concerns. Additionally, it's just a safety issue for those. Plus, they already have the dash cams, the other GPSs in the vehicle, so they're already tracking amongst themselves the best utilization of that. And And having any of that utilization on what a police cruiser goes through and how many miles and how fast they're driving is
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
1:10:29
going to skew any of the other data that we have that is
Speaker 177
1:10:34
used for a normal state purpose. Okay.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:10:37
I mean, I guess some of that makes sense. I think the foiable part of it does not because, I mean, obviously you couldn't foie it in advance of a sting. It would be after the fact. And I'm for exempting law enforcement. To be honest, I'm going to vote no in general just because I think it's overreaching to a lot of the points that have been made. But again, I don't understand everything about the bill, but I just have some concerns. And I appreciate that. I'll let it go with that. Thank you.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:11:08
Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are you familiar,
Representative Klein, I'm sure you are, but just for clarity, are you familiar with
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:11:20
the term metadata? I've heard it. I am not
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:11:24
Stephen Meeks, but it's fine. When I was, when I was in college, it was the first time I was introduced to the term. And I asked my professor what my Todd was. So it's more or less, it's, it's digital data that is embedded in other data, like a photograph,
like a video frame, like tracking data. My assumption, which I know could get me in trouble, but my assumption is that there is metadata that will be attached to the tracking information. A lot of the tracking information itself may be metadata. So when we're talking about something that could be FOIA'd or something that could be subpoenaed, imagine there's a lot of itty-bitty data that is available, Like destinations along a journey for a vehicle, where they stopped
for five minutes or where they spent the night, where they started, where they ended.
Does that make sense so far, that that information would be available in the tracking device's metadata? It should
Chair
Unverified
1:12:28
be. I think that's available on all our vehicles, so it would be included on that as
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:12:33
well. So follow me with this, and I feel like I'm referencing at least more than one account that I know of just from conversation, but we have state employees who live close to the Capitol. We have state employees who live far from the Capitol. We have state employees who may live a good ways off, but also keep a residence here.
We have state employees who may travel all across the state, and in those journeys, they may stay overnight somewhere. And in the
scenario I'm going to give you, which is a real one, but we can make it a hypothetical one, too, they could start out in Little Rock and have a trip to the other side of the state, north, south, east, west, wherever it is. And this could be something they do semi-regular. And in the course of their journeys, instead of staying in a hotel, their house, their primary residence, may be somewhere in between point A and point B. They may stop there frequently.
They may spend the night there, see their family, visit their kids, whatever it might be. And they're in their state vehicle. And we're now saying, if we pass this, that that residence that they may stop at with some frequency, whether it's because they're passing through or they're staying the night or whatever it is, that that data of where their residence is is now publicly available. Does that make
Speaker 103
1:13:49
sense? And my understanding is it would already be publicly available because they have to record that on the— Their home address?
If they stop there, every destination has to be entered on that form where they stop.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:14:02
and you've made that publicly available
Speaker 103
1:14:05
no one's asked for it so no i don't make it public well i'm not the keeper of it today but um if anyone asks for it it's a form that's already i mean that information is being captured
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:14:18
today it's supposed to be you capture the address
current policy captures the address of every stop yes of every state vehicle that's not exempted wayne long
Speaker 163
1:14:27
behind you nodding vigorously. And that's part of why
Speaker 103
1:14:33
we want to automate this, because to use a vehicle is so, it requires so much manual writing of everything. Every stop you make is required to be entered in that log, in that vehicle log. All right. And I
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:14:45
want to go back to this with cost savings. Can you tell me specifically how that's calculated? I still haven't heard that yet. So today,
Chair
Unverified
1:14:56
there's a few different ways that McKinsey has recommended we're going to capture
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:15:00
cost savings. I'm sorry, I want to make sure we're on the same page, how
Speaker 103
1:15:06
this specifically would be saving. Okay, the GPS. So that's one of them. By being able to know I have, of those 4,000 vehicles, I have 200 that have not been driven more than 100 miles in a year, tells me I probably don't need those vehicles. Or I need to go figure out why they're not being driven more than 100 miles. Maybe they're special purpose. Maybe they're, you know, it's a truck that's used for maintenance that
only goes between here and the Commerce Building. And so that makes sense. We still need that vehicle because it carries ladders, equipment, et cetera. But if it's a pool vehicle that we're using for people to check out and for anyone to use, we don't need that vehicle and we need to sell it. We don't need to have the cost of the insurance. We don't need to have it sitting on a lot, not being used, and
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:15:58
deteriorating. So you have an anticipated rough number of vehicles, you think? 300. That you would get rid
Speaker 103
1:16:04
of? We've started getting rid of vehicles as part of this
exercise. I think we've gotten rid of over 100 as of maybe 124 as of today that have been identified as underutilized. So you've gotten rid
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:16:17
of 100 without this and you're anticipating 200 more because of this? Once I have data, I
Speaker 103
1:16:24
could tell you how many we should get rid of. I just don't have all the data today because it's manually entered in a system and there's not a good way to do the analysis. So I'm hoping that we could identify 200 more vehicles that are underutilized
or we shift it instead to looking at the $8 million that we're paying for travel reimbursement. We know we have 66 employees that are getting over $10,000 a year, so maybe they need vehicles. So maybe we need to shift those underutilized vehicles to those departments so that they can instead not, we don't incur that high cost of travel reimbursement. The point is efficiency.
Chair
Unverified
1:17:07
The point is to save money. I understand, yeah.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:17:12
There is a hope that you will find more efficiencies through this. You have optimistic savings, but not necessarily data yet, is what you're saying. It has
Chair
Unverified
1:17:23
to be better than what we do today.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:17:33
Thank you, Chair. I'm going to make a motion in just a second, but
I want to ask a question, because on page Page 2 and page 3, the very beginning of page 3, it does say that there's supposed to be a report that's turned into the Legislative Council.
That's like already a shall. So is that done every year? Because it seems like when people have asked questions, I keep hearing I don't have those numbers, I don't know what they are. So I'm wondering if that part of this is not being done every year, has that report
Speaker 103
1:18:05
gone to Legislative Council? Yes. DFNA is currently responsible for that. And so they have a system that they track that inventory. And that's what we have, 4,000 vehicles that they have reported to me. But there's not a clear line of distinguished.
We don't distinguish. It's hard to know which
Chair
Unverified
1:18:23
ones are law enforcement in those unless you go line by line and look at the
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:18:31
vehicle description. Okay. Well, my motion is there's a lot of conversation about the cost of this. And I don't think we're going to come to the resolution today. And so my motion is, can we get a fiscal impact on this and then come back when you have better numbers for us to look at? And that way we feel more comfortable with what that is.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:18:52
That's my motion, a fiscal impact. I think, Representative Mamrie, just if I may, I think that we tried to get a fiscal impact and we couldn't. Is that correct? I'm sorry. I just want to
Speaker 225
1:19:05
make sure I'm right before I say this. Is that correct? We don't
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:19:08
have one from DF&A because we can't work with it. Can we get one? Is it possible to get one for this committee? We can. We'll try. I will contact DF&A and
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:19:16
try to get that for you, Representative Mayberry, for sure. Okay. Because I was going to say, I know every committee member is allowed to ask for a fiscal impact on any bill, health bill.
I mean, any committee, we're allowed to request that. And so I'm asking if we can, and I think they have to have it back within three days, five days. Five days, which we won't be here in five days. All right, is
that a request for fiscal impact? Yes. All right, Representative Mayberry has made a request for fiscal impact. It's my understanding, once a request for fiscal impact has been made and there's not, if there's not one, and there is not, then no action can be taken on the bill until the fiscal impact is prepared and presented.
And so we're going to send that request to the appropriate entity to prepare and send this committee a fiscal impact impact, and then the committee must receive the fiscal impact or have the fiscal impact for one day before any action can be taken on the bill. So Representative Mayberry has made the request. Sounds like no further action can be taken on the bill today. Thank you, committee. All right. Thank you. All right.
Does anyone have a bill they'd like to run quickly? It wasn't a joke. I have one, but I can't. It hasn't been 24 hours. All right. Seeing no further business before this committee tonight, Representative Beatty, hang on. Representative Beatty, you sure you want to do this?
This committee is not played. Which, what numbers do
you have, Representative Beatty? Okay, House Bill 1774, all right, let's start with that one.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:21:42
Representative Beatty, you're recognized. Representative Howard Beatty, District 95. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee members present House Bill 1774 as an act to amend the membership of the Arkansas Fair Housing Commission. Basically right now what this bill would
do is would add seven members total four-year terms, five members appointed by the governor subject to confirmation by the Senate. Five members would have knowledge or experience in the fields of real estate, home building, mortgage lending, banking, or other related field. One member would be appointed by the president pro tem of the Senate this demonstrated active involvement or interest in fair housing issues one member by the speaker of the house with like similar demonstrated involvement or interest in fair housing the
justification for these changes current statutory requirements for appointments are very specific and difficult to maintain compliance it's difficult to find candidates who are willing to serve and also meet the very narrow Requirements and burdensome for appointing authorities, citizens interested in serving or anyone else making those recommendations. So broadening these requirements will allow a much greater pool of candidates to be considered for appointment and give more people an opportunity to participate.
It will result in an active and engaged board of directors. With that, it will entertain any questions.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:23:34
All right. Representative Woodridge, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. thank you representative so i was trying to get this
pulled up so is this the statute that governs the board appointment and certification of all of our local housing authorities i don't think so
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:23:47
i think this is just the fair housing commission at the state level okay
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:23:52
so this is the state level this doesn't because right now every housing authority in
our districts or communities have a state statute by which those boards are made up they're governed how folks roll off of them this doesn't amend or change that in any way no i think this is strictly the arkansas fair housing
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:24:07
commission thank you all right any other questions by the committee seeing no further questions by
the committee we have no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative beta you recognize to close for your bill i'm closed mr chair
i offer motion do pass we appreciate a good vote we've got a motion do pass is there any discussion
on the motion seeing none all those in favor say aye all those opposed yes have it congratulations you passed your bill you've got one more
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:24:39
i got one more that i can be just as quick representative howard baity district 95 here to present senate bill 403 and basically senate bill 403 is an act to create the 2020 arkansas complete count committee to plan for the statewide educational outreach initiatives to increase community awareness and participation in the 2030 federal census
and members, if you have this bill, you can kind of look through the need for this. I think if you look on page two of the bill on line one, it points out that accurate information is critical to planning and growth and development for the social needs of Arkansas. And during the 2022 census, Arkansas had the highest undercount in the 2020 census at 5.04% undercount.
It was one of six states that considered by the U.S. Bureau of Census to have statistically significant undercounts during the 2020 federal census. Over 300 federal programs rely on that census data to allocate their funds. It was estimated that that undercount from those 55 federal programs that spend money, they allocate somewhere around $10 billion to Arkansas for fiscal year 2016 based on that data.
And it's estimated that based on the undercount that that census cost over $5 billion to the state of Arkansas. So basically that's the justification for this bill. It was brought with Senator Clark Tucker this morning when he was in here presenting. We were kind of hoping that maybe we could run those at the same time. But he said he was going to leave it in my hands. And so I think this makes the case for it. It gives us time.
We're halfway through now, and we need to get on task and get the educational programs out there and work on getting our communities and our folks comfortable with reporting to take advantage of the monies that we're missing out that we can employ here in the state. With that, I'll entertain any questions. Representative Collins,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:26:53
you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Representative Beatty, you know, you and I are both on some sort of federal group as the majority leader and as the minority leader regarding the census,
and I think you probably got the same mail I did. How is this different from that? I think
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:27:09
this is going to be something that we here in the state can take an active participation in and help educate our folks instead of just the
two of us working and advocating on behalf of the state. I think this will establish, you know, if you look in here, the establishment of the board and a working group and a committee. So it's something that we can proactively work on here as a team in the state of Arkansas. Well, and I appreciate that, and I appreciate the bill.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:27:35
I guess I just want to understand, are they two separate things like this group will complement and coexist with whatever that other group is, which I think maybe is determined by federal law?
I'm not sure if it is or not. I
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:27:50
think it is. I think it's under federal law and with
the Census Commission that we get the notices and things that we get. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Representative Meeks, you're recognized.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
1:28:06
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Only question, and I definitely understand the concern you're trying to fill here. Only question I have is a 30-member board. That's a pretty large group to try to get together. And I'm just wondering, does that board need to be that big? Because we understand that you try to get 30 people to agree and go in one direction. That can be a challenge sometimes. just just curious about your thoughts on that. Well
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:28:35
my thoughts on on that are
we're gonna this committee is going to be working for all 75 counties in the state and I think everyone's going to want to have a stakeholder someone involved in the committee so I mean that's I think it's going to it's a monumental task and it this is a task that can't be completed by five or six folks it needs to have a collective involvement. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing
no further questions by the committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:29:08
Representative Beatty, you're recognized to close for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members
of the committee, this is probably one of the most important things that we can do for the state moving forward to prepare for the 2030 census. By focusing on improving the accuracy of our census data, this bill will make certain and ensure that Arkansas receives its fair share of federal funds and resources based on the true population count of the state of Arkansas.
And with that, I appreciate your attention and allowing me to get these bills out. I'd offer a motion to do pass.
All right, we have a motion to do pass on the floor. Is there any discussion on the motion? Representative Beck,
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
1:29:49
you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to emphasize the importance of that. Thanks for bringing this bill. It's great. I had a city that dramatically got underreported And they are held out of a lot of federal funds that could help that city right now because they just didn't get their reporting done right. And when they tried to appeal it, there's literally nothing they could do. They're stuck there until the next census.
So this is a very important thing for bringing this
bill. Thank you. All right. Any other discussion on the motion? Seeing no further discussion on the motion, all those in favor say aye. Aye. And all those opposed, the ayes have it. Congratulations. You've passed your bill. With that, seeing no further business for this committee, we are adjourned.
Agenda
CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT
HB1614 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED TO CERTAIN CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRANT PROGRAMS.
REGULAR AGENDA
HB1621 Wardlaw TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO EXEMPT PERSONAL INFORMATION OF ELECTED CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, JUDICIAL OFFICIALS, ELECTED COUNTY OFFICIALS, ELECTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS, AND THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY.
HB1631 Wardlaw TO ADDRESS THE ISSUANCE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS.
HB1632 Wardlaw TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME AND FISH COMMISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES.
HB1706 McCollum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS; AND TO PROHIBIT RANKED CHOICE VOTING.
HB1720 Vaught TO CREATE THE BABIES AT WORK ACT; TO ALLOW STATE AGENCIES TO PERMIT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WHO ARE PARENTS OR LEGAL GUARDIANS TO BRING THEIR INFANTS SIX MONTHS OR YOUNGER TO WORK.
HB1069 S. Meeks TO OBSERVE STANDARD TIME YEAR ROUND IN ARKANSAS; AND TO ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME IN ARKANSAS.
HB1739 M. Brown TO ADOPT THE UNIFORM ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIALS ACT.
HB1740 K. Moore TO EXEMPT CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION FROM THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967.
HB1187 Vaught TO AUTHORIZE A LICENSURE BY ENDORSEMENT FOR MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPISTS.
HJR1004 Ladyman APPLYING TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION OF THE STATES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION TO IMPOSE TERM LIMITS OF MEMBERS FOR THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS.
HB1753 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT-OUT OF THE NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 1993; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, § 5.
HB1773 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BALLOT QUESTION COMMITTEES AND LEGISLATIVE QUESTION COMMITTEES.
HB1774 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE ARKANSAS FAIR HOUSING COMMISSION.
HB1243 Underwood TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY REGARDING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES; TO AMEND CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTING AND PROTECT ELECTION INTEGRITY; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996.
HB1037 A. Collins TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING PERSONS WHO MAY REGISTER TO VOTE; AND AMENDING PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, UNDER THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, § 19.
HB1041 A. Collins TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS.
HB1797 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AUTHORITY; TO AMEND A PORTION OF THE ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 2000; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SENATE BILLS
SB351 J. Dismang TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1990; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996.
SB370 Irvin TO TRANSFER THE ARKANSAS WINE PRODUCERS COUNCIL FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, HERITAGE, AND TOURISM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB343 Irvin TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC PROPERTY; AND TO AMEND THE AUTOMOBILE AND PICKUP TRUCK ACQUISITION ACT FOR THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
SB12 B. King TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING REDISTRICTING BY THE BOARD OF APPORTIONMENT.
SB403 C. Tucker TO CREATE THE THE 2030 ARKANSAS COMPLETE COUNT COMMITTEE; AND TO PLAN AND CONDUCT STATEWIDE EDUCATIONAL AND OUTREACH INITIATIVES TO INCREASE COMMUNITY AWARENESS AND PARTICIPATION IN THE 2030 FEDERAL DECENNIAL CENSUS.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
HJR1001 A. Collins A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE THE CITIZENS' REDISTRICTING COMMISSION AND TO REPEAL THE BOARD OF APPORTIONMENT.
HJR1002 J. Richardson AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REPEAL THE EXCEPTION TO THE PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE.
HJR1003 A. Collins THE ARKANSAS GOVERNMENT DISCLOSURE AMENDMENT.
HJR1005 Long AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TAXPAYER BILL OF RIGHTS.
HJR1006 B. McKenzie AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION PROVIDING THAT A GOVERNMENTAL BODY SHALL NOT USE STATE OR LOCAL FUNDS TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH A LOBBYIST FOR LOBBYING PURPOSES.
HJR1007 Cavenaugh A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO CREATE A PROCEDURE FOR THE RECALL OF CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS.
HJR1008 S. Meeks AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CONCERNING THE TAXATION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY AND REAL PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
HJR1009 K. Brown AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KNOWN AS THE ARKANSAS VICTIMS' BILL OF RIGHTS; AND TO PROVIDE RIGHTS FOR VICTIMS OF MISDEMEANOR AND FELONY OFFENSES, INCLUDING VICTIMS IN THE ADULT AND JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEMS.
HJR1010 Unger A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT BY A TWO-THIRDS VOTE, THE SENATE MAY REMOVE MEMBERS OF CERTAIN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR CAUSE ONLY, AFTER NOTICE AND HEARING.
HJR1011 S. Meeks A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING THE CONSIDERATION OF BILLS OTHER THAN APPROPRIATION BILLS DURING A FISCAL SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
HJR1012 R. Scott Richardson AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REPEAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE REAPPRAISAL AND REASSESSMENT OF REAL PROPERTY; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 79, CONCERNING REAL PROPERTY TAXES.
HJR1013 Pilkington A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN VACANCIES SHALL BE FILLED BY APPOINTMENT BY THE GOVERNOR.
HJR1014 Beaty Jr. A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
HJR1015 Lundstrum A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO ENSURE TRANSPARENCY BY REQUIRING A JUDICIAL CANDIDATE TO DECLARE HIS OR HER POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATION OR INDEPENDENT STATUS WHEN RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
HJR1016 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 5, § 1, ALLOWING THE SPONSOR OF AN INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM PETITION TO CORRECT OR AMEND A PETITION.
HJR1017 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED STATE-WIDE INITIATED ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME A LAW WHEN APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF THE VOTES CAST IN THE ELECTION AND A MAJORITY OF THE COUNTIES OF THE STATE.
HJR1018 Ray THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT.
HJR1019 S. Meeks AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO REMOVE REFERENCES TO GREYHOUND RACING FROM ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 100.
HB1028 A. Collins TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE LAW CONCERNING OBSCENITY AND THE PROCESS FOR CHALLENGING MATERIALS INCLUDED IN A LIBRARY; AND TO REQUIRE A LIBRARY TO HAVE A POLICY PROHIBITING BOOK BANNING IN ORDER TO RECEIVE STATE FUNDING.
HB1035 A. Collins TO CREATE THE ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 2025; TO ALLOW ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION; TO AMEND ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51; AND TO AMEND THE DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
HB1036 A. Collins TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO ALLOW VOTER REGISTRATION DURING EARLY VOTING AND ON ELECTION DAY; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51.
HB1038 A. Collins TO CREATE THE NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING ACT OF 2025; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE VOTING; AND TO REPEAL VOTER
QUALIFICATIONS FOR ABSENTEE VOTING.
HB1039 A. Collins TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS.
HB1040 A. Collins TO CREATE THE WATER IN LINE ACT OF 2025; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PENALTIES FOR MISDEMEANOR OFFENSES RELATED TO VOTING.
HB1042 A. Collins TO CREATE THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2025; TO REPEAL THE ENSURING ACCESS FOR ALL ARKANSANS AND VOTER PROTECTION ACT OF 2023; AND TO AMEND THE PROCEDURE FOR THE FILING OF A BALLOT
INITIATIVE PETITION AND REFERENDUM PETITION.
HB1043 A. Collins TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING OF NONCANDIDATE EXPENDITURES PERTAINING TO APPELLATE JUDICIAL ELECTIONS; AND TO ADOPT NEW LAWS CONCERNING APPELLATE JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS.
HB1162 Duffield TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLIDAY.
HB1058 Unger TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; AND TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FROM GIVING ADVANCE NOTICE TO ENTITIES OF REQUIRED INSPECTIONS.
HB1059 Unger TO PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR A FREE LIFETIME HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSE TO A COMMERCIAL TRUCK DRIVER WHO IS A RESIDENT AND PROVIDES CERTAIN INFORMATION RELATED TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
HB1078 Long TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING RUNOFF ELECTIONS; AND TO PROVIDE FOR A RUNOFF ELECTION FOR CANDIDATES FOR THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
HB1281 McAlindon TO AMEND REPORTING FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES AND FOR COUNTY OFFICE; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996.
HB1415 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL; AND TO ALLOW THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL TO REQUEST AN INQUIRY BY THE DIVISION OF ARKANSAS STATE POLICE FOR ARSON.
HB1494 Hawk TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS GUIDANCE OUT OF THE DARKNESS ACT; AND TO REQUIRE STATE AGENCIES TO PUBLISH FEDERAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS ONLINE.
HB1459 L. Johnson CONCERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
HB1461 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE EVALUATION OF NECESSITY OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. TO REPEAL THE LAW CONCERNING THE REVIEW OF INFORMATION
HB1470 Beaty Jr. TECHNOLOGY PLANS.
SB184 D. Sullivan TO TRANSFER THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION AND THE STATE LIBRARY BOARD TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
HB1683 McAlindon TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE OR A COMPONENT OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE THAT WAS MANUFACTURED IN WHOLE OR IN PART USING FORCED LABOR.
HB1667 Bentley TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC MEETINGS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967.
HB1769 Barnett CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDARDS; AND TO REQUIRE A PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION OR ASSESSMENT TO BECOME OR BE EMPLOYED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — STATE AGENCIES & GOVT'L AFFAIRS- HOUSE, Mar 19, 2025 | Agenda | 5 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Jimmy Gazaway Chair
Unverified
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
Speaker 21
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
Speaker 56
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
Speaker 70
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 79
Speaker 85
Speaker 93
Speaker 103
Speaker 91
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 118
Speaker 61
Speaker 125
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Speaker 152
Speaker 157
Speaker 169
Speaker 175
Speaker 177
Speaker 180
Speaker 129
Speaker 203
Speaker 209
Speaker 163
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 225